In terms of research in this area, the Centre for Conflict Dynamics in Florida, U.S. has found that there are 9 behaviours/attitudes or ‘hot buttons’ that are found to be particularly triggering for people in the workplace. These are: unreliablity, overly analytical, unappreciative, aloof, micro-managing, self-centred, abrasive, untrustworthy and hostile You can take a free test to help you identify what your particular ‘hot button’ is here.

Your hot button may of course be none of these or perhaps even a few of them (none of them are particularly appealing characteristics anyhow!) although it’s worth thinking further to identify which one would lead you into reacting back as opposed to just being mildly irritating.

So the first step in what I’ve termed ‘owning your hot buttons’ is to clearly identify what the exact behaviour or attitude is that bothers you. But knowing ‘aloofness’ bugs you is not enough. Next, it’s important to try and figure out why exactly that particular behaviour bothers you – what is it that’s important to you that this behaviour gets at or challenges. Getting underneath the hot button for yourself is a key part of having ‘ownership’ on it and being better able to manage when it gets pushed. One way to help you figure out why it’s important to you is to ask yourself: “what comes up for me when I meet this behaviour?” and then take note of the thoughts, feelings – both physical and emotional, interpretations etc. that you make about that person doing this. So let’s take for example someone whose behaviour I would term ‘aloof’. For me, reflecting on what this attitude brings up for me, I would say that aloofness would give me a sense that the person doesn’t want to connect with me and isn’t interested in me personally. So by considering this I now have more information about myself – that connection with others is important to me and that this person is violating a value I hold dear as opposed to just being someone I complain about. I also realise that I have made a couple of assumptions, neither of which might be correct – they don’t want to connect with me, they aren’t interested in me. The process of doing this exercise has however taken me out of my stream of negative and blame-focused thinking about this person and brought me to a better understanding of my own values and a realisation that perhaps I should check out my assumptions rather than just believe them all. I feel calmer and more objective about how I view them and myself, rather than being caught up in the irritation or annoyance that the behaviour provoked. I am therefore in a better place to manage any potential reaction I might have the next time I meet their aloofness. I also have a slightly softer attitude towards it, now that I’ve thought it through and see that it’s about my values being different to theirs perhaps rather than them being a ‘person who annoys me’.
The other interesting thing to reflect on from the list of unwelcome traits and behaviours above is which, if any of them, do you think that you might possess and might trigger others?

Try out the hot buttons exercise and let me know how you get on. I’d also like to hear your opinion of the ‘hot buttons’ list that the research identified…does it ring true for you, when you think about the kind of behaviours in your workplace that seem to upset people?

Mindfulness or mindful awareness is about becoming aware by intentional focussing of your attention, on what you are experiencing – your thoughts, feelings, sensations – in any particular ‘present’ moment. There are a huge variety of practices from formal meditation, yoga, tai chi or simply 10 minutes of breath awareness every morning. In this article I want to give you a short overview of some of the emerging research on mindfulness. This identifies some very compelling reasons why it can significantly improve your life – professionally as well as personally and most importantly your relationships with others. 
So first a little brain science for which I am drawing on the work of Daniel Siegel, author of ‘The Mindful Brain’. Our brain consists of three main areas: the brain stem and the limbic areas which go from the top of the spinal chord up into the centre of our brains and work together to regulate basic bodily functions, the fight/flight response to danger, emotions and memories; and then the  cortex, the higher part of the brain that allows us to think and reason.

At the front part of the cortex, just behind the forehead, lies the middle pre-frontal cortex which plays an important role in regulating and balancing the brain stem and limbic areas. This means that when we feel tired or triggered by something that annoys us we are able to respond in a balanced and flexible way rather than ‘losing it’.
When the circuits of the middle pre-frontal cortex aren’t working very well, then we are more likely to allow the emotions and impulses that arise from the lower and mid brain to dominate our behaviour. How well these connections work is influenced to an extent by our experience growing up where the initial ‘wiring’ of the brain circuitry takes place. One of the ways we can improve these connections or ’rewire’ our brain is by developing a regular mindfulness practice. Research from a number of neuroscientists is demonstrating that developing a regular mindfulness practices actually changes and rewires the  brain. These changes can be seen on fMRI brain scans and occur even after a short time of regular practice. Siegel refers to this process as ‘neural integration’.
So let me list out some of the benefits for you: 

1. You will manage stress and negative emotions more effectively in your life. Regardless of how harmonious and supportive our workplace or family environments are, we inevitably encounter events and people that provoke the usual gamut of unwlecome emotions such as irritation, annoyance, fear, hurt etc. Mindful awareness practice helps you to regulate your body’s energy levels and emotional states more effectively. So you are less likely to ‘flip your lid’ or become overly anxious in a way that causes you to be less effective in how you make decisions and deal with situations or difficult people in your life.

 
2. You will have greater flexibility in how you respond to your external environment, be less impulsive and more given to pausing before you act. So when someone does something that upsets or annoys you, you will be less likely to respond reactively e.g. get angry, withdraw and foster an ability to have a more thought-through response. 

 
3. You will get to know and understand what Daniel Siegel terms the ‘architecture’ of your own mind and be better able to relate to and understand other people’s less-connected brain circuitry. You are better equipped therefore as a coach, mediator, counsellor, teacher or even manager to support other people’s ‘neural integration’. Not only that but research in the area of ‘mirror neurons’ is demonstrating that when we interact with others, there is a constant resonation between the internal states each of us is experiencing. Bonnie Badenock tells us that connection with others is another way the brain gets rewired so your mindful state of mind in itself has a beneficial impact on the people you work with. 

 
4. You will develop a more non-judgemental approach to other people. Our brains are actually hard-wired to make judgements all of the time. According to Bonnie Badenock, the single most important factor in therapeutic (and I would include in this term many interventions such as mediation, coaching, counselling, informal support sessions) efficacy is non-judgemental acceptance. She defines this as being able to hold someone with a non-judging mind and heart. Think of how much more effective all of your interactions would be if you could ‘hold’ people  in a calm and mindful way in how you are present to them. 

