What's Involved in Workplace Mediation?

Ten Years of You, My Peace and I

Tue, 03 Mar 2026 11:51:11 GMT

Perceptions of conflict and inner peace

In a time when we regularly hear phrases like, “they triggered me” and “I felt really attacked", there seems to be more call than ever for individuals to be equipped for managing their own peace.

Last month was a pretty special one for Mosaic Mediation, as it marked 10 years since its formation. Ten years of developing more tools and techniques, and also ten years of watching trends occur within the mediation world.

I remember attending networking meetings as a ‘mediator’ when I first became accredited almost always raised the foundational question about what ‘mediation’ actually was. Whereas, most people are now aware of the vague concept – and may have participated in mediation for marital or parenting disputes – but what it means in reality still requires explanation. Especially, in how it applies to workplace disputes.

I have also noticed a big change in how people describe their feelings and perceive the situation. When most initial pre-mediation calls would previously involve describing the events and their goals, the pre-mediation calls these days are much more focused on the individual describing their feelings and the impact of the situation on their mental health. Often, the terms used by individuals would, ten years ago, only have been discussed following some foundation training in psychology.

I don’t point out this change with cynicism, but rather an acknowledgement of how people are viewing and experiencing conflict differently these days – which, naturally then, requires mediators to be more knowledgeable of mental health, ‘therapeutic terms’ and neurodiversity. (Something that has become an essential element of my own self-development.)

It is not just personal insight from mediation conversations that leads me to believe this, as the evidence clearly demonstrates this change. In the CIPD’s ‘Health and Wellbeing at Work' report (2025) , findings show that ‘mental ill health’ is the second in the top three causes of short-term absence and is the primary cause of long-term absence . ‘Stress’ is only slightly behind, as the 4 ^th most common cause for both categories. Perhaps in response to this, 63% of the organisations surveyed reported training managers in managing staff with mental ill health.

And, surprise, surprise… What did employees say was the primary driver for a negative impact on their mental health? Poor relationships with colleagues (75%) . A statistic which only backs up my belief that a robust and realistic conflict management approach is necessary for any organisation that wants to support the wellbeing of their team.

There is clearly much work to still be done in supporting organisations with conflict management strategies and conflict resolution services. With mediators also needing to be more greatly aware and knowledgeable about mental ill health – both in terms of deeper understanding and use of language around it.

One outcome that I hope for the most when I have been brought in to support with a conflict situation is improved wellbeing . No one can force another person to change their mindset or behaviour, but the process of mediation can help each individual consider the situation, realise the options available to them to self-manage, and techniques to increase their confidence and sense of peace.

Almost every workplace conflict situation has impacted the quality of sleep and mental health of one or both parties. And, even if the relationship is only slightly improved by the end of the process, the vast majority of parties feedback that their sleep and wellbeing has been positively impacted by going through the process. So, mental ill health is not a reason NOT to mediate , as mediation may be the thing that helps them most .

Yes, as mediators, we talk a lot about wanting peaceful relationships between people. Yet, what we know really makes the difference to people is that an individual’s inner peace remains , regardless of what other people choose to do. And, when people start from that position while navigating conflict, a peaceful relationship is more likely to be the outcome anyway.

In my experience, those whose peace is dependent on the actions of others are much more likely to get offended, react defensively, communicate unclearly, and find it more challenging to problem-solve or take accountability for their contribution.

Having this insight into human behaviour over the last ten years has been a privilege and it has also been incredibly useful to recognise such patterns for my own growth and development. It gives me a greater motivation to not take things personally and to choose my behaviour based on what seems like the right thing to do, rather than what others do or say first (or in response).

Essentially, although “as far as it depends on [me]” I try to live at peace with others, the last ten years has made it so clear to me that to have genuinely peaceful relationships my sense of peace cannot depend on what they do.

Emma Jenkings is an experienced and accredited workplace mediator , SEND mediator, c onflict coach, Peaceful Leadership coach , mental health first aider, mediator mentor, and DISC practitioner. Emma founded Mosaic Mediation to support and equip individuals and organisations with the training and techniques to improve relationships at work and beyond.

If you are aware of a situation that could benefit from specialist input, do get in touch via the ‘Contact’ page or by emailing: enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

Communicating Without Words

Thu, 13 Nov 2025 15:02:23 GMT

Exploring the importance of non-verbal communication.

Do you know what your face looks like? I thought I did.

I still remember watching a family holiday video back with my husband and the shock of seeing my face pull the most bizarre expression that I had been in total ignorance of. I turned to my husband to question, “Do I make that face?! Have you seen me do that before?”

“Erm, sometimes…”, he replied with a smirk. It’s now become a bit of running joke in the years since…

Putting this silly story aside, people do think they know how they come across to others – in tone, facial expression, wording and body language. However, I am sure there are times when you have said or done something and another person provides feedback on how you came across which is entirely in contrast to how you intended.

“The greatest problem with communication is the illusion that it has been achieved.”

I find it quite helpful to be the neutral person in a tricky conversation with permission to ‘call out’ behaviours or communication that has the potential for misunderstanding or escalation.

For example, there may be times in a workplace mediation when an individual makes a statement, which the other people have a reaction to, but the individual is clearly unaware of how the statement was received by the rest of the room.

In a day-to-day scenario, the other people may have left the conversation, holding onto that statement, and dwelling on their perception and the assumed intention behind it. They may harbour frustration, hurt or anger about that moment. Meanwhile, the individual who made the statement continues to live in ignorance about the impact that statement had on them – and probably also the impact on their perception of this individual and their relationship.

In a mediation setting, I have the opportunity and permission to halt what is happening and draw attention to the unspoken issue. I am always fascinated by what happens in these moments and glad that there is an opportunity to clear up a potential misunderstanding immediately or use it as a moment to address genuine concerns about the statement or behaviour.

Even when words are not used, non-verbal communication matters as much as verbal communication because it still sends a message .

Some physical reactions are obvious, but some are more subtle. Which is why effective listening involves going beyond what someone verbalises. For example:

When someone suddenly pulls back, I get curious about whether they are just need to readjust their position or whether they are trying to distance themselves from the other person or what has been said.
When someone raises an eyebrow, I wait to see what they do or say next. Are they surprised by something? Or, are they just curious?
When someone consistently makes eye contact with others but consistently does not with one or two people, I may discretely explore what I have seen with them (away from the others). Is it intentional or subconscious?
When someone is repeatedly holding their hand over their mouth, seemingly subconsciously, I may proactively invite them to contribute to the conversation. And, if I am aware of some social anxiety or shyness, I may find a creative way to ensure they feel more comfortable to speak.

Sometimes, the message is misinterpreted, potentially influenced by the listener’s frame of reference. For example, for one person, if someone raised their voice in their childhood home the volume meant anger. Whereas, for another person, someone raising their voice was neither positive nor negative, it just inferred passion about the topic.

We may not always know what everyone’s frames of reference, of course. Yet, if we would like the message to be received as intended, it makes sense to be cognisant of potentially how both our verbal and non-verbal communication is coming across.

As one frame of reference, and as a mediator and DISC practitioner , I am also aware of the influence our communication styles have on both our behaviour and the perception of other people’s behaviour.

What for one person will seem like a neutral, factual statement might to another person seem aggressive. Or, where one person might start all emails with a greeting and "how are you?" question to be friendly, to another person this may seem unnecessary and disingenuous.

Some people are naturally ‘smiley’, whereas others do so only for the benefit of social etiquette and the benefit of others. What we infer or how we interpret other people’s behaviour and or other forms of non-verbal communication is significant and may not always be the reality.

What we think we would do; we often expect others to do. Therefore, if you are someone who smiles, makes eye contact and gives a cheery greeting to all, you are likely to notice when others don’t do that with you, and you might then assume a negative intention behind it.

In my opinion, the two best things about having an awareness of non-verbal communication are that:

a) Greater self-awareness of how someone might come across to others, even with the best of intentions.

b) Greater understanding of the fact that other people’s non-verbal communication may not be directed at them as much previously presumed (if at all), and that assuming intention based on your own frames of reference could be misleading.

We know that non-verbal communication is consequential to social interactions. Studies suggest that up to 93% of communication is non-verbal .

Even things that are not about body language or facial expressions can impact social interaction – such as the presence of mobile phones on the table. For example, when Elizabeth Dunn conducted a series of experiments, one study divided participants into two groups – one for those who kept their phones on the table and one for those whose phones were put away. The phone-on-the-table group reported being significantly more distracted, and to have enjoyed their social interactions much less than the other group.

So, what can you take away from this exploration of non-verbal communication?

Remember than miscommunication can happen even when words are not the point of contention . Words do matter, but sometimes the message that people are getting is coming from what is not being said.

So, it is worth seeking feedback on what others notice about your non-verbal communication and reflecting on what may have been a previous blind spot. And also be curious about what other people’s non-verbal communication truly means – and that the meaning you are applying to it may not be the reality.

If you are aware of a situation that could benefit from specialist input, do get in touch via the ‘ Contact’ page or by emailing: enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

The Power of Yet

Wed, 17 Sep 2025 16:48:22 GMT

Hope for a positive outcome in conflict resolution

My eldest daughter is one of those people who tend to have the ability to learn a process, understand a theory, or pick up a skill without a ton of difficulty.

This has obviously been a real benefit to her in life. (She is also a very conscientious learner, which helps too.) However, what this has meant, is that the thing she has had to work the hardest at is developing her mental resilience around those skills that have not been so easy.

She is so used to skipping her way towards competence that the struggle and challenge of ‘failing forwards’ is less familiar to her. So, not being able to grasp the skill… YET is something we talk about a lot.

I could now refer to the 10,000 hours theory for mastering a skill. Or, I could discuss the four stages of the ‘Unconscious Competence Model’ regarding acquiring a skill.

Instead, I want to highlight and acknowledge the feelings that come up in that space between the desire and the outcome .

