EMPR 220 Final
How to create conditions for an effective mediation (invitation; mediation environment; ground rules) - location
As the mediator, it is important to minimize the overt message of authority that your position as manager conveys Find a location that is physically removed from your office or areas where team members work or congregate This will help preserve the parties' privacy It also conveys a message of neutrality where neither party enjoys "home court advantage" The space selected should have all the creature comforts Though the room need not be large, it should not be so cramped that the parties feel boxed in or cornered Chairs should be comfortable. The room should be well lighted If there is a window, be sure to draw the shades to reduce outside distractions and glare from the sun Provide water or other non-alcoholic beverage of choice
Ladder of Abstraction
Concrete object The real apple Photograph of an apple Wax apple Still life painting of an apple The logo of the Apple computer company The word apple Abstract conceptualization At the concrete end, or at the top of the ladder, we have the real object, the real apple At the bottom of the ladder, the abstract conceptualization end, we have the word apple A word is the most abstract representation of any real object When we want to comprehend what the word means in relationship to a real object, to fully experience the object, we simply move up the "ladder of abstraction" to find the object itself. To "experience and learn the apple," we go pick an apple
The basic definition of conflict and the conditions under which it arises
Conflict involves competition between two or more individuals or groups who: - Are interdependent - (Believe that they) have incompatible interests
The three parts of a message (content, feelings, relationships), How the three parts map onto the communication channels
Part I - Content: Facts, data, information sent (written or spoken) Part II - Feelings: Emotions and intentions felt by the communicator (usually sent nonverbally and para-verbally) Part III - Relationship: Statement about the nature or quality of the relationship (the extent one values the relationship with whom he or she is communicating)
Caucus
The parties may have to be separated from one another during the process The mediator separates the conflicting parties into two locations and engages in a process of shuttle diplomacy By which he delivers messages back and forth between the parties
Commit
• After careful examination of implications • Recommend in writing
Foster the relationship
• Typically not a one-off • How to improve future collaborations?
Role of ego-maturity level and implications for resolving conflict - goal level
Description: People at this level generally possess insight into their own motivation as well as the motivation of others. They - Engage in goal setting and problem solving - Are fully capable of collaboration and finding a win/win solution - May at times have trouble with people of different professional backgrounds - Will be somewhat faster than the self-aware-level person in the process of defining the problem as well as in find- ing solutions - Will take ownership of a particular problem statement - May have trouble reframing or defining problems in different ways Having to negotiate with a goal-level employee or mediate a conflict between two parties who are at this level of maturity is relatively easy to do Interest-based negotiation is probable The most difficult task for the mediator will be slowing the process enough so that more creative definitions and resolutions can emerge This is particularly true if the cultures or backgrounds of the participants happen to be different Two goal-level people can hope to achieve a win/win resolution to their conflict One task will be to control the speed of the process so that neither person in the conflict feels left out or slighted Another task will be to ensure that both participants are careful about how they define the problem, for there will be a tendency on the part of both to think that there is only one correct definition of the problem When a goal-level person negotiates with a self-aware person, he or she must ensure that the self-aware person feels safe enough and has time enough to ensure that proper insight is available While negotiating with a self-aware person will be much easier than with less mature participants, the goal-level person should still use caution
The negotiator's dilemma
How a party can achieve the best result, or big- gest piece of pie, she possibly can To maximize her gains, a negotiator's natural instincts are to claim value by gaining as much as possible in the negotiation for herself and leaving as little as possible for the other party To do this, she typically withholds information, assumes an aggressive posture, and adopts other strategies common in the distributive negotiation model This approach naturally creates resistance in the other party, causing him to also withhold information and concede as little as possible
Distinction between integrative (or interest-based) negotiation and distributive negotiation
Integrative negotiation involves problem solving in which the parties work side by side in an attempt to achieve outcomes that are mutually beneficial to all It is distinct from distributive negotiation, wherein parties engage in face-to-face confrontation with one another to achieve maximum gains for themselves
The three communication channels (non-verbal, paraverbal, verbal)
Interpersonal communication: Channel I: Nonverbal/Behavioral: Includes all forms of body language, facial expressions, and gestures. We generally form first impressions and give and receive feeling and emotions using this channel. Channel II: Verbal: Constructed of the words we use (written or spoken) to send information on thoughts, feelings, intentions, directions, and data. Channel III: Para-verbal: How we say things. Grunts, groans, vol- ume, pitch, speed, tone, and inflection of voice are examples. We can influence meaning by how we say things
How to create conditions for an effective mediation (invitation; mediation environment; ground rules) - table and seating - A top, Mediator bottom, B right
Oval or round Parties and mediator sit more or less equidistant from each other around table Reduces perception that parties are taking "sides" Sends message that the process is open and collaborative Increases intimacy Reduces formality, which may not necessarily be beneficial if mediator wants to maintain neutrality and avoid perception that he or she is their "buddy"
Understanding and application of power-based, interest-based, and rights-based approaches
People generally adopt one of three approaches when addressing conflict: 1. They exert power to impose a resolution over the other party. 2. They exert superior claims of rights and entitlements over the other party. 3. They focus on articulating their interests and understanding the interests of the other party to achieve a resolution that will meet mutual goals.