5. You will be more resilient in meeting new challenges that arise. The work of Jon Kabat Zinn has demonstrated that following a number of weeks of mindfulness practice a “left-shift” in the brain activity of participants was noted, in which the left frontal activity of the brain is enhanced. This electrical change in brain function is thought to reflect the cultivation of an “approach state,” in which we move toward, rather than away from, a challenging external situation or internal mental function such as a thought, feeling, or memory.

 6. ….It’s free! There is no VAT, no levies…it costs nothing but your time and committment. Why not read some of the research yourself or even better, try it out. You can find some introductory exercises right here. Let me know you you get on!

1. First off, get into the right ‘mindset’. This is one where we consciously decide to give time and attention to this person and set an intention to connect with them. So we need to bring a sense of mindfulness to the discussion we are having. It can be helpful even to do some deep breathing to empty our own minds and to slow us down because true connection takes time. One of the things I find useful to do is rather than think about ‘what should I say next’ or in fact to ‘think’ about anything, is to have an image of my own heart centre or intuition centre attempting to connect with theirs. So I’m attempting to listen at deeper levels than just the content’ of what they are communicating.

2. Next, tune into yourself – what are you feeling/sensing here and what’s your own intuition telling you about this person and what might be going on for them ‘beneath’ their words. What sort of energy – which is a kind of catch all word for feeling, sense, aura or mood – are you picking up from their tone and body language.

3. Go for simple open questions. For example ‘What’s going on for you with regards to…’ and even simpler ‘Tell me more’. At a recent NLP training I attended, Trevor Horne talked about the power of the ‘Tell me more’ question followed by ‘And can you be more specific about that’ to take people down to deeper and deeper levels of what’s important to them or at the core of what they are trying to say.

4. Slow down – effective communication takes time. This gives you the space to pick up the unstated and use an acknowledging statement to help draw this out. So when your team member says ‘This presentation is such a pain and I really don’t see the point of it at all’ and they are sighing or a bit uptight you can say ‘it sounds like you aren’t feeling very positive about the presentation next week, tell me more about what’s going on for you’.

5. Keep the question in the back of your mind all of the time ‘What might be going on for this person that they are reacting like this’  and allow this to guide your questions. You might even name this, for example ‘I’m picking up that you are very keen to get this piece of work done but see a lot of barriers…can you say more about what’s getting in your way’

These are just some of my ideas – do you have any to add on how you think you can connect and communicate more authentically and effectively with people’? I’d love to hear your comments below.

You might think ‘all very nice but do we have the time and what about the bottom line??’ – however it appears there were also organisation-wide improvements in co-operation between departments, efficiency and cost reduction, profits and productivity.

The reality is that most managers get promoted because of their expertise and experience in their field of training. But management of a team requires not just skills as an engineer, nurse, IT specialist but also skills in effectively managing and bringing the best out in people. Expecting managers to be able to do this without adequate support and training is setting them up for failure and leaving them exposed to being seen as a source of stress. 

If you are finding some of the people management aspects of your role  challenging, then get in touch – we can provide you with training, consultancy or coaching in key skills around communication, preventing and resolving conflict.

1. Initial needs assessment – carrying out a conflict audit of the organisation in order to assess how conflict currently impacts people, productivity and profits. This gives a clear benchmark to do a costs/benefits analysis as to whether such a panel is in the first place warranted. It also provides a basis for future evaluation of an internal mediation service.

2. Ensuring there is a good understanding of, and openness to, the process of mediation and the benefits of having an internal mediation service, from key stakeholders – senior management, unions/employee representatives, human resources department, health and safety representatives etc.in championing and promoting such a service.

3. Mediator Selection Process: There are a number of options here for example, candidates can be nominated by key stakeholders or the role can be advertised internally – ideally there would be some awareness raising about mediation and conflict management prior to this to help potential candidates make an informed choice as to whether this role would fit for them.

4. Training of Mediators: Ensure that mediators’ training conforms to recognised accreditation standards such as the Certified Mediation level with the Mediators’ Insititute of Ireland

5. Access to the Mediation service: Develop clear procedures around how staff and managers can avail of this service, information leaflets, protocols around key mediation principles such as confidentiality, impartiality of mediator.

6. Underpinned by policies and procedures: Ensuring that there are supportive and complementary policies and procedures in place underpinning the use of mediation to resolve disputes. A policy document around terms of reference for the in-house mediation programme would also need to be developed.

7. Designated champion: Consideration of the need for a designated co-ordinator and steering committee to champion and drive the programme within the organisation

8. Adequate resourcing: Ensuring that the organisation is prepared to resource the programme, which in addition to set-up costs will involve ongoing costs in relation making the Mediators available to conduct mediations during their working week as well as time for ongoing support and training for the team

9. Promotion of the mediation service: Consideration of how the mediation service will be promoted – the development of information booklets and guidance and dissemination of this throughout all levels of the organisation

10. Supportive Continuing Professional Development: Setting up a framework that would ensure mediators have access to supervision/mentoring as structured further training opportunities

11. Evaluation: Establishing in advance the framework for evaluation of the mediation service.

If you would like to know more about establishing an internal mediation programme in your organisation, please email us at mary@consensusmediation.ie

An interest-based approach is one where the parties are facilitated to focus on how best they can have their concerns and needs mutually satisfied as opposed to defending positional stances. Mediation is one such process and nowadays more and more organisations are starting to make this available as a means of resolving disputes. The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development cite the strong business case for mediation as well as other benefits such as improved relationships between employees and reduced levels of workplace stress. A recent CIPD report highlighted a level of 82.8% of public sector employers reporting that they use mediation.