This ‘space’ can contain a whole bunch of feelings and thoughts:

- Discomfort

- Frustration

- Self-doubt

- Envy

- Determination

- Courage

- Hope

When I discuss the impact of mediation , there is one element that I like to identify in terms of the importance of the mediator’s role, that BECAUSE we are not involved in the situation but have experienced reconciliation, resolution, and a rebuilding of trust, the parties can ‘borrow our hope’ when they are not ready to believe it for themselves.

And, what I will often say to parties who may be concerned about the other person’s intentions for mediation, is that saying ‘yes’ to the opportunity is already a good start. The alternative of saying ‘no’ to mediation means they either are happy to move forward without mediation, or they have no hope for mediation to produce a positive outcome.

Essentially, those who say ‘yes’ to the opportunity are more likely to believe in the power of ‘yet’.

At the beginning of a mediation process, most people are little cynical but that makes total sense to me. They are in that in-between space of having a desire that motivates them enough to accept the offer of mediation but they have not seen what mediation can achieve.

The ingredients for mediation are not even that complicated!

- 1 x person of a neutral, experienced mediator

- 2-3 x rooms that provide spaces for private and joint conversations

- Many reassurances that the conversations are confidential and non-judgemental

- A few reminders to navigate conversations peacefully and constructively

- 2 or more x participants willing to engage with the process

- And a sprinkling of hope!

As a Formula One household, I consider the hours and months and years that go into a Formula One driver’s career, way before they step foot in an F1 car. The adults we see winning big trophies and spraying bottles of champagne across the podium stage were once young children who believed in the ‘power of yet’ (with a lot of backing from their families!) – even through crashes, losses, and disappointments.

Without the ‘power of yet’, people might fall for the belief that circumstances can never change, or that individuals cannot correct the course of their behaviour.

I understand why so many find it difficult to hope for the best when it relates to human behaviour. We have all experienced difficulties in relationships and have seen the damage that human beings can cause others.

However, the courage that it takes to accept the offer to listen, share your unique perspective, and try to find a way forward is much more likely to result in a positive outcome than not allowing for the possibility of it.

“Whether you think you can, or you think you can’t, you’re right.” – Henry Ford

Get in touch with Mosaic Mediation to discuss your workplace relationships and explore whether coaching , training , or mediation (or a combined approach) would be suitable for your situation. Emma Jenkings , founder of Mosaic Mediation, is an accredited workplace mediator, SEND mediator, DISC practitioner, conflict coach, mediator mentor, and interpersonal skills trainer. Enquire by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk or going to the ‘Contact’ page.

What a Difference a Day Makes

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 22 Jul 2025 16:48:13 GMT

The impact of mediation - day-by-day

It seems almost extraordinary to suggest that one day could improve a situation, if a colleague dispute has been going on for months or years. Just one day.

When someone enquiries about workplace mediation, we discuss both the situation and what to expect from the process, including the anticipated timing suggested for the mediated conversation. There are three typical responses that have become standard if my recommendation is for one working day of mediation:

a) “Oh, wow. Are you sure we will need a whole day?!”

b) “Yes, that is fine.”

c) “Do you think one day is enough?”

When I am speaking to those who consider a day to be longer than necessary, I find it helpful to ascertain what their expectations of the day are. Typically, this response regarding the timescales often results from having a picture in their mind of remaining with the other person at one table (or videocall virtual room) from 9am until 5pm.

Mediation is a flexible process , which means that the number or duration of individual meetings or joint meetings will be determined by the mediator – and with the agreement of the parties - depending on what is most likely to benefit the parties.

Sometimes people are surprised by the commonly recommended ‘one working day’ timeframe because of their experience of other forms of mediation. Of all the varieties, workplace mediation is primarily the one that requires a full day for most situations. For example, in comparison, I know from also facilitating SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) mediation, this type of mediated conversation works well in only two hours.

From the over nine years’ experience as a workplace mediator now, I can assure you that one day of mediation for workplace disputes flies by ! Even with the initial conversations happening in the days before the joint mediation session, there is a flow to the mediation process that takes time. Each conversation and the focus for that conversation is purposeful.

Why does workplace mediation require a day?

At its core, mediation is simply a conversation that is facilitated by a neutral, third party. Mediation skills are largely similar, across the specialisms. Yet, the nuances in terms of the process are influenced by the differences in the types of issues being discussed – and the aims of the parties.

In SEND mediation, there tends to be one element being discussed and the documentation which may support the positions of the parties are typically seen ahead of time. So, the shorter time is adequate.
In community or family mediation, the sessions may be shorter but there may perhaps be more than one – including more separate conversations before the joint session.
Civil and commercial mediation time allocations are very much dependent on the complexity level of the case. If the matter is largely transactional, then the focus may be more about negotiation than relationships.
Workplace mediation tends to have several layers to it , which take time to unpick and then move forward from. Trust is at the centre of every mediation, of course. However, there is something around trust that is quite specific to the nature of workplace dispute resolution.

Perhaps, it is because the mediation is not just about resolving what happened but also having conversations and self-reflective moments than provide the opportunity for a working relationship in future.

It is also far too commonplace for a workplace mediation to be left as the ‘final resort’ after months or years of tension or frustration (or worse) – by which time, it understandably takes much longer for people to move from being focused on their positions and rights, to understanding and appreciating the other person’s needs and interests.

It takes time to process what happened, process what the other person has shared about their experience and perspective, and then to consider what to do next.

In fact, I would say that one day is generally not enough to turn things around and have total resolution of relationship issues.

Firstly, mediation is not just about the joint conversation. There are two other incredibly necessary and purposeful stages – the pre-mediation work and the follow-up work . It may be that one pre-mediation call per party is sufficient to prepare an individual for mediation, but it is increasingly common for mediators to recommend additional time (including conflict coaching or DISC profiling tools). This additional time may be used to support individuals who have neurodiversity or mental health challenges. Or the pre-mediation support may be focused on mindset work in readiness for the mediated conversation.

Similarly, follow-up calls are standard for any workplace mediation – typically taking place 4-6 weeks after the mediated conversation, to see how things have settled and whether any additional support is appropriate. However, additional calls may be beneficial in terms of the interpersonal conflict, or to further work with one of the parties – to increase interpersonal skills or support how they move on from the situation.

Secondly, the mediator is there to facilitate the conversations and guide the parties through the process. The mediator role is not to fix the issues for the parties. This is probably the toughest element of being a mediator – letting go of feeling responsible for what people do next after they leave the mediation.

So, there is work to be done by the parties after the day of mediation. They will likely have agreed to some actions to embed the progress that began at the mediation, and following through on those will be a vital part of improving a situation in the long-term. There is also mindset work to be done, aside from practical tasks or changes in behaviour.

For trust to be built, it requires the parties to ‘extend trust’ by giving the other person the benefit of the doubt. They will each have likely developed habits around what they think of the other – making assumptions about their intentions in a negative light perhaps.

Though this is all discussed during the mediation, individuals may need a reminder at the follow-up call – that it is still their responsibility to follow-through on what they agreed, be open-minded to change, and contribute to making improvements possible. Long-term change takes more than the one day of mediation – even including the pre-mediation and follow-up work. (See – blog article ‘ Put it in the past ’)

Finally, I will often say that ‘no conflict is an island’. There are often multiple factors at play with a workplace mediation – even more so, if the situation involves multiple people. On several occasions, I have facilitated mediation processes for organisations that involve several stages, perhaps with different people at each stage. The flexibility of mediation enables an approach which is cognisant of the key people and various factors that have influenced the situation and will then play a part in how the situation is improved.

Day by Day

In conclusion, one day can make an incredible difference! But it is not the only element that matters. Mediation offers a psychologically ‘safe’ place to discuss difficult issues and provide a foundation for moving forward. Let us all remember though that it is best to be seen as a ‘reset’ rather than the completion of conflict resolution. The pre-mediation work, the day of mediation, and the follow-up calls are each purposeful stages of the process.

Long-term conflict resolution works best when individuals build on what was accomplished during those stages, embedding what they have learned about themselves and the other individuals, and committing to peace-making, trust-building behaviours.

What is Underneath the Behaviour?

Mon, 02 Jun 2025 17:55:04 GMT

Understanding what leads to miscommunication.

“I will never eat chocolate ever again!”

We don’t always say exactly what we mean, do we? When my youngest child shouted the above statement when she was little, I almost burst out laughing because of how nonsensical it was.

Many years on, she finds it funny that she said it and had no idea why she did. I have an inkling…

Having spent some time working at a pre-school during my law degree days, and then running a toddler group for a few years, I am well aware that - although young children have a wonderful way of being painfully honest – sometimes the adult might have to dig a little bit deeper to understand some behaviours.

My chocolate-loving child had no intention of avoiding chocolate forever.

Without fully understanding that the only person impacted by such a promise would be her, it was clear to me that this statement could have been replaced by anything similarly extreme. The subconscious intention manifesting in her child-like reaction, I believe, was to communicate that she wanted to be taken seriously! Underneath the seemingly absurd statement was a need to feel heard.

Even as adults, it is a sad irony that when people are most significantly experiencing a ‘need’, their mindset often becomes an obstacle to communicating that need.

This challenge is what so often leads to miscommunication and misunderstanding - the behaviour distracting the individual and those around them from the core need or message they were striving to communicate.

Human Needs

The most common theory on ‘human needs’ is found in Abraham Maslow’s ‘Hierarchy of Needs’ (1943) , which is often illustrated as a pyramid of types of need. Starting at the bottom of the pyramid from the fundamental and foundational needs to working our way up to the more ‘aspirational’ and self-improvement ones…

1. Physiological Needs – like food and shelter

2. Safety and Security – from work, good health and family/social systems

3. Love and Belonging – from good relationships and connection

4. Self-Esteem – through being confident and having the respect of others

5. Self-Actualisation – found in creativity, experience purpose, meaning and morality

The ‘needs’ described here are more significant that needing the latest fashion trend or highly rated book. These needs influence how we make vital life decisions and interact with people on a daily basis. (And, Maslow even went on to expand the model to include additional types. See image below )

As a workplace mediator, I particularly notice certain needs arising within workplace scenarios – such as difficult interactions happening after an organisation goes through a restructure of some kind. Even if the change only relates to their line manager, any change that has the potential to impact someone’s livelihood, can bring up concerns around ‘Safety and Security’ or ‘Self-Esteem’ – or elements from all the other need types in the pyramid!