The five communication continua: When each are more/less effective
Responding from one end of the continua is not necessarily better than responding from the other end Both ends of the continua have consequences that may be positive or negative given the circumstances
How to create conditions for an effective mediation (invitation; mediation environment; ground rules) - table and seating - Party A top, Party B bottom, Mediator right
Square or rectangular Parties sit across from each other and mediator sits in between. Establishes mediator as clear neutral. If issues are heated or contentious, promotes increased security and prevents either party from getting too close or appearing menacing or threatening However, may reduce intimacy Also may send message that negotiation process involves hard and inflexible bargaining
Effective empathic responding and when appropriate to use
The listener gives an empathic response when he or she suspects that the sender has a feeling or emotion It is not a complicated response It is merely a statement or question of how the listener thinks the sender is feeling It is appropriate to give one - When you have the time to listen to a lengthy conversation - When you are negotiating or mediating a conflict - When you truly value your relationship with the person
Approaches to mediation (evaluative, facilitative, transformative) - T
Transformative. While transformative mediation is also concerned with facilitating an effective communication process, it has a broader focus in supporting the parties' ongoing relationship Popularized by Robert Baruch Bush and Joseph P. Folger in The Promise of Mediation: The Transformative Approach to Conflict, such processes seek to give more personal power to each party in the relationship and how they will resolve their differences and to encourage each party to give recognition and under- standing to the other party's perspective In contrast to evaluative and facilitative approaches, wherein the goal is to assist the parties to reach an agreement on current issues, transformative mediation goes beyond immediate concerns to help parties increase their understanding of and improve their ongoing relationship Often, in a transformative process, this is considered the primary goal that is necessary to accomplish before the parties can meaningfully work on reaching agreement on substantive issues In formal mediations involving long-arm business transactions, settlement negotiations to avoid litigation or other legal, judicial, or administrative matters, it is generally not expected or expedient to delve into deeper relationship issues Such mediations are inherently transactional and limited to reaching agreement on the specific issues at hand Depending on the nature of the dispute and style of the mediator, mediation processes in these contexts are generally evaluative or facilitative Similarly, in the workplace, while a pleasant by-product may be to have coworkers understand the deeper roots of their conflict, it is not an expectation A facilitative process is probably best in most circumstances to ensure that the employees in dispute are heard and have the opportunity to reach agreement in furtherance of business goals On the other hand, because internal mediators are perhaps more accessible and have fewer time and cost constraints than external mediators, they may have more opportunities to help parties work through deeper relationship issues
The various types of triggers that can set off conflict (roles/goals/policies/procedures; information; relationships; values; structures) - relationships
Triggers over relationships occur as the result of -Individuals' ability, comfort, and effectiveness (or lack thereof) in communicating and interacting with others, especially with individuals who are different from themselves. - Perceptions, filters, and biases based on differences in experience, background, culture, and other factors - Specific differences involving race, ethnicity, gender, age, religion, and sexual orientation as well as differences in personality; the way people communicate, learn, and work; social and economic status; job classification and duties; and a host of other factors
The various types of triggers that can set off conflict (roles/goals/policies/procedures; information; relationships; values; structures)
Triggers over roles, goals, policies, and procedures occur when - The roles individuals play within a team come into conflict, such as when employees appear to be working at cross-purposes or when an employee's efforts run contrary to team goals and expectations - Changes in organizational or team policies, procedures, and expectations threaten personal interests, including deeply held emotional and psychological needs for security, acceptance, or respect - Employees disagree with the goals of their team or the organization and their responsibilities for fulfilling them - Employees do not trust the roles, goals, and expectations laid out for them and ask, "How does this impact me?" or "What's in it for me?"