So how might organisations go about making mediation more mainstream and increase the level of understanding and use of this very effective tool? Establishing a panel of internal mediators to resolve disputes as they arise is an increasing recent trend in this area. For example, the Health Services Executive has a very well developed internal mediation panel here in Ireland and in terms of the private sector, the well-known high street retailer Topshop cite savings of £80,000 with an internal mediation programme. Advantages of having an internal mediation service are that it can be more immediate and certainly more cost effective than bringing in an external mediation provider.

But aside from this, establishing an internal mediation programme also has the potential to set in motion a culture change in how an organisation deals with disputes. It introduces to the organisation in a very concrete way a ‘mediation mind-set’ which can have positive consequences far beyond getting Mary and Tom’s dispute resolved. It means in a core cadre of staff understand, practice and champion an approach that promotes and models constructive listening and problem-solving. This can only have positive ripple effects for both the formal and informal culture in the organisation.

Please get in touch if you would like to hear more about how to go about establishing an internal mediation programme in your organisation or check out upcoming blog posts.

An obvious indicator of a person having taken time to reflect on themselves is if they attend some form of one-to-one intervention such as counselling or conflict coaching. A couple of recent mediation cases illustrated this. The first was a situation following an investigation of a bullying complaint that was put in by two people against one person. Mediation was proposed as a means of rebuilding the working relationship. At the pre-mediation meetings with both of the complainants, they both spoke about their fear of the person and there was also lot of anger towards her. At the time, I had suggested that they consider attending the company’s Employee Assistance Counselling service. One of them did and the other ‘couldn’t find the time’. Notwithstanding the fact that both had different issues, personalities etc. there was a clear difference in how each of them presented and dealt with the mediation meetings that they then had with the person they complained about. The person who had attended counselling was much calmer, accepting and although still somewhat fearful, was able to see the situation from a broader viewpoint, not just one of ‘victim’ and ‘offender’. They reached an agreement about how to restart working together. The other person was still palpably angry and predictably, the mediation was more about how little contact they would want from each other and how best to manage that, in the future working relationship.

A second interesting case was one where an organisational glitch in moving people and departments resulted in one employee being quite hurt and traumatised. The organisation recognised and acknowledged their faults and her line manager actually met with her in a facilitated meeting and apologised profusely for what had happened. Yet almost a year later, the employee requested an independent mediator to facilitate a meeting with her and her manager, telling me in pre-mediation that the manager had never actually apologised to her! She had in the meantime attended counselling and the mediation worked well, her manager reiterated the apology. The client said later that she had been so angry and upset she hadn’t actually heard the apology that had come in the first meeting!

In my view and experience, mediation will only work to the extent that parties are willing and able to engage in some sort of process (and it might just be taking the time to think it through themselves) that causes them to work on themselves internally rather as simply turning up on the day and hoping that the other person has done all the changing!   

Mediation yes, is a great process and has many advantages over its more adversarial cousins such as investigation or litigation. However, it’s not without its challenges. In order for mediation to be able to work, people need to be in some sort of mindset that fosters collaboration and compromise and be able to think in terms of needs rather than wants. Yet, it can be hard to help people clarify this for themselves in advance of the process and to get clear on the type of challenge they need to rise to if the process is to be successful.

I have drawn up a short questionnaire here that people can take in order to help assess whether they are in such a mindset. I’d welcome any thoughts or feedback you might have as to whether this would be useful or not. Maybe consider a conflict situation you are in yourself and how well this questionnaire would help you identify where you were at in terms of willingness to move forward in the situation.

It will probably touch for starters, on values – work ethic perhaps or the importance of being collaborative and team work. You would draw on memories from childhood of hearing from parents or other respected teachers about the importance of people pulling their weight and observing the scorn they had for people who didn’t conform to this way of being. Needs are also involved – the need to get the job done effectively and efficiently – maybe you have a need to look good perhaps with the  boss or maybe you just need to get it done so as to get home to family and freetime. The third piece, identity is often a  juicy kernel to unpack. More than likely, at some level, we might feel perhaps undervalued or disrespected if our colleague Ann doesn’t want to co- operate. Here, this can touch on the universal habit many of us develop of wanting or expecting our identity to be reinforced and positively endorsed by  others around us and feeling hurt/angry where this is lacking. So now, Ann’s behaviour is actually just a key that’s unlocking a doorway to our own  storage cupboard of beliefs about ourselves, needs in other areas of our lives, learned values about how people should behave.
But you might ask, why would I bother doing this – why should I spend time exploring what’s happening for me when it’s Ann that’s causing the problems in the first place…we are back to focusing on Ann again of course -  but if you can bear with me, the reason is very simple. When you can own your reaction and take responsiblitity for it, your ability to deal with the situation involving Ann will be greatly enhanced. For starters, imagine that you could be in a place where Ann’s unco-operative behaviour would no longer be experienced by you as anything other than a mild challenge that you have to deal with? Think of how much more relaxed you would feel? In turn, you would have greater resourcefulness and skill in how you deal Ann because when we are less stressed, our ability to think creatively and problem-solve increases.

Most important of all, you would be coming across differently to Ann – non-reactive and calm rather than having an undercurrent of resistance and irritation in your energy around her and any action you would take would be so much more effective than if it was laden down with your own emotional responses to her behaviour.
Call to action: Think about a recent time when you were annoyed or upset by something someone said to you. Now, take a pen and see if you can find 5 other factors that might be influencing how you are reacting to this person and take responsibility for dealing with those first before you deal with the person supposedly causing them!

I had the wonderful privilege of going to see the Dalai Lama speak on ‘The Power of Forgiveness’ in the University of Limerick a couple of weeks ago. He spoke about anger and it’s effect on us and one of the points he made was that if you are angry and you put all your energy into focusing this anger onto one target or one person, then it can be very destructive. On the other hand, if you try and break it down and see the bigger picture, as it were and how many factors might have led towards a situation that made you being angry, it can dissipate and cause less damage – to oneself also.