Tony Robbins developed an alternative framework to explain variations in human behaviour with his ‘6 Human Needs’ (2020) model. He argues that the 6 psychological needs - certainty, variety, significance, love and connection, growth, and contribution – drive all human decisions and behaviours. The first four, he describes as ‘Personality Needs’ and the last two as ‘Spiritual Needs’. Everyone is likely to prioritise each of the six needs differently, depending on our innate temperament, our childhood experiences, the culture we grow up in, and the stage of life we are in.

You can imagine how either human needs framework might explain how, when those needs are perceived to be at risk or are fundamentally unmet, the effectiveness of someone’s communication is likely to be impacted. This is especially true when the individual is unaware of what is causing them to feel so unsettled.

Core Fears

One element that I consider noteworthy in every DISC profile is reading what someone’s communication style ‘Core Fear’ is. From my perspective, needs often highlight what someone is seeking and going towards and, though motivations are strongly featured in a DISC profile report , the core fear highlights the thing they try to avoid.

Sometimes, when I explore this core fear with the DISC profile owner, they share that they are not currently afraid of that thing – then reflecting on it realise that many of the life decisions they have made ensure that fear is unlikely to factor into their reality!

When I know – or think I know – what someone’s DISC communication style is, it often helps me interpret their behaviour better - in particular, their instinctive reactions to a situation.

For example, someone with a ‘D-style’ core fear is likely to be around losing control or fear of being taken advantage of. Interestingly, this style is motivated by the opposite – being in charge and winning. To avoid this fear, if someone with a ‘D’ communication style becomes subconsciously aware of the potential to lose control, they are likely to react rather than calmly respond.

Their response may be entirely reasonable, but an instinctive reaction could also be the precursor to appearing unnecessarily dominant and aggressive in their approach.

In contrast, an ‘S-style’ core fear is often related to loss of stability or relationships – in which case, they might end up saying ‘yes’ when they disagree, to keep the peace. Or, they may end up overcommitted in order to maintain job security. A reaction to this core fear materialising might lead to ambiguous or confusing communication – which of course can lead to miscommunication, particularly regarding needs.

Unique perceptions

To add to the above collection of factors that contribute to instinctive reactions, we all have a unique ‘frame of reference’ (those who are interested in NLP might refer to this as someone’s ‘map of the world’). The frame of reference includes all those influencing factors that form our perception of situations – our education, our childhood experience, work experience, relationships, culture, etc.

Our frame of reference influences how we interpret the meaning of other people’s words and behaviours. What one person would consider ‘frank honesty’ another might label as a ‘verbal attack’. Similarly, what one person might frame as minor, another might consider to be incredibly significant.

This difference in how we interpret interactions, assign value, and the meaning we give to words makes it even more likely for people to misunderstand each other.

What is underneath?

Though behaviours that are destructive to productivity and human relationships should not necessarily be ignored, what I think the various needs models, frame of reference, and DISC core fears indicate is that the behaviour is only part of the story .

People often ask me how on earth I could enjoy mediation, when it involves so much conflict. The answer is simple – though the behaviour is relevant and has natural consequences, I am more interested in what is happening ‘underneath’ the behaviour.

When my daughter declared that she would never eat chocolate again, (after composing myself) I could have just considered it a ridiculous statement and left it at that. Instead, from experience and insight into seemingly bizarre reactions, I chose to be curious… “I’m listening. What are you trying to tell me?”

While avoiding a scenario in which you make the mistake of assuming you have the permission or relevant authority to ‘diagnose’, perhaps the next time you witness a reactive and unexplainable behaviour, perhaps it is worth getting curious about what is happening underneath ?

Would you like to know more about DISC and communication styles? Mosaic Mediation uses DISC as a tool within light-hearted team workshops, one-to-one coaching services, and facilitating difficult conversations, including mediations. Get in touch by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk or visiting our Contact page.

A Problem Shared

Mon, 28 Apr 2025 17:34:04 GMT

The benefits of conflict coaching

Last weekend was a joyful celebration of my parent’s 40 ^th wedding anniversary. Much of the weekend was taken up with preparing and decorating, and then the celebration itself. A couple of hours into the party, I suddenly felt very tired – partially due to the busyness of the weekend I’m sure, but actually the feeling began when I suddenly realised how much time and effort the packing away would take.

Particularly so because it seemed only a few of us would have been left, alongside my parents, to tidy up and take all the decorations down – considering the hours it took to put it all up, this was a task I did not relish!

However, some of our very kind guests decided not to leave at the official finish time, instead staying behind to help. What a difference it made! I’m sure it halved our packing up time, but in addition, it was a huge boost to my spirits.

As the saying goes, “A problem shared is a problem halved.”

In the UK, across dispute specialisms, there has been an intriguing rise in the request for conflict coaching in recent years and I wonder whether the above saying might provide an indication as to why this is happening.

In a conflict situation – whether it is commercial, workplace, community or family – there is an often-apparent sense of disconnection from those involved.

An individual may feel very obviously disconnected from the other person directly involved in the dispute. And they may also feel disconnected from most people in their circle - those who may be prevented from discussing it, those who do not know how to manage such conversations and be useful to them, or from people who simply do not understand their experience.

The experience of speaking to someone who knows you, or who is neither naturally nor professionally competent in listening skills is entirely distinct from a conflict coaching experience.

Especially, as talking to someone who would typically be on your side, tends to become a gossip-style venting session – rather than one which will lead to a constructive outcome. (See the blog post ‘He said, She said’ for more on the impact of gossip.)

Like other forms of coaching, conflict coaching is not a forum for the ‘coach’ to agree with the individual’s position, nor to advise them on the best course of action. It does, however, offer the opportunity for that individual to truly be listened to, without judgement.

Trained conflict coaches tend also to be trained in mediation skills. Coming in with mediation experience means they are unlikely to be shocked by conflict coaching situations and will also be trained in several conflict management techniques which would help an individual reflect, consider alternative perspectives, and explore options for improving the situation.

Consider a scenario in which your close friend is involved in a really challenging dynamic with someone at work or with a neighbour. Typically, the expectation of your role would be to reassure your friend and champion them – probably, also providing justification for their actions whilst demonising the behaviour of the other person.

Though this role expectation is understandable and might naturally meet a desire of the individual to feel justified – particularly if they are already feeling somewhat insecure or isolated by the situation - the role of a friend innately is missing a vital element in conflict resolution. The power of objectivity.

The ability to be objective, presents an opportunity to metaphorically ‘step back’ from a situation and focus on the core issues, instead of what is to be disliked about the other person. I will often refer to ‘zooming in and out’ with my clients:

· Zooming in – is beneficial for truly understanding what led to the current situation and what lies beneath the behaviours we see. What are the underlying beliefs, misconceptions or partial information?

· Zooming out – considers the wider perspective on the events, including the perspective of the other person. What is the root cause of the issue, and what is required to improve the situation – irrespective of trying to apportion blame or judgement?

When someone is connected to the individual or has not developed the skills essential to perform a neutral role when discussing a conflict – i.e. someone may not be involved with the person but may insert their own opinions or project what they experienced in a different situation on to the present one – it is unlikely to provide the environment required for an individual to truly reflect on their part, become more open-minded, or determine how to effectively navigate the situation.

What most conflict coaches and mediators will attest to is the significance of a conflict coaching or pre-mediation call. Others may jump straight to a mediated conversation, but they are then missing out on the impact these calls have on each individual and the situation itself.

In my experience, these initial calls tend to start with the individual saying “I don’t know where to start” , but as soon as they are made to feel comfortable to share their thoughts and experience, most could keep talking way beyond the call time. In fact, many are surprised by themselves – at how much they have been holding in and the relief they feel by the end.

In recent years, in fact, I spend much more time in the build-up to a mediation, having noted the difference it makes to an individual to have focused time during which they feel heard and are prompted to explore what is really at the root of the issue… without judgement.

In some cases, conflict coaching may take place instead of mediation – either because the other person is not willing to mediate, or because the nature of the conflict coaching session is to mentally and/or emotionally process a past situation. (See the blog post – ‘Resolving Conflict – Without Mediation’ .)

Whatever leads to conflict coaching, the result is positive for the vast majority. Individuals go from a state of feeling ‘stuck’, hopeless, disconnected, and unheard, to receiving specialised coaching time, during which they are listened to and empowered with conflict management techniques .

So, though every situation is unique, you may now appreciate why I truly believe that a problem shared through conflict coaching is likely to halve the burden – or at least release the burden of pent-up emotions or feeling of disconnection significantly.

To learn more about conflict coaching and how it might be utilised to improve a current dispute or process a past conflict situation, make an enquiry HERE or email: enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk . Author, Emma Jenkings, is an accredited workplace and SEND mediator, a trained conflict coach, mediator mentor, DISC practitioner, and conflict resolution skills trainer, and founder of Mosaic Mediation. Sign up to receive the monthly newsletter by email HERE.

Now I Can

Mon, 24 Mar 2025 18:26:19 GMT

The wider benefits of Workplace Mediation Training.

Recently, my fourteen-year-old daughter began singing lessons.

For years, she has had a beautiful voice, practising regularly to develop her vocal ability. As a singer myself, from a musical family, I have been able to support her efforts by providing encouragement and tips along the way.

However, recently she wanted to get more serious about her singing voice and asked to take up lessons. We quickly saw a difference in her, both in terms of the quality of her voice and her confidence. I was proud to support her with foundational skills… and relieved that formal training would develop her beyond what I could do in the role of ‘Mum’, without formal training myself.

Formal training does more than just provide a set of skills.

Several years ago – before I trained in mediation – I felt completely stuck in the middle, with no way out.