The various types of triggers that can set off conflict (roles/goals/policies/procedures; information; relationships; values; structures) - structures
Triggers over structures occur when - Structures in place for fulfilling the organization's business purpose and the means for doing so are not realistic, causing employees to feel time pressures, work overload, and stress. - Power imbalances or an inequitable distribution of power and authority exists, causing others to feel disenfranchised and power- less. - Employees do not have the degree of control they would like over their work and decisions impacting their work. This can occur when > Individuals would like more control, but management either dis- allows this control or minimizes it. > Management wants employees to exercise more control, but organizational and management structures create disincentives for doing so. - Employees proceed with a "business as usual" mentality while more logical, effective, or innovative ways of doing things are never considered
The various types of triggers that can set off conflict (roles/goals/policies/procedures; information; relationships; values; structures) - values
Triggers over values occur as the result of - Different values placed on work and the importance of work, such as the contrast between those who find intrinsic value in work and those who value work because it furthers other interests, such as the need to make a living or the desire to make more money. - Different values concerning certain aspects of work, such as the importance of getting to work on time, participating in meetings, and working on a team in contrast to working alone. - Different values concerning management authority, with some deferring to authority without question and others willing to challenge authority when they do not understand management expectations. - Different values concerning the way individuals evaluate ideas or behaviors. For example: - Some are open to differing viewpoints while others are more rigid. - Some are tolerant of quirks and odd behaviors, while others are less tolerant - Differing values concerning lifestyle choices, ideology, politics, religion, and other deeply held beliefs and practices
Understanding and application of integrative negotiation and distributive negotiation
When parties negotiate to resolve their conflicts, they commonly use one of two negotiating strategies: - Distributive negotiation in which the parties bargain in an adver- sarial manner and view a win for one party as a loss for the other - Integrative negotiation in which the parties use a more open bargaining process to share their interests and needs and explore how a resolution that will satisfy both may be achieved
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Is achieving a particular outcome important?
Yes • Collaborate (if you care about the relationship) • Compete (if you are less con- cerned about the relationship) Somewhat • Compromise No • Avoid (if you do not care) • Accommodate (if the issue is more important to the other party)
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Do you trust the other party?
Yes • Collaborate or compromise • Accommodate (if relationship is more important than outcome and you trust party won't take advantage) No • Avoid (if costs of addressing conflict outweigh benefits) • Compete (if benefits outweigh costs)
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Is lasting commitment to the outcome by the other party important?
Yes • Collaborate or compromise (depending on level of commitment needed to move forward) • Accommodate (if the issue is not as important to you as the other party and it will engender greater commitment) No • Compete (if relationship is not important and you can force compliance on your terms)
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Does a decision have to be made quickly?
Yes • Collaborate or compromise (if par- ties able to work together efficiently to reach a quick decision) • Compete (if you have authority and making decision is more important at the moment than concern about hurting the relationship) Somewhat • Accommodate (if: (1) you do not have authority and must concede to the decision made; or (2) you have authority and are willing to agree to other party's decision) No • Collaborate • Avoid (if issues do not matter to you)
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Is there a power imbalance?
Yes • Compete (if you have more power and relationship is not important) • Avoid (if you have less power and costs of addressing conflict outweigh benefits) • Accommodate (if: (1) you have less power and must address the conflict; or (2) you have more power and accommodating will benefit the relationship) No • Collaborate or compromise (if outcome and relationship interests are important) • Other modes (depending on importance of outcome vs. importance of relationship)
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Is maintaining an ongoing relationship important?
Yes - Collaborate • Accommodate (if the issues are more important to the other party than to you) Somewhat • Compromise No • Avoid (if the issues do not matter to you) • Compete (if the issues matter greatly to you)
Implement and monitor
• Any unforeseen issues • Modify • Go back (or start over) if needed!
Agreement not always possible or in best interest - importance of a best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA)
• BATNA • What is the minimum you would be willing to accept? • Start with aspirations and points of contentment
Involves exploring options that provide mutual gains: Ensuring legitimacy of options
• Before beginning substantive discussion, determine: • Criteria to evaluate whether a proposal is fair • Procedures for resolving disagreements
Problem-solve (Brainstorm solutions; evaluate possible solutions; refine solutions)
• Brainstorm • Evaluate • Narrow and refine
What each of the six steps of supportive conflict resolution entails: Research and reflect - what questions might you ask yourself?
• Deliberately develop a full picture of the issue • Question assumptions • Again: What role do you play?