A recent Conflict Coaching session that I was doing with a client really illustrated this for me. Ann, my client, was going to a new department but had some misgivings about her new manager Jean, based on some negative and recent experiences she had had with her, in particular, a meeting where Ann met with her to discuss her start date etc. Without going into all of the history, Ann was feeling very upset and very angry with Jean and very negative about having to work with her as her manager. In fact, what she really wanted to do was to give Jean a piece of her mind, as it were and hand in her resignation – not at all practical though for her family and financial circumstances. She had also become very anxious and worried about the impending return to work.

In the coaching session we looked first of all at the situation from Ann’s viewpoint and explored how it was she had been upset by Jean, the emotional impact it had on her and also the assumptions that she had started to make about Jean. We then spent some time talking through the situation but looking at it from Jean’s point of view. This is one of the key features of conflict coaching – it challenges the client to explore and start to view the situation from the other person’s point of view. In doing this, the client is being asked to take a ‘bigger picture’ view – what the Dalai Lama referred to as a more ‘holistic’ approach. Some people find it difficult to do this but this is where the real nuggets of learning and developing how one deals with conflict, lie. The better the client can engage in this piece of the coaching work, the more they will gain in terms of real insights and ways forward for dealing with the other person. Ann was completely open to doing this and took a very honest and authentic look at how Jean might have viewed her. She realised that her behaviours might have been triggers for Jean and saw how they might have upset her or caused her to be somewhat negative. She saw how both of them as well as some other circumstances beyond them, had contributed to the difficulties.

At the end of the session, she said she  she felt greatly relieved and much less angry when she thought now about Jean – she commented ‘I had created a demon and now I realise that I only have to deal with another human being’. It’s so much easier when we realise that we are just dealing with someone like ourselves – the same fears, needs, concerns – and of course the same hopes and dreams too!

In most of the cases I deal with in mediation or conflict coaching, emails are increasingly becoming a feature through which conflict gets played out. I was going to say ‘a cause of conflict’ but of course every day millions of emails get sent and received in very positive and productive ways, so it’s probably fair to say that the conflict was already present and the unwelcome email was a mere symptom of this. Nevertheless, it is worth looking at the role that this method of communication might play in exacerbating a conflict.

Recent research has looked at the negative impact the computer age will have on the  emotional intelligence levels of the upcoming generation – emotional intelligence being the set of skills we use to read, understand, and respond effectively to the emotional signals we all send out. To illustrate this, a friend of mine has a 17-year old daughter whom he accompanied to a football match. While waiting for the game to kick off, he saw a young man whom he knew his  daughter had been texting a lot across the way and drew her attention to this ‘There’s your friend, why don’t you go over and chat to him’, to which she responded ‘Oh no Dad, I couldn’t talk to him’. Herein, in my view, lies the crux of the emails issue – its such a convenient and efficient method of communication but when it starts to be used to avoid talking, then there is need for caution. So in an age in which we increasingly communicate with people while staring at a screen, rather than a person’s face with all the attendant body language and feedback that this gives us (up to 90% of our face-to-face communication is non-verbal), we need to ensure that this is not causing us more problems than it solves.

Here are two ways I’ve seen emails be used in an unconstructive way as well as some changes I would suggest that might make it less likely to worsen the conflict.

1. Copying emails to other people: This can take a few different versions but if there is already some tension going on, it’s a surefire way to escalate the situation. Emails are often copied to managers to “keep them in the loop” or to  ‘put it on record’. Unfortunately, very often it can be perceived on the other side as a demonstration that they can’t be trusted.
2. Copying to a wider group can have a similar function or I have also seen the version where a person wants to transmit a message to another person – let’s call him John, addresses the email to a manager, refers to the issue and to John’s role in it and just ‘cc’s John in on the email. Yes, it’s guaranteed to make John very upset! Including a larger group in an email that might hold a negative message for John is going to land on him like a public accusation to which most people’s natural reaction is defensiveness rather than reflection.
3. Of course there are times when issues have to be put across in writing and accountablity is important as is ensuring there is a record. However the face- to-face discussion about these matters needs to happen first of all where the heat of the issue can be dealt with. Part of the discussion might be letting them know that it will be emailed to relevant others afterwards so while you may not have their full agreement with this, it won’t be any surprise and will hopefully reflect the discussion that was had, in a constructive way.

2. Using email to communicate a negative message because a person finds it easier than having to ‘confront’ the other face-to-face ‘John, I was very annoyed with your behaviour at the meeting…’. This often happens when a person is upset, annoyed or frustrated and they react in the heat of the moment. Yet the research cited above tells us that even a neutral message tends to lead to negative interpretations, therefore the impact of such an email will again be one that draws defensiveness rather than a willingness to listen and hear what the difficulties are. There are situations where it is appropriate to communicate in writing around such matters although I would wager, if the issues are reflected on and thought through in a  constructive way, they are few and far between. So the first question to ask yourself, if you are tempted to put across a negative message to someone in an email is: WAIWT: Why Am I Writing This (instead of sitting down and talking to them!)

So in an increasingly technological age and one which becomes more and more dependent on communicating via screens rather than more traditional forms (talking face-to-face!) there needs to be greater awareness and reflection on the use of email to ensure that it is appropriately used rather than being an apparently easy way out of having difficult conversations that ultimately exacerbate and prolong conflict.

 If you have a difficult message that you want to communicate to someone, conflict coaching can be a great way to help you prepare and figure out how best you want to get this across!

As part of the recent training course for participants on the Leitrim Mediation Training project, a cross-border visit has taken place with one of the most established and best known mediation projects in Ireland – Mediation Northern Ireland (MNI). This project has been funded by the PEACE III Programme through the European Union’s European Regional Development Fund managed for the Special EU Programmes Body by Leitrim County Council on behalf of County Leitrim Peace III Partnership.