There was a situation in an organisation which led to a breakdown in trust and communication, and I was devastated. I cared about people on both ‘sides’ and my vague understanding of mediation as a concept felt inadequate.

Though I had wanted to train as a mediator before this – having previously focused on ‘mediation’ as the topic for my law degree dissertation and my ongoing interest in it after watching so many people go through their cases when I worked at the employment tribunal.

Yet, this experience of simply not knowing how to make things better between people spurred me on to do something about it.

Time and again, people in organisations are asked to sort out an issue because they understand other people-related processes – whether through their management or HR experience, or doing a module on ‘conflict resolution’ as part of a course. (Though they feel insufficiently equipped to do so.)

I know so many now-trained mediators who were previously put in a situation to mediate without the support of formal mediation training, and the most common phrases I hear from them now are:

1. “I just wish I had trained earlier”

2. “Now I know what a ‘real’ mediation is supposed to look like!”

For me, learning how to mediate was not just about learning skills for my professional development, but it also gave me a sense of empowered capability. I knew that if I were to encounter a future situation of conflict, even if it were not necessary for me to play the role of ‘mediator’, I would now feel that I could help if I had to !

My concern is not just about how wrong mediation can go when someone has not got the skillset or essential formal mediator training but also the impact of that situation on the individual ‘mediating’ – during and afterwards.

Without training, someone might think the directed two or three hours would be enough for a comprehensive mediation session. So, they may place – or accept - responsibility for an unsatisfactory outcome wholly on themselves, without realising that the norm is to allow a day (just for the joint conversation part).

Similarly, they may attempt to mediate a situation that they are too ‘close’ to and experience the reason why one of the core mediation principles is neutrality – not just in terms of that person’s capability to facilitate with neutrality, but also in terms of the parties’ perception of their neutrality.

Also, let us not forget that mediation can be very intense! I would not expect a talented pastry chef to be thrust into a fast-paced fast-food restaurant without experiencing some internal discomfort. So, why do we expect people who are talented at one process to – without the support of training – to feel comfortable in a mediated conversation between people in a heightened emotional state, divulging personal information (often regarding their mental health), working through trust issues and feeling very little hope about resolving any issues with the other person?

So many people practising mediation without formal training have incredible conflict resolution skills. They may naturally be good at facilitating conversations or have trained in coaching skills. But just as my daughter’s formalised training was building on a good foundation from my initial support and I had to know the limits of what I could offer, so too it is important to recognise the limitations of experience and common sense within a mediation process.

What mediation training offers (beyond just the skills):

- An understanding of mediation ‘best practice’ – in terms of the process, and the mediation principles and their application.

- ‘Real-life’ insight from mediator-trainers about their experiences of techniques, challenges and learnings.

- Practising mediation skills under the guidance of supportive trainers and learning from feedback.

- Understanding when and how to use coaching skills – and when it is not suitable.

- The opportunity for ongoing mentorship and support.

- Development of listening, questioning, coaching, and other communication skills.

- Guidance on self-development and essential practices for the mediator’s wellbeing.

- An understanding of conflict which benefits personal relationships as well as professional ones!

I am convinced that my mediation skills have better equipped me to be a parent of two. Learning about the theory of conflict and practice of conflict resolution skills have given me a confidence and insight into relationships that has empowered me way beyond my professional role as a mediator.

Whatever you find a challenge right now, training in it may be the key to unlocking your next opportunity and gifting…?

If you are interested in becoming a mediator, and become confident and equipped to say, “Now, I can!” , what are you waiting for?

Emma Jenkings is an accredited workplace & SEND mediator, conflict coach , mediator mentor, DISC practitioner , and interpersonal skills trainer , and founder of Mosaic Mediation. Emma is also a Director of CLA Mediation & Training Ltd who provide CMC-accredited workplace mediation training. Find out more about workplace mediation training HERE .

Sign up to the monthly newsletter HERE for early access to articles, offers, and insights.

Give It Up

Tue, 04 Mar 2025 15:48:52 GMT

Developing habits that improve relationships

At the time of writing, it is ‘Pancake Day’ in England. This fun lemon-and-sugar delicious event, also referred to as ‘Shrove Tuesday’, marks the day before Lent begins in the Christian calendar – a period of 40 days where Christians around the world will fast, pray, and reflect, in the build-up to Easter.

At the same time, Ramadan, a season in the Muslim faith is also happening – involving a month of spiritual reflection, self-improvement, heightened devotion, worship, and fasting.

During this time, people who participate in Lent or Ramadan will engage with daily activities in a different way. Some may not be eating at the same times and others may proactively alter their routine, giving up certain foods or habits.

It got me thinking about the significance of continuing or changing habits within a ‘peace-making’ process.

Having regularly given up chocolate for Lent, I am aware of the physical and psychological process that I go through – how ridiculous it feels to use such terms about eating chocolate! It so easily becomes an embedded part of my daily routine, to have a bit of chocolate every day. My husband can easily predict what dessert I will choose from a restaurant menu.

Several years ago, it was the very first day of Lent and I met with another friend for a day out. She and I had just been talking about me ‘giving up’ chocolate for Lent moments before I quickly went to purchase a snack. Guess what I came back with?! It was only when my friend wryly smiled and pointed at my chocolatey purchase, that what I had done registered with me. But, habits are a tricky thing to change.

When people are in dispute, there are few habits which influence how the situation develops:

1. How the individuals instinctively behave and communicate

2. The beliefs each person has about how other people ‘should’ behave and communicate

3. The pattern of communicating and conclusion-forming between them

Instinct

It will not be a new subject for me to raise the differences that exist between people in terms of how they communicate and behave. As a DISC Practitioner , I naturally look for traits that might indicate someone’s communication style. I know that by knowing more about someone’s communication style, I am more likely to provide the amount or type of information that the person is looking for and engage with them in a way that builds trust and rapport.

We all have traits that may seem neutral or positive to us but are a source of frustration or bafflement to others. This is a common challenge between colleagues in an organisation – hence why communication comes up so frequently within workplace disputes that are referred for mediation.

Some traits are objectively fine - i.e. not unethical, illegal, or fundamentally unkind - but if a trait has become habitual and it is impacting someone's life or workplace relationships , there may cause for them to examine whether there is a benefit to adjusting or adapting a habit in certain ways or for specific contexts.

The ‘Shoulds’

From my experience, what we do, we expect .

In other words, an expectation regarding how we consciously or subconsciously believe other people should behave or communicate tends to form based on how and why we behave or communicate a certain way.

For example, imagine someone with a communication style that seeks security in relationships, thereby intentionally listening more than speaking and taking great effort to find consensus in a team. Their ‘should’ belief is likely to be that others should listen and not make decisions without making sure everyone is happy with it.

Unfortunately, in this scenario, the other person is unaware of their ‘should’ belief - and, even if they were, would disagree. Their communication style favours directness and decisiveness. When they are convinced about the ‘right’ action to take, that is enough reason to decide. Of course, they expect if anyone has a better idea, that person should address it directly with them.

Even if we are not looking at differences in communication styles, the ‘should’ beliefs are an influencing factor within a conflict , perhaps based on someone’s life experience, their family set-up, their previous work experience, their culture or the beliefs they grew up with. This ‘should’ belief could relate to opening the door for someone, prioritising being on time, workplace expectations, avoiding tricky topics, etc.

When someone has a ‘should’ belief about another person, it is likely to create internal frustration if that person does not comply with that ‘should’ – regardless of whether the other person is aware of this expectation!

These ‘should’ beliefs are often so embedded that they become difficult to challenge or change – much like other habits.

The Pattern

When people interact with each other a few times, they may fall into a pattern of communication.

This may be a peaceful pattern whereby they listen with curiosity to each other, and they assume the best of the other person, and they communicate with sensitivity and honesty. If issues crop up, they address it peacefully – able to take accountability when necessary.

It may, however, form a pattern which does nothing to enhance their relationship – when the other person says something which feels uncomfortable or unkind, rather than addressing it peacefully, they just get more and more annoyed, and communicate passive aggressively. The other person is unaware how the other person feels about their communication but is frustrated by the passive-aggressive communication they are receiving from them.

In the second instance, though they are interacting, the communication is ineffective. AND… unless something changes that pattern of communication, nothing will improve.

Sometimes, the pattern works for each person for a time but then one or both fall out of love with that form of communicating. For example, sometimes we develop a light-hearted dynamic with each person insulting the other without causing offense. However, if someone is going through a particularly difficult time or those insults feel a little too personal, there is a sense that the dynamic needs to now change.

Giving It Up

We all have things about us that are inherent to who we are and what forms our unique personality. So, I write this next section with a caution that I do not want anyone to think that they need to become someone different.

As it is believed Oscar Wilde said, "Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."

There are some habits, however, that we all have that we probably know are impacting us or our relationships in a negative way. Perhaps, they are ‘blind spot’ habits that other people have been attempting to highlight.

When something is a habit, it has become embedded in how we live, behave or communicate. So, it is worth asking ourselves the question, “How much do I want this habit to form part of who I am?”

If you recognise that, as an example, though you want to still communicate honestly and clearly, you know that at times a habit of directness can come across as uncaring - and you want people to know that you care – continuing with this habit is unlikely to contribute positively to those relationships.

Or perhaps the habit is assuming the worst of people? Whatever this habit is, if in answering the above question, you want to address this habit or replace it, here is my follow-up question:

“What do you need to give up or adapt, making space for a habit that will serve you and your relationships in a better way?”

Do you want to know more about what is available to enhance interpersonal skills or find a peaceful conclusion to a dispute, get in touch HERE . Emma Jenkings is a trained conflict coach, workplace mediator, SEND mediator, MHFA, DISC practitioner, interpersonal skills trainer, and the founder of Mosaic Mediation .

Do you want to receive updates and offers from Mosaic Mediation, and be notified with our latest blogs, you can sign up to our monthly newsletter HERE .