What each of the six steps of supportive conflict resolution entails: Follow through and follow up
• Implement solutions • Longer-term follow up
What each of the six steps of supportive conflict resolution entails: Rehearse
• Internal rehearsal • Role play with trusted other • Manage own emotional reactions
Listen and seek to understand (content and feelings)
• Listening for content • Listening for feelings
Involves exploring options that provide mutual gains: Selecting the best option (look for dovetailing - where interests are distinct)
• Multiple options that may solve the (mutual) problems • "Separate inventing from deciding" • May result in "dovetailing"
When (and when not to) mediate
• Need neutral third party to resolve • Can be informal (manager) or more formal • Focus on informal, internal mediation
Define the problem
• One that both parties agree will address their needs, interests, and goals • Does not impose solutions
Key barriers - understand what each is, common causes, and how to respond - Positional or hard bargainers
• Other party doesn't see the value of integrative bargaining • Sticking to positions • At worst, engages in dirty tricks
Key barriers - understand what each is, common causes, and how to respond - Refusal to negotiate
• Parties have different perspectives > Awareness of conflict > Situation as problematic > Need to negotiate
Express your concerns (as neutral and specific as possible) - check understanding and perspectives toward common problem definition and common desire to collaborate
• Situation • Impact • Check understanding
What each of the six steps of supportive conflict resolution entails: Meet (ensure that you create a supportive atmosphere for meeting and conflict resolution)
• Start with awareness • Talk vs. sell • Work to eliminate anger • I-messages vs. you-messages • Key listening and responding skills from earlier modules
Relationship can be strengthened through integrative negotiation but issues do arise: Problems with perceptions, involving emotions, and with communication
• Successful negotiation = agreement reached is based on clear communication • Improves (or at least does not harm) the parties' relationship • Toolkit for effective communication built through earlier modules • Empathic listening for content and feelings
How to create conditions for an effective mediation (invitation; mediation environment; ground rules)
• Timing • Location • Table and seating configuration • Appreciation and clear process and ground rules
Invite the other party - what does an effective invitation look like?
• Use "I" statements • Give context • Provide notice, if possible
What each of the six steps of supportive conflict resolution entails: Problem ownership - what does it mean to own the problem?
• What is acceptable/unacceptable to you? • What role do you play?
Key barriers - understand what each is, common causes, and how to respond - Impasse
• When one or both parties believe they cannot take another step toward achieving resolution • CAN spell the end of the negotiation process...or breakthrough point • Depends on the reason for impasse
Involves exploring options that provide mutual gains: Brainstorming and evaluating options
• Why a party takes the position they do • Motives, emotions, needs, goals, fears, and desires underlying the position
Language
We use language to model our reality. Our language is in a circular relationship with our deeds, thoughts, feelings, and emotions. Each depends on the other.
Interpreting scores on the Conflict Capability Questionnaire
- If your self-score is in the high range (17 points or higher), you are most likely capable of negotiating an effective resolution to your conflict - If your self-score is in the medium range (12 points to 16 points), you will probably be able to negotiate a satisfactory solution to your conflict. It would be to your benefit to raise your capability through self-development and study of negotiation strategies prior to attempting to negotiate. When the conflict is a serious one or very important, hire a professional mediator. - If your self-score is in the low range (11 points or lower), you should consider hiring the services of a professional mediator or seek the advice of someone you perceive to have a high level of capability. - If your total perceived score for the other party is 9 points different from your own personal score (higher or lower), consider hiring a professional mediator
Case Analysis
1) Very clearly identified the central problem 2) Clearly identified two highly relevant triggers or environmental factors that were salient in the case, and accurately catergorized them (see Chapter 2 for the discussion of triggers and factors contributing to conflict) 3) Had a clear resolution strategy that was connected logically to the two identified triggers/factors 4) Short and long-term steps in the action plan were clearly identifiable 5) Overall, connected the analysis to relevant course material where relevant
