by Edward de Bono
(Vermillion Books)
Just to recap…in my June update I introduced a favourite book of mine- Conflicts A Better Way to Resolve Them by Edward de Bono which is critical about the current way we go about things (EdB calls it the adversarial approach) and instead it promotes a totally different way of sorting out disputes: one which would make us happier- and better off: called the Design approach.
This update looks at how conflict begins and importantly how we can sometimes make it worse… with some ideas on how to put people in the right frame of mind to negotiate.
The essence of what I have to say is we should always avoid anything which puts the other party in a position where settlement feels (or looks) like a climbdown…
This is an odd question when you think about it because we all know that ‘winning’ comes at a cost. There is always some collateral damage not to mention making enemies of ex- employees with nothing to lose. Of course everyone wants to avoid legal costs… But the real cost is the diversion of resources towards raking over past wrongs. And there is another subtle cost- a little less obvious but no less important and that’s the impact of conflict on creative thinking. As EdB puts it:
‘…It may be that in that emotional state a thinker is simply incapable of having certain types of thought.’
Taking this into account it’s impossible to quantify the true cost of workplace disputes… because it’s impossible to know what we’d have come up with our best, creative thinking. The truth is people think they like conflict, but as things pan out, most of us can’t wait for it to stop. ACAS annual stats confirm this: 70% of cases settle so surely, we all want to get there as quickly as possible.
But there are many drivers to conflict. You’ll have to read the book to get the full picture (agitators, money, revenge etc.) but if you work in HR, you’ve probably come these:
Mood- In the short-term this definitely adds to the attraction of conflict. It’s perfectly rational to want to attack if we are angry, humiliated or scared. Given that we all seem to want peace it would be wise to factor this in…to think about how to put others in the right frame of mind for peace and, importantly, to check in on how everyone feels about the issues as time moves on.
Entrenched perspectives
The adversarial approach to litigation really is a bad place to start the journey to a Settlement. At Law College we were trained to start with a Letter Before Action. You may have seen one: you pen everything down but from your client’s point of view (only), add a bit of law and make a threat with a timescale for surrender…. Things may have changed a bit for the better- at least now we’re supposed to exchange documents to back up what we are saying… but I can’t image not feeling infuriated if I was on the receiving end of one of these!
With the processes of litigation, it gets worse and worse. People set out their stalls with grandiose statements about ‘robust’ this ‘we have no doubt that’ all of which just make us want to never concede anything at all. Lawyers and the HR team can often get so absorbed in preparing documents and statements that we forget to concern ourselves with common sense ideas. For one thing the parties often don’t speak face- to- face until the Tribunal.
EdB perfectly summarises the problem of the need to be ‘Right at Each Stage.’ A frame of mind in which we have unwittingly imprisoned ourselves. But the problem is… things change as information unfolds so why set the scene so that they are simply not allowed to.
Being right is not a good way to understand things and it definitely isn’t the way to encourage dialogue. It’s a horribly short-term sport!
So, always take a step back and try to be objective. It’s a funny thing but being curious is the best way of ultimately being ‘right’…and be prepared to accept things along the way if they are likely to be correct.
Understanding perception
I often think about this when visiting Canary Wharf.’ I’m pretty sure that- sitting in a fabulous glass building (with excellent coffee) is not the best way to see things from another perspective: the employees or even that tribunal panel in a tiny town.
There’s a lot more going on in the mind of an employee than in your typical dispute such as an arm’s length complaint about a car or a ruined holiday. The employee may be very worried about something specific…how will losing their job look on their CV?... or in front of their peers or family? Or how it may affect immigration status if they are on a Work Permit.
You’d be surprised just how helpful it can be to know what’s really going on from the employee’s perspective. So where possible, encourage them to put ideas forward: an agreed announcement or a draft reference on the table or ‘garden leave’ to help with the work permit.
Recently we did this with an employee who was going to be put on a PIP but on speaking to him the HR manager found out he would be very happy to drop management duties and focus on his accounting work (which he was very good at!)
The main things- as I mention above- are to be genuinely curious and to avoid any words or steps which might create ego problems and the need for a climbdown.
Ideas
We should adapt our behaviour so that we don’t wind one another up. Here’s some basic guidance:
Drop all the clever (being ‘right’) language… Tone things down and set things out from your understanding with a genuine interest in finding out the truth rather than ‘winning.’
Keep an eye on mood. Avoid ‘poking the bear’ … make space to consider how mood might have changed, for example when a person has another job, or the dust has settled.
Try to limit words to what’s necessary. If anything, be a little bit boring, limit things where possible to a neutral chronology.
Face- to- face discussions are so much better than written exchanges. They offer a chance to pick up on helpful non-verbal signs.
I hope this article helps. The next one will be looking at the creative approach in action with some specific examples of how this has worked for clients.