Located in the heart of Belfast, MNI is a mediation development organisation which works to support reconciliation and community cohesion and uses mediative practice to build capacity for change among individuals and communities and promote sustainable peace building. The trip commenced with an extremely informative presentation of Belfast as the ‘divided city’ which gave an overview of how the social and demographic profile of the people has evolved in the wake of the peace process. The almost three-fold increase in the number of Peace Walls in recent years has is a clear illustration of how much of the resolution consists of separate but peaceful co-existence rather than any significant level of integration and relationship building between the two sides.

We took a tour then of some of the Peace Walls and mural works of art and got some insight into the role of symbolism and insignia as markers of identity and the significance of claiming and maintaining this identity for the two communities. However, the work of building peace is ongoing and much of Mediation Northern Ireland’s focus is on using mediative practices to address the conflict at cultural and structural levels in Northern Ireland rather than simply mediating individual disputes.

This field trip had been organized as a final event over the course of the training run by Consensus Mediation. The course which ran from November 2011 and has just been completed. It has aimed to give participants the required level of generic skills, knowledge and attitudes to enable them to successfully qualify at Certified level with the Mediator’s Institute of Ireland.

Key content included knowledge of mediation theory, principles, practice, styles and methods, exploring participants own styles and approaches to dealing with conflict, acquiring a theoretical understanding of conflict, managing conflict and principles of conflict resolution, an awareness of the external context of mediation as well of course, as developing effective skills, knowledge and attitudes in mediation to meet the certified assessment requirements. Models of good practice of peace building and mediation in this area were also explored.

Participants had an opportunity to practice skills in simulated role plays and the course assessment consisted of a videoed role play of each individual mediating a case for an hour. Following successful completion, trainees are now eligible to apply for a Certificate to Practice as a mediator issued by the MII, which also has a comprehensive Code of Ethics that Mediators are required to follow.

It is now hoped that the group of trained Mediators in Leitrim can work towards implementing the use of mediation to build the capacity of communities in Co Leitrim to improve and develop more positive relationships and empower people to deal with conflict more creatively.

Myth 1: An honest conversation doesn’t have to be ‘confrontation’:

In Conflict Coaching or Mediation when I talk to people about situations where they are feeling annoyed or upset with another person and explore how they might discuss that with them they usually respond by saying ‘I don’t want to be confrontative or aggressive’ – it’s as if the only alternative to saying nothing is to say something in a way that will be harsh and cause the issue to escalate and get out of control. This kind of all or nothing thinking couldn’t be further from the truth and even thinking like this sets up a polarised view of the situation – it has to be either me or them. With good preparation a difficult conversation can be transformed from a confrontation that drives people apart to one which brings greater understanding and clarity for both and leaves each feeling they have been treated with respect.

Myth 2: If it gets heated at all, then it’s over:

Conflict theory tells us that the heat is very often a necessary part of the difficult conversation – in fact the route to harmony and resolution is only through some level of people being upset or angry in the exchange. It’s a bit like mountain climbing – the clear view only comes after we’ve sweated and ached on the way up. Yes, it might get heated but there are ways to manage that and get you and the other person through it that don’t cause long-term damage to the relationship.

Myth 3: If they don’t see my point in the first half an hour then they never will:

Having an exchange that allows both persons to get the depth of understanding that might be required to give more clarity and open up ways forward takes time and again, has a natural trajectory. If we go back to the mountain analogy again, you wouldn’t expect to see the beautiful view when you’ve just reached the top of the first hill. The path that the other person might have to travel in order to fully comprehend your point of view will take time. Your hesitancy in having the conversation for fear of upsetting the other is an indication that there is an emotional journey that will have to be made also for that person and will involve ups and downs for both of you. You have to accept that it will take time and sometimes quite a bit of perseverance on your part.

Myth 4: You can’t be honest:

This is the catch-22 – I want to have an honest conversation but can’t be honest’ So what do you want to be honest about? If you want to be honest about some of the negative thoughts and possibly derogatory terms in which you might want to describe them (he’s so bossy/arrogant/mean..) yes that kind of honesty – can be unproductive. So much depends on how you frame it, how you say it. For example, are you going to be blaming and shaming with phrases such as ‘You are..’ ‘You did…’ ‘It’s all your fault…’ or could you go for simply naming i.e. ‘I was upset when you said….’ or ‘I consider you have some responsibility here for what took place..’ . You can be honest about the impact of the situation on you or on the business/family, you can be honest that it has impacted on how you view them or the level of trust between you. Yes it might cause some escalation, hurt and upset that the other person might feel as a consequence. You then need to be ready to respond – do they need empathy, some acknowledgement (of the upset, not of them being right!) or maybe it’s simply a some reasoned and calm reiteration of the negative message.

Myth 5: If I say nothing, perhaps it will all go away:

Not always a myth perhaps as sometimes things can be best left alone but my own experience (as a natural avoider) is that it nearly always comes back to bite. You say nothing at the time, appear unperturbed but then invest lots of energy in convincing yourself that it isn’t worth getting into with the other person. Time passes and then there is another interaction – again, you act as if everything was normal but underneath, there has been an attitude change for you. So while you mightn’t be rude or nasty or overtly annoyed, there will be very subtle influence – you are less willing, less agreeable and eventually, it gets expressed. It might be through sins of omission rather than commission e.g. forgetting to tell them about a meeting that’s coming up or not involving them adequately in a task but more than likely, it will impact negatively. So you’ve just postponed the thing you’ve been afraid of – a conflict or upsetting exchange with the other person.

If you would like to have some support that will ensure you navigate successfully through a potentially heated exchange, just 2 or 3 Conflict Coaching sessions are an invaluable and proven way to give you the confidence and assurance that you need to climb the mountain, get down the other side and enjoy a greater range of clarity and peace of mind about the situation.