Impasse
1. A party's needs and interests have not been met or have not been met at the appropriate level of depth 2. A party has made bottom-line commitments and does not want to lose face 3. The parties have not come to an agreement on defining the problem or are not defining the problem at the appropriate level of generality or specificity 4. The parties are "stuck" on two proposals, one each advo- cated by the parties. Neither is satisfied with the other's proposal 5. A party does not wish to take responsibility for a proposed agreement 6. A party does not believe that a proposed agreement is reasonable or achievable 7. A party is fixed on his position and does not see the poten- tial for integrative bargaining 8. A party feels overwhelmed 9. A party is inordinately fearful or worried 10. A party is concerned that negotiations lack objectivity
Methods for improving capability to resolve conflict via the CCQ factors
1. Increase experience via preparation 2. Shift thinking about conflict in general 3. Increase willingness to confront this conflict 4. Increase willingness to resolve this conflict 5. Increase training or access those who are trained 6. Manage emotions about this conflict 7. Increase level of personal responsibility for resolving
6 steps of supportive conflict resolution
1. Problem ownership 2. Research and reflect 3. The three alternatives 4. Rehearse 5. Meet 6. Follow through and follow up
What each of the six steps of supportive conflict resolution entails: The three alternatives
1. changing attitude 2. changing environment 3. confronting the other
Approaches to mediation
1. evaluative 2. facilitative 3. transformative
ego-maturity levels
1. opportunist level 2. rules level 3. self-aware level 4. goal level
hygiene (or maintenance) factors
1. policies and administration 2. supervision 3. working conditions 4. interpersonal relationships 5. money 6. status 7. security
People generally adopt one of three approaches when addressing conflict:
1. power-based 2. interest-based 3. rights-based approaches
Categories of organizational conflicts
1. routine daily events 2. evolving conflicts 3. deeper conflicts
What gets in the way of higher-level communication and how to reduce barriers
2 kinds of noise interfere with our hearing and listening to a message: environmental noise and internal noise. Communication is hindered greatly when either type of noise gets too loud When we realize that the environment is interfering with our hearing, we may shout or move to a quieter place. We may decide to send messages using the nonverbal channel and create elaborate hand signals or other gestures to communicate our message We are generally aware of our internal dialogue and when it begins to interfere. Luckily, we can turn down its volume and, to a degree, manage it. Listening with the intention to paraphrase the message back to the sender is an effective tool to use to reduce internal noise
The Thomas-Kilman Model of responses to conflict (5 types) and how they interrelate
5 basic modes that individuals generally adopt when responding to conflict: - Avoiding - Accommodating - Compromising - Competing - Collaborating
The difference between positional and interest-based approaches to addressing conflict - 3
Focus on what they could win vs. what they lose by not resolving the dispute vs. Focus on durable outcomes that meet both parties' legitimate interests
Effective paraphrasing and when appropriate to use
A paraphrase is verbal feedback you give to the sender of a message before you take action A paraphrase is a restatement in your own words of what you think the sender is saying in his or her message A paraphrase will demonstrate to the sender how accurately you understand the contents of a message After hearing the paraphrase, the sender can make corrections if needed It is not appropriate to paraphrase when the message is short and obvious or mostly small talk It is the appropriate tool to use when - Understanding a message is important to you or important to the sender - The message is long and complicated - A misunderstanding could lead to a costly mistake - Your concentration begins to drift as someone is speaking to you - You want to turn down the volume on your internal dialogue - You are trying to resolve a conflict
Role of ego-maturity level and implications for resolving conflict- rules level
Description: People at the rules level of maturity are conformists. They - Are motivated by clearly defined rules and will follow them - Are usually polite and concerned about fairness - Wish to avoid any unpleasantness - Frame problems simplistically in relationship to cause and effect - Often engage in stereotypical thinking - Identify with their group (being wrong equals breaking the established rules or norms of their group) The supervisor attempting to resolve a conflict with a rules- level employee will need to spend time explaining all the reasons why the conflict exists.