NO Conflict is an Island

Mon, 20 Jan 2025 16:46:28 GMT

The impact of workplace conflict on the wider organisation. (And vice-versa)

I love the poem by John Dunne, ‘No Man is an Island’ (1624). The first stanza says this:

No man is an island,

Entire of itself;

Every man is a piece of the continent,

A part of the main.

The poem in its entirety seems to be a commentary on death and the interconnectedness of humanity. When I am brought in to mediate a workplace dispute between colleagues, I often have the phrase in my mind, directly inspired by the above poem, ‘No conflict is an island’ .

What happens to a few individuals affects the team and the wider organisation. And, most issues are not instantaneously ignited – there is often a build-up, and multiple factors will have influenced the interaction happening as it did.

As an example, colleagues may be working on a project together and end up arguing. Yes, it maybe that the biggest contributor to the dispute is miscommunication, but what led to that?

a) What is the history of their relationship or with that type of task?

b) What reputation does each of them have that may have influenced their perspective? What have they seen – or, what have people told them - about the other person?

c) What other elements are involved in the project… timescales, task management, changes, client input, management direction, mistakes, commercial factors, organisational change, differing priorities, etc.? How might this have affected the interaction?

d) What other responsibilities do they bear at work? What mental, physical or emotional capacity do they believe they have?

e) What other elements are impacting the individuals? What is happening with their family or social circle? How is their home life? Other influencing factors might include health or finance concerns, or concerns about loved ones.

f) What has their experience of conflict been – from childhood or as an adult?

There is so much that could have a part to play in the scenario that ends up happening. It is only the extremely rare case that involves two unkind people who ‘need their heads banging together’ – don’t get me started on that phrase!

When conflict happens, it is not taking place on an island, unaffected by what is happening on the 'mainland' – whether that involves home circumstances, work life, or a mixture of the two. Also, consider the unique frames of reference each person relies on – often subconsciously - that influence their perception of the other person and their behaviour.

I am regularly reminded of the particular influence line managers have on the escalation or effective and speedy resolution of an issue. I have lost count of how many times the action or inaction of a manager has resulted in an added complexity or the breakdown in relationship being unnecessarily sustained. Thankfully, I have also seen the positive impact of a line manager or senior leader in tackling issues or bringing the situation to me before escalation happens.

And, just as the build-up to a dispute or fall-out involves many external factors, the conflict similarly has an impact on other people and elements outside of the core dispute.

People know.

Colleagues can spot when there is friction happening between people – unless the individuals are incredibly intentional in their behaviours and self-aware, and all matters have occurred privately. Family members can sense tension between couples, and friends notice a change in communication.

They may not always know why it is happening or feel it is their place to ask questions, but people know.

As soon as other people know, it affects how they interact with the individuals concerned and their perception of an event – “Clearly, A doesn’t like B, and that is why they said ‘no’ to their request” . The narrative from this perception can start with pockets of assumption and gossip but easily develops into misinformation being communicated as fact.

Clients are impacted by the conflict too. They may not see the interactions day-to-day (though in some industries, they might!), but the natural consequence of conflict between colleagues leads to a difference in how they communicate, work with each other, and it often becomes a distraction from tasks, productivity, and a positive team atmosphere.

From my experience, people with ongoing frustrations tend to:

Avoid the other person.
This often creates challenges for typical working arrangements – impacting both the colleagues involved in the process and the productivity levels or standards.
Look out for the negatives and minimise the positives of the individual.
This clearly skews the feedback they give and develops an even more negative narrative of the person and the situation.
Feel ‘stuck’ in the situation.
This belief inevitably impacts their overall mindset about their work and abilities – either acting more impulsively or with undue caution.
Have a lower capacity for stress (because capacity is already taken due to the situation)
This affects how they perform, manage tasks, and tackle challenges or change.
Feel differently about the organisation.
Depending on how proactive, supportive and wisely an organisation acts, the individuals involved will either feel more engaged with the organisation OR develop feelings of frustration, hurt, or betrayal even.

The latter consequence of ongoing conflict without effective resolution is unfortunately the one that many organisations do not anticipate. Sometimes, I will mediate in a situation where the parties are able to move forward in their relationship, but they are left with very negative feelings towards their employer due to perhaps perceived delays, inaction, or mishandling of the situation.

I find it incredibly refreshing and encouraging when I am engaged by an organisation who proactively seeks out any feedback from the parties or my insight from the process – within the constraints of the mediation confidentiality principle – so they feel better equipped to support the individuals and reduce the likelihood of unnecessary conflict or escalation arising again.

Whether people are experiencing seemingly minor communication issues or total relationship breakdown, there is a knock-on effect. Before falling into the false belief that it happened on its own or is not affecting anyone but them, remember, that ‘No conflict is an island’ .

Do you have a situation developing in your workplace, but you are not sure which solution is required, book a Consultation Call to discuss the situation and explore which option/s are right for your unique situation. Or you can enquire by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

Put it in the Past

Tue, 17 Dec 2024 17:03:21 GMT

How to find closure without staying stuck in the past

Let us start with a quote from my favourite characters from the ‘The Lion King’ film:

Pumbaa: “It's like my buddy Timon always says: you got to put your behind in your past.”

Timon: “No, no no... It's 'You got to put your past behind you.' ”

As we come to the end of one year and look to the start of a new one, you will begin to hear people reflect on the year that has been. Some will focus on all the good, others will consider what they learned from the year’s challenges, some might only see what ‘went wrong’ and others will just want to forget this year and think about next year.

At the start of a workplace mediation, it is common for a party to ask, “But we’re not going to keep digging up the past, are we?” This totally relevant and reasonable question does not come with a clear-cut answer most of the time. They want to 'hakuna matata' the situation away and put the past behind them... but without actually discussing it productively first.

In the years I have studied and specialised in conflict resolution, I have yet to see effective, long-term conflict resolution accomplished by pretending the past did not happen .

The experience we have of someone and our perception of their character and competence impacts the metaphorical ‘lens’ through which we view their words, actions and intentions. We form judgements based on what we believe happened in the past.

However, I think the above question is really asking, “Are we going to stay stuck in the past?”

Whether the process is mediation or conflict coaching, the past is relevant due to how it informs an individual’s mindset. Having said that, it is not constructive to stay focused on the past, because it prevents progress in conflict resolution.

There are several reasons why people might find it hard to put their issues in the past:

1. The main one in my opinion… The person feels their experience has not been acknowledged.

2. Believing the other person owes them a sincere apology – they may have received ‘an apology’ but it is likely to bother them still if the apology – or behaviour since - did not seem sincere.

3. They have not seen behaviour which would have rebuilt trust following a past error.

4. They find it difficult to trust due to their previous life experience – regardless of the actions of the other person in this scenario.

5. They do not want to move on.

The final reason may seem a little hopeless and, unfortunately, some people find it really unsettling to change the dynamics of a relationship. I have seen this happen often when someone has become quite wedded to the feeling of being ‘the victim’ in the situation. Resolving the issue necessitates a shift in how they see themselves and the other person. They might also have played a part in the situation, which they do not want to acknowledge.

Trust is a vital part of moving on from a dispute and ‘leaving it in the past’ because conflict resolution is blocked by a lack of trust – or the refusal to extend trust. It may be that someone has apologised but their behaviour does not demonstrate remorse or sustainable improvement, so the person who received their apology is only able to rely on the past negative experience of the person.

Similarly, when someone has experienced damaged trust with other people and has not seen enough effort in conflict resolution, it understandably might lead to a reluctance to extend trust to the other person in the current situation.

The most common reason that I notice for people focusing on the past in conflict coaching and workplace mediation is the sense that their experience has not been listened to or verbally acknowledged; or, that they are still missing out on a sincere apology.

Therefore, even if they have already discussed what happened or the other person has apologised, if they still have a sense that the other person does not fully understand the impact of their actions or value the person’s feelings enough to make changes, the conclusion to those past interactions will not be satisfactory. So, they keep bringing it up!

My approach with clients is to find a middle ground: we do not ignore the past or sweep things under the rug, but we remember that past-related conversations benefit from having a constructive reason behind them.

Sometimes, a conversation about the past becomes circular due to having differing versions of the same event – a very common situation! And, without having a human-interactions version of the ‘VAR’ (a ‘Video Assistant Referee’ in English football) – which I could not see being a positive thing – trying to argue someone into believing your version of what happened when their memory convinces them otherwise does little to move the situation on.

I consider two questions:

1. “If we do not talk about this, can someone truly move on?”

2. “If we do talk about this, how is it discussed to enable both individuals to move forward?”

Talking about the past is useful, constructive and peace-making if one or more of the below justifications apply:

- It offers clarity about the reasoning behind someone’s actions

- It clears up a misunderstanding

- It enables greater understanding between people

- It provides a reference for making wise decisions about the future

- It helps one or both individuals feel heard and valued – and opens the conversation up to any necessary acknowledgement, apology or clarification.

So, as you look forward to the new year, I invite you to consider how much of the past you choose to take with you and how much you choose to leave behind. Because, regardless of your decision, remember that the past is rarely entirely forgotten and, a difficult situation left unresolved does not go away by itself . And also know that you do not have to manage the situation or find closure about the past on your own.

For more information about how conflict coaching can help process challenging relationships or difficult interactions, and develop conflict management skills, get in touch or learn more about conflict coaching HERE . Emma Jenkings is a trained conflict coach, workplace mediator, SEND mediator, MHFA, DISC practitioner, interpersonal skills trainer, and the founder of Mosaic Mediation .

Does it even MATTER?

Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:31:16 GMT

How to know if it is worth the argument.

Recently, one of my children went through a planned operation which will benefit her greatly in the long-term. Her recovery has been incredibly smooth, thankfully. However, what it also did was require me to reduce my typically wider focus on the various personal and work-related activities I like to be involved with.

I am built to be in a role that is multi-faceted and have a routine that is constantly changing – I love it that way in fact! I enjoy jumping from mediation to coaching call, or from advisory conversations to training workshops.

