Critical Analysis of Mediation in Action: Role-Playing Workplace Dispute Resolution Video - Article Example

Critical Analysis Mediation in action: role-playing workplace dispute resolution | Acas Mediation process is a significant andhighly effective method of resolving apprehensions, misunderstandings and conflicts among the coworkers in a professional setting. It has been in practice for long to resolve professional conflicts, but the six-step mediation structure has been more productive than any other kind. Opposing and arguing individuals create stressed and unproductive environment around them with their persistent squabbling. Moreover, their colleagues and subordinates also come under the wrath of their inappropriate behavior. Thus, they tend to make simple and urgent tasks intricate with back and forth complaints of each other. In the video “Mediation in action: role-playing workplace dispute resolution | Acas”, the two competitors at managerial position Paul and Kristy required mediation for the sake of their professional efficiency, stability and future progress. They also needed to resolve their disputes so to bridge the gap in their communication. To mediate the situation between these two, Senior Manager Bernard suggested mediation session which was conducted by an external agent, when he was unable to eliminate the strife between them himself. Now, Bernard as a senior manager regards both of his mangers for their distinctive skills. However, he is unable to accept their continual defiance of each other, which adversely impacted on the business in terms of time, money, lack of contracts and reputation (Mediation In Action: Role-Playing Workplace Dispute Resolution | Acas). After individual sessions with Paul and Kristy, Mediator meets them in a joint meeting and sets the ground rules initially to be followed by both. She reminds them both how these mediation sessions should be kept confidential and how they can ask for private chat if something disturbs them. Moreover, she made it clear to both the participants that they have to give ample chance and respect to the other to share his concerns and the listener will not interrupt the speaker. Setting ground rules and agreement on them makes such session more smooth and participants reach to resolutions quickly without wasting time in arguments. Mediator depicts composed and tactful approach for the second step of mediation that is listening and summarizing (Doherty and Guyler, 2008). She initiated the discussion by picking the flashpoint between two; “Kristy’s delegation handling issue”. Since, it’s directly related to Kristy’s liabilities in office; therefore, she gave Paul a chance to speak out his understanding on the issue, which reduced Kristy’s reserves to some extent without prolonging it through blame game. However, their soared relationship was due to power struggle between both managers, to actually handle and complete the task for the sake of efficiency. And this need of always being efficient inaugurated discord between them. Kristy’s interruptions during Paul’s talk-time were a violation of the ground rules, but at the same time revealed that she had valid reasons to disagree with him. After listening to Paul’s stance and politely silencing Kristy, the mediator adapts a proactive approach and shares how Paul was considerate and concern about the workload on Kristy (in private session). Here she summarized in a proactive manner and tackled the steaming tension between two in the most cordial manner. Likewise, it’s important to express gratitude and compassion to other colleagues for their abilities as it boosts their moral and strengthens mutual relationships. Kristy’s interruptions, disapproving gestures were a bit sentimental in the professional setting, but it could have been a result of long term association with the organization and uninterrupted managerial responsibilities. Paul’s mantra about efficiency and assuming responsibilities is also a bit irrational, as he cannot finish someone else’s work without their permission and later on calls them tardy in finishing tasks when the deadlines are flexible. More importantly, the language Paul chose to express his views was unacceptable for Kristy and the mediator was able to grasp that the communication gap and difference in comprehension has twisted their relationship to a large extent. Mediator intervenes at the right time when the two competitors argued about efficiency, deadlines and targets. She requests Kristy to express her feelings and describe how she felt harassed and due to what? Mediator was able to identify the issues among these two, but wanted them to recognize their differences and accept them. That is why she urged them to discuss vividly everything, so to release the negativity among them. Secondly, she urges them to communicate their fears, apprehensions, and basically to signify the other’s unacceptable behavior. Kristy expresses that “Trust and respect” have been vital elements in their professional relationship; therefore, Paul should have showed some of it towards her. On the other, Paul described his actions out of concern, so some work load could be lifted off her shoulder. At this stage of the video, one can observe how positively Paul’s concern and empathy impacted on Kristy and she seems more connected to him. Simultaneously, Mediator asked for resolutions instead of concluding it herself and as she expected both of the participants to share their ideas on it, so a mutual resolution can be picked to avoid future disputes. At this point, Kristy’s suggestion of seeking permission before assuming any responsibility seemed acceptable to Paul and mediator was able to develop a communication path for both of them to reach agreement. Secondly, the mediator used proactive language to communicate the differences among the competitors and this tactic intrinsically made them realize that expectations and assumptions without appropriate expression of views, acceptance and respect can develop more complexities in their professional relationship. In the second joint meeting, BBQ incident was discussed among the two, which ignited the previous differences among them again. As a way to mediate situation between them, Kristy arranges a BBQ at her place and invites Paul. However, he never shows up or informs her of his absence. In the next session, Paul describes his insecurities and apprehensions in a new social environment and Kristy had been observed empathetic in this regard. From there onwards, Mediator summarizes the action of both in a proactive manner and bridges those areas of communication where the two differed. She had been discussing the recent happenstances and reasons behind Paul’s behavior with Kristy and Kristy’s acceptance made it easier for Paul to agree to her sentimental approach. Mediator was able to take both competitors to a level, where they both understood their differences and accepted the style of communication of the other on an agreed pattern. Mediator devised a pattern of communication, email for day to day agendas and meeting on Monday mornings, so time is efficiently consumed and significant ideas are also discussed on face value. There had been no formal written agreement about the mode and frequency of communication between them, but they both agreed on the mediator’s suggested pattern. They both compromised on their preferred way of receiving any information and compromise is the key ingredient for team development. Both professionals deemed that their way of communication and working is more beneficial, but they could not realize that their distinctive qualities have been the reason of efficacy so far, where if one lacks the other covers it. In the video, the mediator has been an outside agent, who had a neutral tone, pleasant appearance, empathic expressions and polite gestures. Her communications style was proactive with calm gestures. The tensed situation between Paul and Kristy diminished as the third party among them had a soothing tone with none skepticism for both. She had been asking dispute relevant questions in a careful manner from both of them throughout the session, which mainly revolved around expressing their apprehensions, listening to each other’s feedback/opinion in a respectable manner, reaching a conclusion and accepting suggested pattern of working together. Not even once, she showed a judgmental tone or implied anything on either of them and I would have done the same. Mediator had been highly effective in the demonstrated scenario as she had been able to reduce tension between them and have led them through her tactful questions to a stage, where they both could see their differences and reach a resolution them self. In the individual meetings, Paul admitted the interactive and innovative skills of Kristy to tackle clients and work and Kristy admitted that he is quicker to reach the targets and has efficient organizational skills. Thus, the mediator was able to reach her objective and she scores ten points for it. References: Top of Form Doherty, N., & Guyler, M. (2008). The essential guide to workplace mediation & conflict resolution: Rebuilding working relationships. London [etc.: Kogan Page. Mediation In Action: Role-Playing Workplace Dispute Resolution | Acas. Acasoruk: ACAS, 2011. video. At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO3OMVWN8lkBottom of Form Read More