Role of ego-maturity level and implications for resolving conflict- self-aware level
Description: People at the self-aware level have insight and some mastery of problem solving that enables them to engage in any type of conflict resolution. They - Are generally competent in resolving conflict - May be critical of others, particularly those of lower developmental levels or lesser achievement, which can interfere in resolving conflicts - May have trouble with long-range planning and with comprehending complex causation - Strive to achieve the one best solution even when finding one is highly improbable - Have insight and understanding of their own motivation, which makes true empathy for others possible - Are typically ambivalent about feedback - May be reluctant to seek feedback about their behavior from others or even uncomfortable when given feedback they have solicited - Aspire to achieve a well-solved problem When negotiating with a person at this level of maturity, engage in careful analysis of the conflict They may have some difficulty accepting a different definition of the problem at hand Bring all salient points up for discussion Make sure their questions are satisfactorily answered Brainstorm a list of as many solutions as possible and do not rush to closure They will not usually see their part in the creation of a conflict without some help Help them by thoroughly examining the dynamics of the conflict and explore their part in creating and maintaining that dynamic They need patience and reassurance that there is more than one cause for a conflict and more than one possible solution Be careful to limit their criticism of others Encourage them to empathize with the other party This is the first level of maturity at which you can realistically expect workable, long-lasting resolutions
Assumes collaboration has been identified as the best approach to solve a conflict (see Chapter 4) - how to create the conditions to support it
Do Your Homework • Interests • Needs • Goals • Viewpoint • Relationship history
The difference between positional and interest-based approaches to addressing conflict
Enter with a clear idea of what they want (and hold firm) vs. Enter with an idea of why they want what they want (and remain open)
Approaches to mediation (evaluative, facilitative, transformative)
Evaluative. Mediation is often thought of as a process whereby the mediator facilitates communication between the parties, leaving decision making in the hands of the parties An evaluative mediator is more involved than mediators in other contexts in offering possible solutions for resolution and in offering insights on the merits of the parties' positions, argu- ments, and proposals
Approaches to mediation (evaluative, facilitative, transformative) - F
Facilitative. Facilitative mediation is more focused on supporting the process of communication and decision making between the parties and less involved (and often completely uninvolved) in evaluating the merits of the issues A facilitative mediator actively engages in reflective listening skills and other communication processes designed to ensure each party is fully heard and fully understands the other party's views and positions (whether or not they agree)
When separate meetings are advisable
However, there are a few limited circumstances in which holding brief separate meetings may support the process of open communication and problem solving: - To discuss how to manage confidential information. In private, the manager can discuss with the party how he will share with the other party issues related to the confidential information without divulging its confidential aspects. For example, they can strategize how to communicate why the party's performance has declined recently without divulging a health condition or personal issue affecting performance. - To help someone calm down, vent privately, or reassess how his negative or hostile behaviors are affecting his ability to negotiate objectively. A private conversation may be necessary to avoid embarrassing the party by calling out his inappropriate behaviors in front of the other party. - To discuss the validity and feasibility of proposals made. For example, if a party becomes obstinate concerning a reasonable proposal made by the other party, the manager can encourage the party to evaluate the proposal seriously before dismissing it. - To tone down the rancor of an overly aggressive party and build up the confidence of a less assertive party - To help a party express feelings and thoughts that she is unable to express in the joint session. The manager can help the party find a way to sort through and articulate these issues when the parties reconvene - Upon the request of a party. The manager should grant such a request, unless she perceives that the party is using it to avoid the other party or is attempting to manipulate her. - To confer with a co-mediator. It may be necessary to call for a short break so co-mediators may check in and strategize, particularly if they perceive they are at an impasse
Understanding the difference between positions and interests, and how to uncover interests
In traditional bargaining, parties take positions, such as insisting on a certain dollar amount, holding firm on a term or condition in a contract, or demanding that another party perform or cease from performing a particular action While these considerations remain relevant to the integrative negotiation process, a focus on interests involves an examination of why a party takes the position he does, including the motives, emotions, needs, goals, fears, and desires underlying the position What do the parties really want? What problem are they trying to solve? It is important to know what your true interests are and to discern the interests of the other party in order to get at the heart of the problem, search for common ground, and move beyond entrenched positions
What each of the six steps of supportive conflict resolution entails: The three alternatives (changing attitude, changing environment, confronting the other)
It states that when someone's behavior or a situation causes you a problem, there are basically three things you can do about it: 1. Change your attitude. Psychologically move the behavior from the unacceptable area of your window into the acceptable area so it no longer is a problem and you can just ignore it. 2. Change your environment. Make changes to your physical environment or remove yourself from it. 3. Confront the person about his or her behavior. Make the other person aware that you have a problem with his or her behavior. Attempt to persuade the other person to change the behavior and then lend support and help if needed.