The week of my daughter’s operation, however, I knew that my focus needed to be restricted to one thing again – being ‘mum’. Yes, I still worked but only on the things that did not require too much of my concentration and allowed me to keep most of my focus on my responsibilities within the ‘mum’ role.

Let me be clear, the title of this article is not how I feel about my work. I see and experience the positive impact of my mediation, coaching and training work all the time. What I would like to explore in this article is how easy it is to get caught up on those things which – when time is taken to reflect – matter less than our unexplored emotions initially led us to believe.

In a mediation, an individual may start with a few goals in mind, which are often related to the other person doing something different following the mediation or verbally acknowledging ‘what happened’. However, as they move through the process, you can see their priorities becoming clearer and shifting towards what they really want. Which tends to be about the relationship, building trust, or feeling valued.

A common element that people can easily get hung up on is determining specifics around an event – particularly if they do not agree. That may seem perfectly reasonable right? Yet, any experienced mediator reading this will understand the considerable barrier this can be to a conflict resolution process.

Everyone’s version of an event is different. And, even if they do not realise it, every time they think back to their ‘memory’ of an event, it often shifts a little too. So, though there may be some elements that are worth clarifying or providing context too, unless there is irrefutable evidence about what objectively happened, getting caught up on the different versions will only create circular conversations and very little resolution.

Most people want positive and peaceful relationships, so it would be a real shame if the thing getting in the way of peace ends up being something that they do not value as much as they thought. Whether that is being 'right' about a situation or hearing the other person say they are incredible at their job...

In a coaching or training scenario, the same can be true. People may have thought and thought about this frustrating ‘thing’ but after exploring the topic a little more, it often becomes clear that that ‘thing’ is not the real issue. A coaching client may start by discussing a boundary that after some exploration they determine they need to adjust or approach in a different way.

“How did you feel when that happened?”

The above question is a powerful one for understanding why something matters or not. Knowing how you felt when someone behaved a certain way or said something that stayed with you is sometimes the route to the next step… Determining why those emotions came up.

A feeling left unexplored can lead to a conclusion based on partial information – that can sometimes be attributed to mixing up causation with correlation.

For example:

a) Person A feels upset when Person B gives them feedback on their performance. Simply because Person A feels upset, does not mean that Person B behaved in an unreasonable manner that an objective observer would say ‘caused’ Person A to feel upset. Most people do not enjoy hearing critique, even if delivered respectfully.

b) Person C felt sad when leaving their old company. Those sad feelings do not automatically indicate they should not have left. One of many other potential reasons could be that they are sentimental about the good moments they had experienced there.

c) Person D felt mistrusting of Person E’s intentions. Yes, Person E may be giving ‘untrustworthy vibes’. It may equally be because Person D has experienced tricky situations when people in the past have broken their trust.

The right space and setting enable an individual to take a step back and consider their feelings, what led to them, what thoughts those feelings provoked, what conclusions they then came to. Without the space and setting that makes room for greater clarity, it is understandable for someone to hold on to a belief or frustration which, to an objective observer, might seem unnecessary or unreasonable.

This is why a neutral specialist makes sense for facilitating a mediation which involves challenge, introspection, and problem-solving.

Why gentle and insightful coaching questions offer the opportunity for deeper reflection in a way that a chat with a friend does not.

And it is also why engaging in training activities that take people away from routine and encourage creativity, open-mindedness, and self-reflection widen an individual’s perspective beyond the specific message delivered by the trainer.

Taking time out of the daily routine to explore what you think, feel, and want is not an unproductive activity. In fact, when I took back more of my time to focus on supporting my daughter through her operation and recovery, my work did not suffer – it was the better for it. I returned to my regular hours with greater focus, determination, and conviction. I know that my work matters, and which makes it worth all the effort.

What really matters to you? If you are not sure, how will you find the time and space to get clear on what does matter?

Resolving Conflict Without Mediation

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 21 Oct 2024 15:43:17 GMT

Alternative ways to resolve conflict that do not involve mediation

I recognise that for a workplace mediator to encourage looking at ways to resolve conflict that do not include mediation, is perhaps a little contrary. Let me begin by asserting that I am still a sold-out advocate for mediation and regularly see it work its ‘magic’ in wonderful ways.

There are, however, occasions when mediation is not the required solution.

Here are some example scenarios:

1. Mediation would be the ideal option but one or more of the individuals are not willing to explore mediation.

2. There seem to be issues requiring resolution within a team or wider organisation, but it is not clear what the core issues are, which solutions should be explored, and whose involvement is required.

3. An individual has been through a personal or professional conflict and is looking to separately develop their own conflict management skills, rather than seeking a facilitated or mediated conversation.

4. The issues between colleagues are still relatively minor and they seem to just need a few tools to improve interactions with each other.

Alternative 1: Conflict Coaching

I came across conflict coaching, a few years into being a workplace mediator, and it made so much sense to me. As many mediators do, I had regularly experienced receiving an enquiry about mediation and the situation being ideal for a mediation process, but for the fact that one person or more was not willing to go for it.

This left the organisation or the willing party feeling frustrated and discouraged. They had been so willing to use a peaceful method of resolving the issues and now they were left with limited options.

Thankfully, conflict coaching has become more widely embraced as an option – used as both an addition to the mediation process or a separate solution.

For those of you who have yet to hear of it or use it, conflict coaching can be used to help the individual prepare for a difficult conversation, feel equipped to manage a conflict situation, or to process a previous personal or professional dispute.

Alternative 2: Neutral Evaluation

This process offers a similar approach to mediation - in that neutrality of the facilitator is paramount, the process is informal, confidentiality is a key principle, the focus is not on blame, and nor is the process regarded as an investigation. The distinction is that there may not be a joint, mediated conversation – at this point, at least.

A Neutral Evaluation process enables individuals to share their opinion or concerns confidentially and individually, which for some removes the fear of potential confrontation in a joint conversation with the other person.

Neutral Evaluation works particularly well when the issues may be complex, or it is unclear what should be the key focus for resolution.

The process for a Neutral Evaluation incorporates individual confidential calls with every person relevant to the situation and then a report is presented to the organisation, with a summary of the core issues that have been highlighted, and recommendations for next steps to resolve the issues. Sometimes the recommendation may include mediation (or a couple of separate mediated conversations), but it may also include other practical steps an organisation could take to improve a situation, or training suggestions.

Alternative 3: Equipping and Training

Unfortunately, communication and conflict resolution skills are yet to be part of the school curriculum. There is the hope that individuals organically develop the knowledge and skillset over time – which may happen to a certain extent, but it is unlikely to equip people enough to know how to navigate tricky team dynamics or manage people.

Conflict may sometimes arise in the workplace based upon little frustrations they have with each other. Conflict prevention methods can include equipping individuals with self-awareness, an understanding of different communication styles, and being empowered to be a proactive manager in employee relation situations.

As a DISC practitioner, I have successfully used DISC profiles to help individuals understand themselves and their colleagues more – the knock-on effect being that they take offense less and seek to communicate more effectively. I have also used DISC within coaching, or to help individuals who work together and want to improve how they communicate with each other. It is amazing what a little bit of applied knowledge and insight can do!

Psychometric profiling tools like DISC may not fully resolve issues, but they are a very useful tool in reducing the likelihood of unnecessary conflict and, if communication differences are a key factor in the colleague dispute, they may indeed be a way of resolving conflict.

Likewise, training a manager in essential communication skills and conflict management skills may not stop all conflict occurring, but it certainly reduces unnecessary conflict and empowers a manager to know what can be done - feeling confident and capable to do it too – if tension, misunderstandings, or unpreventable conflict does arise.

Ineffective management intervention or delayed/absence of management intervention are very common factors in a workplace mediation – even if at surface-level the conflict seems to be between a couple of colleagues. I would love to see managers be equipped to tackle situations before they become complex and hard to manage.

Management training that I highly recommend as a workplace mediator:

- Effective feedback skills

- Holding difficult conversations (or ‘essential conversation’ as I refer to them)

- Conflict management skills

- Team communication

- Confident communication skills

- Leadership skills - including clear communication, managing change, building trust, boundaries, assertiveness, and demonstrating compassionate leadership

Alternative 4: Roles and Processes

Managing expectations effectively and consistently are a wonderful prevention method. Very often, some of the actions committed to following a mediation session involve clarifying the responsibilities and expectations of different individuals. In one multi-party mediation, that was such a vital part of the breakdown in communication that we spent a few hours just on that element.

When people do not know what is expected of them, tension occurs between them and their manager. When individuals within a team or organisation are unsure of what each person’s role is and where there may be crossovers, they are likely to metaphorically ‘step on each other’s toes’ or get frustrated with anticipated actions that may not have been part of that person’s remit.

Equally, sometimes a little change or clarification of a process is enough to lessen the tension between colleagues. This is especially true for cases when the process was decided by someone who does not perform the role or fully understand the daily operation, or when the process needs updating due to changes in the situation since the process was formulated.

When individuals are performing a regular task and the process is inhibiting them, frustrations are going to arise. If that is further exacerbated by differences in communication style or misunderstandings, you are likely to see conflict of some sort. An experienced workplace mediator will be able to spot a pattern occurring or potential build up of frustration.

So, there are several alternatives to mediation that may still be a way of resolving conflict – or even preventing it in some cases.

One of the core principles of mediation is that the process is flexible and every situation that comes my way is unique, so it is important to me to be flexible and open-minded with every new enquiry. And it is possible for mediation to also be used in conjunction with one or more of the approaches above.

Essentially, mediators love facilitating a problem-solving process – whatever that might involve!

Do you have a situation developing in your workplace, but you are not sure which solution is required, book a Consultation Call to discuss the situation and explore which option/s are right for your unique situation. Or you can enquire by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

How to Have Essential Conversations

Tue, 24 Sep 2024 10:28:52 GMT

Looking at ‘difficult conversations’ differently

Let us start with a reframe, shall we?

I fully acknowledge that some conversations are particularly awkward and that many people would prefer to avoid having them if possible. Even as a mediator , I do not enjoy the build-up to tackling a personal conversation which feels delicate and has the potential for conflict.