In the first place listening is very effective in helping to calm and descalate emotional upset and stress. Letting the person unburden their ‘story’ of what happened can be a very effective way of reducing the emotional arousal; we often use the term ‘vent’ and in effect having someone listen does have a ventilating effect in reducing the heat of the upset, hurt, anger they might be experiencing.

Brain science postulates that neurons in the brain called ‘mirror neurons’ may cause us to simulate the actions and emotions of those we observe. Authentic listening requires a calmness and centredness in the listener, which then in turn can begin to have a similar effect on the speaker who is also observing this. So as a listener, we are modelling as it were a more effective state of mind for the speaker.

We are also modelling for them a skill that might have contributed to the conflict in the first place – namely a lack of them perhaps really hearing and attempting to understand where the other person might be coming from.

Thirdly, brain science is also discovering that being aware of your emotions can help combat amygdala arousal – the amygdala being the part of the brain that reacts in ‘fight’ or ‘flight’ mode. So listening should also involve the use of reflective questions and statements that focus on helping the speaker to identify and label the emotions they are experiencing.

Reducing the emotional load that the speaker might be feeling is not just an end in itself, rather, having a calming effect on the parts of the brain that are reacting to the situation – the limbic system – you enable another part of the brain to kick into play, namely, the pre-frontal cortex – the rational and thinking part of the brain. It’s only when a person is capable of thinking clearly rather than reacting, that they can begin to engage in reasoning and problem solving – key aspects of conflict resolving.

At a more obvious level but one we often forget, listening to a person in an authentic and non-judgemental manner is an experience that affirms and acknowledges them and what they have to say. And it is this gift of understanding and empathy that can play a key role in developing the trust and rapport that is essential to facilitating them  towards solving and resolving rather than blaming and shaming.

The first question is: ‘What’s driving your decision-making?’ This really is such a fundamental question because in so many cases we either make decisions so quickly that they tend to be reactive or we make them but haven’t really reflected on what it is motivating us to make this decision. So are we doing something because we are angry? Are we trying to ‘ get back’ at someone? Are we acting on instinct? Are we getting carried away with something? I am not suggesting of course that these reasons are wrong or that there should be other reasons behind why we decide things. Some people prefer to act on gut instinct and aren’t drawn towards logical reasoning. But at least, we should know about this, that this is what’s driving how we make this decision. Because the second question is: “What would you like to be influencing how you make this decision?” So are you happy about the fact that you are allowing perhaps your emotions about a situation to guide you rather than any sort of rational arguments. Of course the other key factor in this is that you are able to sit back and reflect on this. At times, I’ve seen parties make decisions in mediation that, while they were able to support them with very logical-sounding arguments, it really was difficult to believe that they had rationally weighed up their options and come to that conclusion. One case recently was in a workplace conflict where a mediation agreement between two workers had run aground somewhat, and while in my view was very rescuable or at least had potential to be worked on, one of the parties just seemed to dig in his heels when it came to doing another mediation session. While he even realised that he may jeopardize his job over not getting this issue sorted, he says that he feels it’s ‘not worth trying any further’ and gave a list of reasons that would justify this case. However, a lot of anger and hurt also came across of which I suspect also was playing a large role in how he had reached this decision not to return to mediation. So it’s not about challenging or changing those feelings or reactions but simply about becoming more aware of what one is being influenced by and being able to choose whether to allow this to have a bearing on the decision or not.

At the outset of the coaching, Tom said his goal was to be able to stay calm and not react when his boss did or said something that would annoy or provoke him. He gave some examples of situations that would provoke him – e.g. if his boss gave some instructions to do a task that Tom did not consider was reasonable or or fair – and in the coaching session was able to identify that fairness was a key trigger for him. Tom said that in such situations he would get quite angry and start to challenge his boss, raising his voice, and would become very argumentative. Tom said even with his customers, if he felt they were abusing his services, he would tend to be similarly triggered and react in a way that later he would regret.

During the session, one of the questions I asked Tom was “What got in the way of you staying calm and unreactive when your boss did …” and he answered “It’s part of my personality, that’s the way I am, I’m just not a calm kind of person”;he then further elaborated saying that he thought he got this trait from his father’s side of the family. So my next question was “How might you choose to react differently?” At this, Tom looked at me, was quite surprised by this question and asked: “Can we choose how we react when we are provoked?” so I asked him if there were ever times, people or situations when he didn’t react or stayed calm if he was being provoked. Tom immediately answered that with his children, regardless of how much they provoke him, he seldom becomes outwardly angry or annoyed. This was like a lightbulb moment for Tom as he realised that in these situations, he can have a completely different reaction – he is able to remain calm and manage his annoyance or irritation rather than reacting back.

This session put me very much in mind of the famous insight from Viktor Frankl’s book ‘Man’s Search for Meaning’ (written about his experiences in a Nazi concentration camp) “between stimulus and response there is a gap, and in this gap lies all our freedom”. Through coaching, Tom was able to get more of a sense of the ‘gap’ between him being provoked and his response and we were able to look at what has been described as the ‘golden moment of choice’ – that split second moment where we actively make a choice as to how we will react and how Tom might now choose to react in a different way.

So what happens to you when you are triggered or annoyed by someone – do you believe you can choose how you react? And, if you do, how aware are you of your ‘golden moment of choice’ and the behaviours that you choose in those situations.

The second key time-consuming aspect is in the delivery of the message. Have you set aside a time that you and they won’t be interrupted by the next appointment? Are you just going to ‘hit and run’ or will you be able to give them the time and attention to hear their views. Not only that, but can you take the time to clarify what their understanding is of what you have said. If you are in a hurry, then you will probably tend to say your bit and want then to move straight to solutions and action plan. Understandable, but remember, you have been storing up this discussion and planning solutions for quite a while before. They however, need to be given the time in the discussion to perhaps vent a bit, get defensive, state their case and hear positives acknowledged. So don’t be tempted to to move too quickly – it really is a case of more haste, less speed. If you would like to get some support in having a ‘difficult conversation’, why not try one or two Conflict Coaching sessions. Not only will this help you to feel more confident in approaching the situation, but it will ensure more productive and effective outcomes for both you and the other person.