The four levels of communication - connections with channels used and parts of the message
Level I - Not hearing: We are inattentive for a variety of reasons. Tool used: None Level II - Hearing content: We hear the facts, data, information, perceptions, and assumptions, both written and spoken (i.e., the literal message). Tool used: Paraphrase Level III - Hearing feelings: We hear and respond to the sender's emotions. Tool used: We send an empathic response; we acknowledge that we hear the sender's feelings. Level IV - Therapeutic listening: We help others gain insight into their patterns of thought and behavior. Tool used: About 80 percent of this level of listening combines paraphrasing and empathic responses; the other 20 percent takes formal study and practice in psychotherapy
The difference between positional and interest-based approaches to addressing conflict - 4
Little consideration of each other's underlying interests vs. Central consideration is resolving conflicting interests fairly
The environmental conditions that reduce the likelihood that conflict will arise in organizations, The connection between these environmental conditions and Maslow's hierarchy
Meet basic needs • Physiological • Safety and security • Acceptance and belonging - Establish clear roles and responsibilities - Supply necessary resources
How to create conditions for an effective mediation (invitation; mediation environment; ground rules) - table and seating - A top L, Mediator bottom, B top R
No table Parties sit next to one another. Mediator faces them Increases informality and intimacy Encourages parties to view process as working side-by-side to solve a common problem, rather than face-to-face and perceive each other as the problem Makes parties more vulnerable, which may create problem if issues are heated or contentious
The difference between positional and interest-based approaches to addressing conflict - 2
Not based on clear communication or concern for relationship vs. Value placed on communication and relationship
Conditions that call for internal, informal vs. external, formal mediation, and the nature of each
RELATIONSHIP TO THE ORGANIZATION The advantages to having informal mediators are their accessibility to be called upon at a moment's notice to mediate; the low cost in utilizing their mediation services, which generally form part of their regular duties; and their knowledge and familiarity with the institution, the parties, and the issues at hand This knowledge and familiarity can also be a disadvantage as the individual called to mediate may be too "close" to the issues and therefore be perceived as biased by one or both parties Further, as someone employed within the institution, the potential for undue influence on the mediator by someone higher in authority, whether overt or subtle, could compromise the mediator's ability to objectively mediate a dispute Use of an external mediator eliminates such concerns This may be beneficial when the issues are highly sensitive and confidential For example, external mediators may be preferable for disputes involving high-level executives on matters for which there is great concern about confidentiality or for which undue pressure could be placed on an internal mediator to address In addition, some highly complex issues, such as financial and accounting issues or matters involving highly technical information, may require an external mediator with specialized expertise External mediators generally assess fees for their services An internal mediator may, therefore, be preferable because he or she can devote more time and attention to working with the parties, such as beforehand when conducting individual preliminary meetings and other pre-mediation activities or during mediation to delve more deeply into issue
Examples, prevalence, and content of each channel
Research on presentation impact • Body language: 55% • Words: 7% • Tone of voice: 38%
Conditions that call for internal, informal vs. external, formal mediation, and the nature of each - Cont'd
RELATIONSHIP TO THE PARTIES In formal mediation settings, such as mediations facilitated through the court system, there is an expectation that mediators ensure that they are not biased or prejudiced toward any party in the mediation or have any biases or prejudices with respect to the issues involved that would unduly sway them in their facilitation of the mediation The mediator is generally expected to decline the mediation under such circumstances as well as situations in which the mediator has a prior relationship with a party or prior knowledge of the issues that would affect his ability to be impartial However, if the mediator believes such considerations would not affect his ability to mediate in a neutral, impartial manner, he must at a minimum disclose the information to the parties Upon disclosure, if a party does not believe the mediator can remain impartial, the mediator should then withdraw With use of formal mediators within judicial and government regulatory systems, well-defined rules and procedures provide guidance to parties and mediators on how to proceed in these situations Guidance is less clear in informal settings in which the informal mediator could be, for example, the manager of two employees in dispute, their peer, or a human resources professional who may also have responsibility for advising management on employee discipline and performance issues Some practical considerations may help the organization navigate these waters First, the context for internal mediation is quite different from that for external mediation Internal workplace mediation is especially effective for preventing escalation of conflict before such matters lead to legal action such as the filing of a lawsuit in court or a complaint before a state or federal agency Unresolved workplace conflicts also directly impact the achievement of business goals Organizational leaders, therefore, have incentive and the authority to step in to correct matters Mediation offers a more supportive means for addressing interpersonal conflict than more coercive means such as progressive discipline In this context, mediation is an organizational tool provided for the benefit of managers and employees, but the same ethical considerations as in the judicial context are not as applicable Second, the organization can develop appropriate procedures to minimize, if not fully eliminate, concerns about bias and related factors involving use of internal mediators For instance, when a manager is concerned about the undue influence she may have on two employees working through their conflict, she might ask another manager to mediate who