'How Do You Think? The challenge of being the neutral third party in a dispute'

Before we start, the lawyer in me is shouting for a ‘DISCLAIMER!’.  So:

I’m writing these posts for your general information.  Please don’t rely on this, or any other article in the series, as advice or instruction.  If you have a situation where formal mediation could help, please consult a professional.

So to the title question:

You’re probably used to being asked:

‘What do you think?’  

I’m asking you ‘how’ you think this time because this week’s topic is neutrality.  I Recently dealt with something at work which reminded me, that doesn’t come naturally to many of us – including me!

You may well have noticed, the company has a new logo.  The first version put forward by the designer used the colours I’d mentioned in the brief:

Over all, the image of a central figure in green, bringing together two blue figures, was:

·         calm,

·         sensible and

·         neutral.

 That colour scheme didn’t cause strong reactions – either positive or negative.  The same can’t be said for the final version!

Having the outer figures in red is my choice and I like the contrast (dare I say, ‘conflict’?) with what has been described as:

‘The big, green, hugging monster’

in the middle!  Some people feel the difference is too stark – although others have picked up on what I intend the image to say – that the two red figures are in conflict and the green one is the mediator.

The original version made complete intellectual sense – but my gut reaction was to rebel!  You see, ‘sensible’ and ‘neutral’ aren’t words which always apply to me, or to everything the company does.  If clients are up for it, I love making training – even consultancy – fun!  For instance, I’ve just written up a case study for the website, about a workshop on communication skills, where I had a group of (normally very sensible) managers playing with lego!

I can’t see that ever being appropriate in a mediation. If the parties have been in dispute for some time – especially if they haven’t been speaking – they might start throwing the bricks at each other!

The more serious point is, as business owners and managers, we constantly have to:

·         Evaluate,

·         Prioritise and

·         Judge.

Neutrality is a completely different mindset; and it’s vital

from the beginning to the end of any form of facilitated dispute resolution process.  It helps to:

·         Reduce the emotional temperature,

·         Encourage people to open up – in terms of what they say and how they’re willing to listen; and so

·         It builds trust.

Neutrality isn’t indifference.  It’s about caring equally for everybody you’re dealing with; seeing their perspectives – and resisting the temptation to take sides. 

Keeping in mind how tricky that can be, even for an outsider, here are five tips to help you stay neutral in a work-related dispute or conflict:

1  Neither your place, nor mine:

We’re all, on some level, territorial.  So if you’re thinking of bringing the parties together for a meeting, find neutral ground.  That could be:

·         A room or building neither normally works in or

·         Online.

(If everybody is in a familiar space, it cancels out the ‘home advantage’)

2 What are you doing here?!

As a professional mediator, people sometimes assume I’m there to tell them how to solve their problem; but mediation isn’t arbitration.  My job isn’t to weigh up the evidence and hand down judgment. 

I’m there to help the parties:

·         Reopen the lines of communication (often closed by conflict),

·         Start a constructive conversation and, from there,

·         Collaborate to find a mutually beneficial solution to their issue/s.

Even if you’re trying to facilitate resolution informally, it’s important to manage everybody’s expectations – including your own.

3  KEEP THE NOISE DOWN!

Last time, I said listening was a ‘toolkit’ – and the most difficult tool to master was listening ‘without prejudice’.

Whoever we are, whatever we do and however good we might be at it, we’re all human.  We all:

·         Have biases – conscious or unconscious;

·         Make assumptions based on those biases; and

·         Form opinions based on those assumptions – rather than objective evidence.

I touched on this in Episode 5 of the ‘Investing in Conversation’ pod and the blog which came out of that show.  I’m coming back to it here because in any kind of facilitative dispute resolution, you have to be able to turn the volume down on the noise in your head.

As I’ve said before, biases, assumptions and their offspring so often feel like facts.  They narrow our attention investments and push us towards ‘listening for’ specific:

·         Words and phrases,

·         attitudes or

·         purposes. 

The neutral third party in a dispute has to be able to rise above all that – to take the helicopter view of the situation.

4 Mind your language:

Receiving information neutrally is a great start – which you need to build on by sending it in the same way.  That means speaking and behaving in terms which can’t be read as favouring, or ignoring, either party.  For instance:

·         Who gets to tell their story first and

·         How much time they’re given.

If the choice isn’t obvious, I go alphabetically at the beginning of the session – then reverse the order later – explaining the method each time and, where and whenever possible, getting the parties’ agreement.  (Unspoken resentment destroys resolution from within).

Using ‘neutral’ language etc doesn’t mean you have to pretend to agree with everyone, all the time!  It just means that if you challenge a person’s take on a topic, or question them about their preferred outcome, it has to be in terms which don’t damage rapport – and so, break trust.

5 Remember, it isn’t about you:

Earlier, I said neutrality is ‘vital’ in this context, ‘from the beginning  to the end’.  That includes the outcome.  One of the skills involved in staying neutral is being able to invest attention in the process – rather than in the potential result.

That can be a real challenge– even for a professional!  When I was in legal practice, the best days at work were those when a client came in, looking like they had the world on their shoulders – and left smiling.  It was a matter of professional and personal satisfaction that I could do that for them.

I do this job because I love seeing the process move people from conflict to collaboration.  So the best days are still the ones which start with grim faces and end with smiles – or at least, relief. 

I’d be lying to you if I said they don’t feel like my ‘successes’!; but really, they’re not.  Similarly, if the session breaks down, or the parties just can’t reach an agreement they can both work with, provided I’ve followed the tried and tested process, it isn’t a ‘failure’. 

In any profession – any role at all, we should only be taking responsibility for things we can control, shouldn’t we?  What I control in a mediation is the process.  I can bring bridge-building materials and show the parties how to put them together.  I can even lay foundations; but what (if anything) is constructed on them is down to the clients.

Next time, I’ll talk about asking the right questions.

For now, if you need help with any aspect of conflict management at work – including mediation - come and talk to me!  All my details are on the website:

http://www.savvybusinessresolutions.com