• Have a number of support options available. This is of course much more feasible in larger businesses and organisations. Most policies name a number of persons such as Human Resources Manager, Union Representative, Line Manager/Supervisor or other manager or supervisor. The Health and Safety Authority Code of Practice also refers to Contact Persons being available – trained volunteer members of staff who have a listening brief only. The main difference with Contact Persons is that an employee can have a confidential and off-the-record discussion to help them clarify their issues and explore how they might resolve or move forward with them. This minimises the formality of the discussion i.e. they are not putting a complaint on record with the organisation or company although in serious cases Contact Persons would have to consider reporting the matter on grounds of welfare of the employee in question. 
• Have the availability of external supports such as an employee assistance programme, mediation, conflict coaching, facilitation. Ideally these supportsshould be written into your policy in some way. Many policies nowadays have a piece on mediation which briefly explains what it is and how it works. However,I think it is important that even before this stage, there are options for employees that can help them figure out a way to resolve the issue for themselves. Most policies urge employees in the first instance to approach the ‘alleged perpetrator’ and seek to resolve the issues. How this approach is done is critical as it can easily become derailed and turn into an unconstructive and blaming conversation. Being able to get conflict coaching or support around this conversation can greatly increase its chances of success.
• Even if the complaint comes in writing, consider mediation and encourage the parties to attempt this option. In my view, employers should wherever possible encourage people to engage in some sort of collaborative forum that aims to resolve rather than determine right or wrong. This is because in most cases,whatever chances you have of influencing negative behaviours through mediation or dialogue, an adversarial, investigative process – even where it makes a’complaint upheld’ finding – usually has little impact in terms of real change on the behaviour of one or both parties. It’s usually a question of winning the battle but losing the war.
• Very often a situation between two employees lends itself more to a Line Manager mediating rather than bringing in an external mediator, especially where there is a good level of trust between the manager and two parties in conflict. For a start, it keeps the matter more informal as it can be set up easily rather than having to go through the financial and operational procedure of engaging an external consultant. Secondly, it sends a message that this is a situation that is causing some disruption in the workplace because of unhelpful conflict behaviours on each person’s part and cannot be tolerated. Thirdly, a manager can sometimes get both parties to the table more easily than if they are given a choice about participating in a formal mediation process and will often be able to do this at an early stage in the conflict and where relationships have not become too damaged. The key here is that the Manager gets coaching or mentoring so as to ensure they mediate effectively and that, in any event, their intervention doesn’t make the conflict any worse.
• Have constructive and empowering conversations with someone who raises a complaint. If you are either in a human resources or management role and someone comes to you to raise an issue, rather than focusing in the first line on getting all the facts about when it happened, who was there etc – think instead about asking questions that will help the person think the issue through in terms of what they themselves could do. It’s so easy to feel that your role is to ‘fix’ or come up with solutions for them rather than to empower them to come up with solutions for themselves. A few questions you could try might be: 
               
  • What is it you feel I could help you with most today?
  • What sort of options to you see open to you with regards to this situation?
  • What do you hope for?
  • What have you been thinking you might do next?
  • How would you like to see this being resolved?
  • What outcome do you want from this situation?
  • Imagine a point in the future where your issue is resolved. How did you get there?
  • How can you move this situation forward?
  • What can you do for yourself?
  • Where do you feel stuck in this issue?
  • What other supports do you have at the moment?
  • What’s the biggest challenge for you in getting this sorted out?

Appreciation, according to the authors, can be broken into three components:

• Understanding the other person’s viewpoint
• Finding merit in what the other person does, thinks or feels
• Communicating our understanding of this to the other person.

Understanding the other person’s views requires an openness to asking about and hearing where the other is ‘coming from’. More important often than the ‘content’ is to listen for emotions behind their words. Rather than reacting to ‘angry words’ look to name and acknowledge the anger they are experiencing.

The second, finding merit in what the other person does, thinks or feels, is the real challenge. This is however, also the most important because insincere acknowledgement is easily detected. Remember, however, finding merit and acknowledging the other person’s view doesn’t mean agreeing with it or negating your view. Instead, it’s about going beyond your own emotional response and attempting to understand them at some level. You might find fault with much of their actions or words but it’s about searching for some part of their perspective about which you can genuinely say “I can see how you might feel that given the fact that …” or “Although I find what you did difficult, I can see why you might have taken that action, in this situation” or “I can see how you came to that conclusion because you made these assumptions about me”

Communicating this is of course the third element. Your tone and intention in this are again crucial. Non-verbal communication will always outweigh any kind of ‘dressed up’ content so if you don’t mean it, don’t say it.

Three questions that might help in thinking through the situation beforehand:

1. In what ways might they feel that you do not understand them?
2. In what ways might their viewpoint have merit?
3. How might you communicate your understanding to them?

Even if you don’t get the outcome you want, you will find that your conversation will be more positive and less confrontational. And, as authors Fisher and Shapiro state “By appreciating them, you are more likely to foster their appreciation of you”

from “Beyond Reason. Using Emotions as You Negotiate”, Roger Fisher and Daniel Shapiro, 2006, Penguin

- these famous words from Aristotle remind us of the need for caution in how we deal with our anger. One thing however is for sure, simply holding onto the annoyance, irritation, frustration or resentment is not in our long term interest.

If you want some support in working through an issue and moving past the anger, then two or three sessions or Conflict Management Coaching will definitely benefit you. It’s a sure way to move from a stuck to a more enlightened place. 