is more removed and not as knowledgeable about the employees or the his- tory of their conflict A manager can also withdraw and find a replacement when he believes he can remain impartial but one or both parties believe otherwise The organization can also develop internal third party mediators with specific responsibilities for resolving workplace disputes and who are removed from the operational functions where manager/employee conflicts arise Examples include internal mediators from the organization's HR, equity, or organizational diversity offices Finally, an individual manager's ability or desire to completely guarantee the absence of bias or related concerns may simply not exist in many circumstances The manager has the authority to call his employees into a meeting to discuss workplace challenges, including conflicts in their working relationship Because such matters affect business goals, he may not be able to fully ensure that the conversations occurring during media- tion can be kept confidential Still, the skills and tools discussed in this chapter are effective for processes other than mediation wherein a manager is attempting to facilitate open and supportive communication and relationship building among employees If you find yourself in a situation in which facilitating such a process for employees may be beneficial, but you are concerned about the unattended message you are sending by calling the process "mediation," simply offer to convene the employees in a meeting to talk through their issues without putting a name to the process
How to create conditions for an effective mediation (invitation; mediation environment; ground rules) - time of day, work schedules, and session length
Schedule the session when the parties' energy level and ability to focus are strongest For most individuals, this will be morning, but the time will vary depending on the parties' work schedules and preferences Identify a time and date that you and the parties will feel the least pressure from other work demands Do not permit outside distractions such as unexpected visitors or phone calls Ninety minutes is generally sufficient time to talk through the issues and, if the parties engage in meaningful dialogue, achieve a breakthrough that will lead to resolution If more time is needed, plan for breaks to allow parties time to stretch, refresh, and refocus. If the issues are complex, scheduling multiple sessions may be necessary
Categories of organizational conflicts (routine daily events; evolving conflicts; deeper conflicts) and the recommended approach
See notes
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Style (individual difference): assertiveness/cooperation
See notes
The elements of the mediation process itself
See notes
The five communication continua: Examples of both ends of the continua
Solution Giving ("Sleep on it") Problem Inquiry ("What's going on?") Superiority ("I told you so") Equality "We're in this together" Ignore Feelings ("Oh, stop it! You're always worried about something") Empathize (acknowledge feelings) [Giving an empathic response or by asking questions about the feelings of the other person] Absolute ("You always make mistakes") Conditional ("It may not work, but it's worth a try") Evaluative (" This is an unsatisfactory report as written") Descriptive (Before I send it forward, I want to give you my feedback")
How to create conditions for an effective mediation (invitation; mediation environment; ground rules) - table and seating - Party A top, Mediator bottom, Party B right
Square or rectangular Parties sit at 90-degree angles Increases communication and intimacy somewhat Allows mediator to look and speak to both parties at the same time May create stress if issues are heated or contentious or one or both parties are uncomfortable sitting near each other
The various types of triggers that can set off conflict (roles/goals/policies/procedures; information; relationships; values; structures) - information
Triggers over information occur when - Individuals do not have the information they believe they need to do their jobs, believe the information is not accurate, or believe information is being withheld. - Misunderstandings arise about the information provided, such as when the information has not been effectively communicated. - Individuals receive the appropriate information or data but interpret it differently, disagree on its relevance or validity, or disagree on the impact of the information on their interests
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Do the costs of addressing the conflict outweigh the benefits?
Yes • Avoid • Accommodate (if you have no choice) No • Collaborate or compromise (if relationship is important) • Compete (if relationship is not important)
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Is taking time to discuss the issues important?
Yes • Collaborate Somewhat • Compromise No • Avoid (if issues are not important) • Compete (if issues are important and you must make a decision quickly)
The axis for the T-K Model re: Conflict Strategy (behavior): importance of relationship/importance of outcome), When each strategy would be effective - Will failing to resolve the dispute affect organizational, team, or interpersonal relationship issues?
Yes • Collaborate (if time) • Compromise (if less time) No • Avoid
Role of ego-maturity level and implications for resolving conflict
opportunist level Description: This is the lowest of the four levels of maturity. A person at this level - Views nearly all conflicts as win/lose. - Views any gain for the other side as a loss to himself whether it is or not and will engage in distortion to gain an advantage. For example, he will say that the other side is getting more than he is out of a negotiated settle- ment whether or not that is true. - Cannot be counted on for insight, honesty, or acceptance of responsibility. - Will usually use manipulation to get his way. - Blames his problems on anyone or on anything other than on his own decisions and actions. - Views work as onerous and often has an employment file filled with reprimands. - Fantasizes cause-and-effect relationships where little or none exists. For example, he may say that the other person made him do this or that thing. To this person, being wrong equals getting caught. A win/win negotiation on strategy is usually not attainable with this level of maturity. An opportunist-level employee will strive for immediate advantage and view any gain by another party as a loss for himself When confronting the opportunistic employee, the supervisor must arrange to have another supervisor or manager as a wit- ness to the proceedings