I am also very aware of the impact of a label. By labelling these types of conversations as ‘difficult’, I think that people automatically anticipate that it will be unpleasant and tough. So, already it becomes a thing that our brain would want to guard against.

For most people, when they are focused on the goal instead of the potential problem, they are more motivated to take action. So, I prefer to frame these as ‘essential conversations’ – the value and necessity of the conversation becoming the focal point, rather than any anticipated awkwardness or challenge.

And, actually, most essential conversations, approached effectively, tend to be far more positive and productive than the 'worst case scenario' thoughts would have you believe.

I look at essential conversations as a logically required element in any healthy relationship – “If I want to still like this person in a few years’ time and not be full of resentment, I owe it to us both to have the essential conversations.”

My coaching clients regularly have initiated the enquiry when they realise that they have been putting off essential conversations or they believe they could approach them more effectively. Some of my clients are in leadership positions, others have colleagues, clients or managers that they want to be more assertive with, and some come to me about a specific personal relationship or a general desire to communicate with more confidence.

WHY do they seek coaching support for this?

They have experienced the negative impact of NOT having constructive conversations – either at all, or just not in a way that worked.

When you tackle an essential conversation ineffectively, it can escalate issues, cause misunderstandings, and leave the person feeling like they have no route left to improve the situation.

When you delay in having an essential conversation, individuals are more likely to be quite entrenched in their beliefs – even if you have evidence to the contrary. It takes much more work to rebuild trust and be listened to.

When you do not have the conversation at all, the issues either remain or escalate, everyone involved is missing information which could change their opinion and the course of the relationship, other people notice there is a problem but no one is dealing with it, more assumptions are made, the avoidant individual may get defensive about their approach but feel even less able to do it as time goes on, and it does damage to reputations and relationships.

In the workplace, this is also likely to negatively affect the team dynamics, productivity and the perspective on someone’s leadership potential.

I have great compassion and respect for individuals who have struggled in the past but are willing to try new things with the aim of improving their situation. In general, it is the ‘peacekeepers’ in the team/family/friendship group that value their relationships so much that they want to find a better way.

This also applies to those individuals who have been accused of being too confrontational or aggressive in the past, and now they want to learn how to communicate in a way that is received positively.

What is great about the human brain though, is that we can do things to change the automatic response to dealing with awkward situations.

There are so many techniques that we coaches can use with clients that they can use to feel empowered, have clarity about what they want and why, communicate effectively, and think differently about situations they would previously have avoided at all costs.

I believe so strongly that learning how to have essential conversations is a vital skill, that I believe the learning should be as accessible as possible.

So, if you would like a resource that helps you prepare for an essential conversation with clarity, you can find that here: 5 Steps to Clarity in Essential Conversations

If you find it helpful to listen to guidance on essential conversations, you can watch a 5-minute video on this topic here: How to Have Essential Conversations - Video

And, of course, if you would like some one-to-one work that goes a little further, please get in touch . When someone has the skills to navigate essential conversations it flows into so many other areas – improved relationships at work and outside of work, increased assertiveness, a more confident and clearer mindset, and the ability to set and maintain healthy boundaries.

For more tips on how to communicate assertively and practical methods for having productive, honest, and peaceful conversations, go to Mosaic Mediation Resources to access a wide range of resources. For support in developing yours or your team’s communication skills, or for advice on handling workplace conflict, go to the Contact or Services page.

Know thyself

Mon, 19 Aug 2024 11:54:08 GMT

How being self-aware improves relationships and benefits self-development

“Know Thyself” - These famous words are more than just an ancient Greek maxim. The words were written at the entrance to the Temple of Apollo in Delphi – a reminder to those who entered to know their limits. Plato expanded the meaning of the phrase to encourage understanding ourselves.

I have previously written about the importance of accountability with other people, but in this article, I wanted to focus on the impact of either accepting or not acknowledging traits we possess.

Firstly, let us look at the original interpretation of the ‘Know thyself’ maxim…

By knowing ‘thyself’ you begin to build confidence in what you can do, and you learn to know your limits. Knowing your limits is a powerful thing! If you want to be someone with healthy boundaries, you first need to recognise at what point and in what way those boundaries will benefit you and your relationships.

If someone is in conflict with another person around feeling taken advantage of in terms of their workload, they benefit from knowing what their limits are. For example, if they realise that when they work until 9pm every night, they feel burned out and taken advantage of, they can start putting boundaries in place which restrict how late they have to work until.

I am regularly made aware of the impact work or home pressures have on relationships in the other setting. If the person does not know their limits, they could start attributing their feelings to something which is unrelated. So, the issue becomes far more complicated and difficult to resolve than it might otherwise have been.

Now, let’s look at the wider interpretation of fully understanding ‘thyself’ …

How often do you hear phrases such as "that was out of character" or "that was not me" ?

I find it fascinating to notice that those phrases often come about following behaviours that the individual wishes to distance themselves from – in terms of how they identify, and others perceive them. Perhaps, they said something they regretted or reacted aggressively.

You generally do not hear people say “that wasn’t me!” following socially approved behaviours, even if it was an equally rare behaviour for them as the potentially ‘negative’ behaviours.

In both mediation and as a DISC practitioner, individuals will talk about how they see themselves and it is interesting to see where their perception of themselves aligns with their DISC report or the feedback from the other person.

Typically, with a DISC report, every delegate feels very aligned with what they read, especially after talking it through with them. In a dispute, however, it is interesting to notice what feedback each person is willing to consider, and from whom they are willing to hear it.

I see a self-defence mechanism kick in during conflict which can leads to an individual framing their own behaviour in a justifiable way – other factors influenced them, or they believed this ‘thing’, or “I wasn’t myself”. Yet, they tend not to offer the same grace to the person/people in the dispute.

I know that in DISC workshops , generally the individuals are not feeling defensive. Plus, they know the DISC profiles were generated by their answers and a clever algorithm. So, they believe the report they are reading is totally objective and there is an openness to be reflective and acknowledge their traits.

In a dispute, I also am aware of a vulnerability that comes from being concerned about how other people see them and desire to have some control over that narrative. Individuals are often worried that other people might believe they are a ‘bad person’ or ‘unkind’. In their view, it is apparent that if they were to accept the feedback from the other person, it may have an impact on their reputation. And it also feels like a contradiction of how they perceive themselves.

Cognitive dissonance theory proposes that people seek psychological consistency between their expectations of life and the existential reality of the world. If their expectations do not align with the reality they experience, they tend to:

a) Change the behaviour or belief to create more alignment.

b) Justify the behaviour or belief to make it seem that there is more alignment than there may be without the justification.

c) Deny or ignore the information which conflicts with their belief.

So, why do I raise this point?

Without acknowledging what is happening or the impact of it, you lose the opportunity to improve a situation.

Yes, other people may not always provide feedback which is accurate or beneficial. And, sometimes the feedback is accurate but not delivered in a beneficial way! Yet, most of the time feedback is incredibly useful – particularly if we have a ‘blindspot’ about our behaviours and the experience others have of them.

Self-development is only possible when someone acknowledges what they believe, do, and the impact of those behaviours.

Effective conflict resolution is also only possible when someone acknowledges the other person’s perception of the situation and their contribution to it – even if they hold a different perception.

So, if you want to develop your skillset or character, and/or you want to improve your relationships, I recommend you get to know yourself a little better . Whether you do that through coaching, feedback from peers or trusted friends and family, or through a DISC profile , there are so many benefits to getting to “know thyself”.

Break it Up - How to Have Difficult Conversations

Tue, 23 Jul 2024 15:56:47 GMT

Conflict management tips - facilitating a difficult conversation

I don’t like delays. Breaks are fine.

Let me explain my thinking…

As a blanket rule and a conflict resolution tip for the workplace, delays should be avoided as much as possible . The longer a process takes, or the wider the gap between interactions, the more time is available for individuals to embed assumptions and construct theories about the other person in the meantime. (During the delay, they are also inevitably talking to others about the situation and being influenced by their external – and potentially biased - perspectives.)

Our natural state when emotions are heightened and we feel insecure about a relationship, is often to think of all the worst possible scenarios and justifying our actions. So, if you are hoping that people might start giving the other person the benefit of the doubt during the gap, I would think again.

It should also be acknowledged that people feel incredibly uncomfortable while they are waiting for an outcome. Someone’s mind does not stop thinking through a situation, just because the process is requiring them to wait. Without fail, those who were able to resolve issues quickly, were able to come to the mediation with more clarity of mind and less residual stress from the time spent waiting for the mediation to happen.

“Life isn't about living without problems. Life is about solving problems.” - Tom Krause

Those who had been through a drawn-out grievance process or had spent months – or years for some – just trying to get through a situation that was awaiting any form of effective conflict management, are often significantly more drained of emotional energy and more cynical of a positive outcome.

If I were to give a few tips on how to manage conflict, ‘Not delaying resolution’ would be on the list!

“We were on a break!”

Though I would not recommend a total ‘break’ in the relationship nor delay in re-establishing communication, there are many potential tools and techniques that I use during a conflict resolution process. And taking a short break is one of them.

So, what is the difference between a ‘delay’ and a ‘break’?

Firstly, the break is short. As I have already highlighted, when there are big gaps between communication, people feel those gaps with their own assumptions, which are often based on biased or missing information. If people need a break, keep it as short as possible.

A delay suggests the next step could reasonably have started earlier.

Secondly, the break has a purpose. I recognise that emotions can sometimes bubble over and lead to people feeling unable to communicate effectively or process information well. If there has been a significantly impactful event, people may need days to process what has occurred. If someone has reached this state during a conversation, it makes total sense to encourage a short break. Even ten minutes can be enough for someone to calm down.

A delay tends to just put off the inevitable necessary action.

Thirdly, the break can have clear boundaries – there is a beginning and an end. If someone needs a break during a mediation session, or if I think it might be useful, I will typically explain what they might want to use the break for and give them a time to return. My experience helps me know how long is likely to be beneficial, so the aim is not to be unnecessarily frugal with time. I do notice that the shorter breaks are helpful for people to encourage a focus on what to do in that time.

