by Jane Beddall on May 30, 2007
I am no fan of dog fights, but it’s hard to beat this old expression to capture the idea of neutrality in dispute resolution. A business or family conflict involving siblings and multiple generations (perhaps even a generation that is no longer living, but the elephant in the room of the current conflict) can be an amorphous and evolving problem. In this fog, someone who is involved in the dispute, directly or tangentially, may attempt to resolve it through diplomacy between or among the most influential, vocal, or, perhaps, the most silent of the participants. These efforts may be very valuable and quite successful.
When these efforts fail, it may be simply because others involved cannot overlook that person’s interest in how the conflict is resolved: will she gain some benefit, now or later, depending on how things are worked out? Will her spouse, her child, her favorite sibling reap some advantage? If one of my business partners is proposing to resolve a dispute I am having with a third partner, what is his real motivation?
A mediator has no stake in the outcome of the dispute. A mediator will neither gain nor lose from the resolution that she helps the parties to the conflict create. The mediator’s only motivation is to assist the parties in reaching a resolution that best addresses their unique situation. Adding that aspect of neutrality to the effort to prevent or end the conflict may be essential to creating a solution that fits the needs of the parties.
by Jane Beddall on May 21, 2007
Mediators tell a story about two people and one orange. Each person has a firm position: I absolutely deserve the orange. In addition, I absolutely need the orange. Sounds like an impasse.
Negotiation may be difficult if both parties are so completely committed to their positions that they are unable to hold fruitful discussions (pun intended.)
An impartial third-party, such as an arbitrator, judge, or jury could hear the parties, or advocates on their behalf, make persuasive arguments about the merits of each party’s position. Then a decision, usually binding, would be announced. The orange could be awarded wholly to one party or the other, or split; one or both parties will be unhappy with the result.
Enter a mediator, a different type of third-party neutral. During a voluntary, confidential mediation session, the mediator probes the issues and learns about the interests that lie behind the parties’ stated positions.
Despite the insistent position of each party that “I must have the entire orange,” the mediator learns that one party’s interest is in the juice of the entire orange and the other party’s interest is in the zest of the entire orange. Now that the interests are identified, a mutually acceptable (even beneficial) resolution to the conflict becomes possible. An agreement is crafted by the parties with the help of mediator– a resolution out of reach when the parties were stuck in their entrenched positions and not focused on their underlying interests.
Roger Fisher and William Ury tell a variation on the story of the orange in their classic book, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In.
by Jane Beddall on May 17, 2007
Dale Earnhardt, Jr. was engaged in lengthy negotiations with Dale Earnhardt Inc. (DEI), the company founded by his father and run by his stepmother, before he struck out on his own and invited other Nascar teams to court him. Junior’s chief negotiator is his big sister, Kelley Earnhardt Elledge, who is vice president and general manager of JR Motorsports, his Busch Series racing team. In New York Times articles published after last week’s news conference, both siblings described a childhood where each was the lone constant in the other’s family life, with Kelley looking out for Junior from an early age right through today. Junior said he was lucky to have someone of her talents with him and felt very comfortable with her on board. Kelley, in turn, when discussing some of the more obvious pros and cons of teams who have expressed interest in Junior, was keenly aware of the emotional aspects of affiliation with various suitors.
Emotions and business decisions can be difficult to reconcile, especially in a family business. In Junior’s case, he has left one family business — DEI, founded by his father and run by his stepmother — and remained in another — JR Mototorsports, where he leans heavily on his sister. One thing that Junior and Kelley appear to have going in their favor is their awareness of the potentially potent role of emotions in their business dealings, an awareness that is a key first step to dealing effectively with conflicts as they arise.
by Jane Beddall on May 11, 2007
Yesterday we heard that Dale Earnhardt, Jr. (known as Junior) was leaving the company founded by his father, where his stepmother, Teresa, is now CEO. As the New Haven Register phrased it: “Junior leaving family business.” According to the Associated Press, Junior had asked for 51 percent ownership of the team now run by Teresa and tense negotiations on a contract extension had been unsuccessful.
As a mediator I was struck by the particular focus on the implications of Junior’s move for him individually, for the company (DEI), and for NASCAR generally. Junior held a news conference and Teresa issued a statement. Junior said: “There’s some things you can’t get with money, peace of mind and satisfaction in what you do everyday.” Teresa spoke of future plans for DEI. What we did not hear was backstabbing, recriminations, and finger-pointing, and the media’s most interesting speculation was about what Junior’s new status as a free agent will mean for racing. We did not witness a spectacle of a public family — and family business — meltdown played out for all to see.
Conflict may be inevitable, but the infliction of maximum damage is not.
by Jane Beddall on May 6, 2007
In some contexts, mediation is thought of as a form of “ADR”. ADR stands for Alternative Dispute Resolution. Originally, ADR processes were viewed as an “alternative” to the more traditional and prevalent form of dispute resolution: litigation. Today, even those conflicts that become litigated cases rarely reach resolution by means of a verdict and entry of judgment. Figures vary, but estimates of cases filed that are terminated in some other way are over 90%. Sometimes the field of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is referred to as Dispute Resolution (DR), reflecting the fact that the vast majority of disputes, even those that involve lawsuits, are resolved without seeing litigation through to the bitter end. Perhaps litigation to conclusion will be described as the “alternative” approach someday.
Negotiation is another form of ADR, in which two or more people attempt to reach agreement on a dispute. Arbitration is a different ADR process, in which a neutral third party reviews evidence, hears arguments presented, and then issues a decision.
Mediation differs from both of these processes. A mediator is an impartial person who works with two or more people to reach a negotiated agreement, but does not wield the power to impose a decision on them.
The Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) has a helpful section on frequently asked questions (FAQs) and the benefits of mediation. Click on the Resources button above and then click the link to the ACR FAQ page.
by Jane Beddall on May 1, 2007
I had the good fortune today to spend some time with other business owners who are clients, members, and friends of the Women’s Business Development Center (WBDC). We represented a range of business services and products, from various areas around Connecticut. Everyone was dedicated to business success and to overcoming obstacles that come along in the course of building and running a business. Some business challenges were shared by all of us, some were not. As I listened to others share their stories of setbacks overcome and life lessons learned, I was struck by a common thread. Try as we might, we cannot create more than 24 hours in a day and 7 days in a week, which means we need to use our energy wisely.
Conflict saps energy — from individuals, families, and businesses. Energy spent on denying or suppressing the conflict, on backstabbing, or on direct confrontation isn’t available for strategic planning or quick reactions to new opportunities. Some of conflict’s costs may be difficult to quantify, but their impact is undeniable. The presence of conflict in businesses and in families dealing with the transfer of wealth may seem beyond our control. The way we deal with conflict, however, is not. We can choose to address and resolve conflict in order to minimize energy lost to it and then put that energy to better, more productive use.