Let’s have a look at some of the damage staying angry can do:  

1. Staying angry limits our ability to think strategically and see ‘the bigger picture’. 

When we get angry, it sets off a complex set of physical reactions in our body, whereby the emotional centres of the brain become activated to the detriment of the reasoning centres. The net effect of this is that our ability to think in a strategic and rational way is greatly reduced and instead we start to engage in reactive behaviours. Physiologically, our muscles tense, heart rate, blood pressure and breathing rate all increase as we prepare to protect ourselves. The focus of our attention narrows greatly, to one of defending and/or attacking the percieved source of our anger. Our ability to reason and think through logically what is taking place and make good choices for ourselves is greatly inhibited and we are much more likely to ‘cut off your nose to spite your face’.

2. When we are angry, we are likely to react in a way that exacerbates rather than resolves the situation.

The physiological changes caused by anger are the body’s way of gearing you up to fight so anger brings with it a great surge of energy, which is designed to ensure an effective defense or attack on the target of our anger. So when we are angry, we are likely to engage in behaviours such as arguing, raising our voice, threatening or withdrawing and closing down. In the workplace, many of us of course do have a ’stop’ button that we can press in order to manage such reactions so we might sit and smoulder rather than react. However, this suppression of the anger without really dealing with it is likely to result in it emerging – maybe even sub-consciously – at another time. So instead of reacting at the time, it gets stored up and comes out at a later date as a sarcastic remark, coldness, small act of revenge – and as it happens later, is without context for the other person and feels like an unprovoked attack.

3. Holding onto anger damages our health and well being. 

Not processing and dealing with our anger means that every time we think about the situation or come into contact with the person who triggered us, we tend to go through the same reaction again and again. This means that we will continue to experience the same type of physiological response which over time, takes its toll on our body. Anger stimulates the stress hormones and repeatedly flooding our body with these chemicals will have a negative impact in the long-term on our health. In fact, the person who ultimately suffers the most from unprocessed anger is the person who is experiencing it in the first place.

4. Anger can get in the way of learning valuable lessons

When we are angry with someone, in many cases, if we stop and think about it, we will discover that there are other emotions there also. Anger tends to be a very good ‘mask’ for other feelings that might be going on in our bodies. So by focusing only on our anger and seeing how we can direct action to the other person in reaction to this, we are missing for example the fact that we might be hurt, feel rejected, feel powerless. We might also miss the fact that we are feeling a bit angry towards ourselves for some part that we might have played in the situation. Even if it’s ‘I should have been more assertive’, by not stopping and reflecting on the anger and looking at all of these aspects to it, we miss out on what it is we can do differently in order to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

5. Staying angry ultimately disempowers ourselves

Interestingly, the experience of anger tends to be very energising and give us a sense of having power in the situation. This is the positive aspect of anger – it is motivating us to take an action to improve a situation that we feel is frustrating or threatening us in some way. However, how we then act on this emotion very much determines whether we really do take control and responsibility over what is happening for us. By simply reacting or holding onto our anger, instead of taking the time and space to look rationally at what happened and working through this, we stay locked in our perception that ‘they’ did something to ‘me’. Implicit in this sort of thinking is that we have no control over what is happening to us and leaves us feeling victimised and disempowered. This in turn will have an impact on other aspects of our lives and sap our motivation and energy for these also.

If you would like to find constructive ways of dealing with anger, why not schedule a couple of sessions of Conflict Management Coaching and take back control over your responses and your life.  

Let’s just look at a case scenario I recently mediated. Staff were on a roster for on-call work and when one member returned from long-term sick leave, he was asked by his team mates to ‘make up’ the on-call days he had missed. He didn’t feel this was fair so he approached his boss and asked that this be clarified. The manager delayed acting on this and a situation arose where the other two on the team made repeated requests of Tom to ‘pay back’ his days. Tom’s response to what he viewed as these unfair requests was to simply ignore them and walk off. They continued to ‘hassle’ Tom about the time he owed and he would just ‘blank them’ and walk away. Soon, general relationships became more strained and soon Tom was no longer really having any kind of communication with his other two team members.

What should either Tom or his team members do about this situation? The only ‘tool’ to manage workplace conflict that exists in most organisations is the policy on bullying and harassment behaviours. While either Tom or his colleagues might want to have this matter sorted out in a constructive way, in many situations, it is channelled down the ‘bullying’ route – in other words Tom has to frame his case as a situation where his ‘dignity is being undermined’ or he is being ‘bullied’. Naturally, the next step has to be that Tom’s two colleagues are informed that Tom has alleged they are bullying him. Now, not only have we the original dispute over the on- call, but much worse than this, the fall-out that ensues when Tom’s colleagues are informed by a third party that they are ‘alleged perpetrators’ of bullying behaviours.

In most cases I have worked on, the original issues themselves are often easier to resolve than the hurt and upset caused by the polarisation that a complaint under the bullying policy causes. If I may be permitted to mix metaphors, it’s a case of “if the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail” and using “a sledghammer to crack a nut”.

In the absence of more comprehensive and all-embracing conflict management policies, here are just a few ideas on how organisations might mitigate against anti-bullying policy being applied unhelpfully:

• Ensure that employees who might have a potential difficulty with a colleague or manager have access to supports such as Designated Contact Person/Harassment Advisors.
• Make options such as Conflict Coaching and Mediation as accessible as possible at early stage complaints or rumblings.
• Ensure Managers have both the mechanisms (e.g. appraisal or feedback sessions) and the training to communicate effectively and regularly with staff around potentially contentious issues. This communication needs to be two-way as I have seen many cases where employees use the anti-bullying policy to communicate dissatisfaction with how they are being managed.
• The ideal would be training for all staff in constructive communication so that difficult issues can addressed at an early stage when they are so much easier to resolve.

Please get in touch if you would like further details on how to make your anti-bullying policy more flexible and adaptable.