A delay tends to be repeatedly extended – often because the situation was not prioritised, or the time allowance was not accurately anticipated.

Finally, a break allows for a reset. I don’t know what happens in each person’s mind when I use a break as a tool, and it looks like a beneficial next step. Yet, when people return, it is interesting to see the difference between how they behaved before and after the break. Many a time I have called for a break when communication has started to become unproductive, they leave heated and return humbly apologetic.

I also believe in acknowledging awkwardness and tension – whether before or after a required break. Learning how to do so sensitively is just one of many essential skills required for resolving conflict. This kind of framing can be help people process what they were experiencing before the break and make a proactive decision about what they want to do next. They are empowered to discuss what happened and then given the choice - “What would you like to happen next?”

A delay, however, keeps people in suspense about the future – over which they often feel out of control.

“Again and again, the impossible problem is solved when we see that the problem is only a tough decision waiting to be made.” - Robert H. Schuller

Is a break always necessary?

Every workplace conflict is unique. There is a reason why a key principle of mediation is that the process is flexible. I have no fixed processes when I mediate – every scenario is assessed uniquely, and I am also aware that the way a mediation session evolves is different each time.

A mediation conversation can feel quite intense at times (even if everything is peaceful and positive) so I think short breaks from the conversation can be beneficial anyway, but I am not rigid in my approach to when, why, and how long for.

There may be additional considerations for individuals who have mental health concerns, experience anxiety, are neurodiverse, or have a disability. And, sometimes, even the mediator needs a break too!

To break up or not to break up…

I also recommend the person managing the conflict should not fear stopping a conversation for a short break. Some might be concerned that if they call a break someone may not return. Generally, if you have communicated what will happen after the break, this is very unlikely. If you were to just let a conversation run on, getting more and more heated and unconstructive, then someone may indeed feel the need to leave.

In general, if you think a break is likely to help, I encourage the person managing the conflict situation to consider what the purpose of the break is, what the shortest yet effective interval period would be, and what boundaries they need to communicate.

If you would like to develop your conflict resolution skills, receive mentorship from an experienced mediator, or are in need of mediation, training, DISC profiling, or coaching, get in contact by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk . Or you can make an enquiry through the Contact page. Sign up to the Mosaic Mediation newsletter HERE .

The Blame Game

Mon, 27 May 2024 12:28:30 GMT

Why pointing fingers makes it difficult to resolve a dispute

“Blame is the water in which many dreams and relationships drown.” – Steve Maraboli

We have all witnessed couples in public, arguing over which one made them late, who got the directions wrong, or who is just the most in the wrong. We see these behaviours and it is so very clearly unproductive for a relationship.

And as a middle child of three, I remember this game well. If I made a mistake or got caught out for unkind behaviours when younger, the first instinct is to look at who could shoulder some of the blame… “They started it!” or “They were doing it too!”

Even as adults, we may find it incredibly uncomfortable to accept all the culpability for our role in a situation. Perhaps we may find excuses to supposedly reduce how much we could be held responsible for our actions.

There may be times when situations are truly out of our control – when the train arrived (or didn’t), not receiving information from another person, or a sick relative suddenly requiring care. In those situations, it seems reasonable to explain why we are not totally responsible.

So where does the line start between giving an explanation and shifting blame? I would say, the ‘blame game’ arises when someone feels the need to defend themselves, rather than provide useful, necessary information.

The trouble with blame is that the justification takes focus away from what often needs more attention – the issue at hand. Because the truth is that even if we were to shift the blame entirely onto others or external forces, the impact of a situation remains and still needs to be addressed.

Even if someone did do the thing they are being accused of, if they feel like the amount of blame – or any pointed inference about their intentions – is unjust, they are much more likely to become defensive. It is incredibly uncomfortable for your mistakes to be so apparent.

It is instinctive to avoid discomfort like this, especially if you feel that someone is suggesting something negative about your intentions in a way that contradicts your perception of your character, values, and morals.

I often must distinguish ‘intention’ from ‘impact’ in a dispute resolution session . The individuals tend to get caught up with feeling unjustly accused of something when they believe their intentions were pure. They become distracted from addressing the core issue because their entire focus is on not being blamed.

It doesn’t feel fair.

And it is incredible to see the shift that takes place when they instead focus on the impact – rather than avoiding or apportioning blame. Now they are open to problem-solving, and the defensiveness starts to calm down.

“Focus on fixing the problem, never focus on the blame. Problems are only resolved when solutions are sought.” – Catherine Pulsifer

Focusing on the issue and the impact is not enough though.

Because there is a distinction between blame and accountability . Blame tends to be linked to feelings of shame or guilt. Whereas accountability hopefully inspires a desire to take ownership of both what a person’s contribution to the situation was and the emotional maturity be responsible for the consequences of that contribution. Even if their intentions were good.

When someone chooses to demonstrably take accountability when they have been at odds with another individual – whether they are a personal or professional relationship – it pays immeasurable dividends into the formation, or rebuilding, of trust in the relationship.

As most would agree, trust is integral to a healthy relationship . So, I am not one to subscribe to the notion that apologies mean nothing.

Sometimes the impact of a situation or behaviour – even with the best of intentions – is that feelings are hurt. This means the problem is not tangible or able to be addressed with practical solutions. When a verbal apology is delivered in combination with accountability, reassurance for the future, and demonstrating genuine remorse, it is often a significant turning point in a dispute.

If people choose to not play the ‘blame game’ but focus on problem-solving both the tangible and less tangible concerns, then I would suspect they would see far more people taking accountability - and far more trust-filled relationships as a result.

Time to lean into the discomfort of taking full accountability perhaps?

Sign up to receive Mosaic Mediation's monthly newsletter, tips and offers HERE. Emma Jenkings is an accredited workplace mediator, conflict coach, MHFA, DISC practitioner, and interpersonal skills trainer. Mosaic Mediation equips individuals and organisations to peacefully prevent, manage, and resolve conflict through a range of services aimed at helping with personal or workplace matters. Get in contact for more information.

Change or Adapt?

Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:21:35 GMT

How does understanding communication styles help with team communication?

I was recently coaching someone who kept using the phrase “I feel like I need to change who I am” when discussing a tricky work relationship.

Each time, I challenged the statement - “Do you think you need to change ‘who’ you are?”

Then, we talked about the difference between changing and adapting. The standard definitions for these terms are as follows:

· ‘Change’ = become something different.

· ‘Adapt’ = become adjusted to new conditions.

When you learn how to adapt, you are not rejecting who you are as a person, rather you are learning how to be you in different environments .

In my line of work, a person’s environment tends to be impacted significantly depending on which people are involved in those situations. Though someone can be incredibly consistent in their character and personality, you will still generally notice a difference in how they interact with a parent in comparison to a childhood friend or a client.

This is rarely done proactively or consciously. It is just what happens when you go between different environments – especially within longer-term relationships.

It may also have a little to do with the expectations linked to each relationship – the respect level for a parent, the unspoken understanding between friends, and the service level underpinning the relationship with a client.

The Proven Approach

When I am working with a manager or facilitating a mediation between a senior leader and their team member, they may talk about having a ‘proven approach’ that works “with everyone else”... but this individual. And they are frustrated that the individual is responding negatively – or just not as expected – to that approach.

When you begin to understand the world of communication further, you unlock the key to understanding why a one-size-fits-all approach is rarely going to work for people.

Firstly, the cliché is true: everyone is different. It is not realistic to expect for different people to respond the same way.

Secondly, learning about different communication styles enables a person to adapt , rather than through out a way of being or doing things entirely. Just because a couple of people work or respond in another manner should not lead to a conclusion that the entire method must change.

Learning to adapt does not send the message that something is ‘wrong’ with you that must be amended. Rather it suggests that your message will be received more comprehensively and amiably if you adapt your method for certain people .

When I first discovered the theory around communication styles, not only did it alter for the better how I understood people in my personal life, but it also changed how I communicated with clients.

Don’t Throw it ALL Out

Whereas previously I may have questioned how I handled an enquiry call if the client was still seeking further information or asking follow-up questions, I will now consider the client’s communication style because certain styles like much more detail than others would. It does not mean that in every future call I now give an extremely detailed explanation of everything, reports and statistics included! For some clients, that would be their worst nightmare – they would just like to know the key highlights – price, main points of action, and next steps.

When I deliver training on team communication, involve DISC profiles to explore communication difficulties in a mediation situation, or do coaching on conflict and communication the message is the same – the aim is not to change who they fundamentally are but to help them know how to adapt to improve their communication skills and have peaceful and productive interactions.

There is nothing inherently ‘wrong’ with preferring to listen than to speak. Though in some situations, a person will want to disagree, and they want to be respectfully listened to when they do. So, they learn how to adapt to this new situation.

There is nothing inherently ‘wrong’ with wanting to get tasks done quickly. Though in some groups, your message is going to be received better if you choose to speak calmly, encourage collaboration, and ensure everyone understands their role within the task. This may not be the typical approach for someone but if they learn how to adapt their approach for the benefit of the task at hand they are going to achieve a much better result.

Adaptation for Collaboration

When I talk about this topic, I am aware that for those that realise they have a tendency towards ‘people pleasing’ behaviours, there is a very fine line here. They tend to be highly sensitive to discontent and will try and make things better by agreeing to what they disagree with or dimming their personality to avoid potentially annoying others.

It is always important to consider why you are adapting, that you feel good about it, and it is not a long-term personality alteration.

It would be exhausting for someone to feel like they must mask their natural behavioural traits and communication style for a long period. This is why adapting often supports wellbeing more than encouraging a total character change:

· Adapting an approach can be done in short bursts .

· The adaptation may only need to be a minor adjustment rather than a significant shift.

· Adapting for the benefit of collaboration tends to be less work in the long run because you see quicker and more positive responses to the adapted approach.

The more people in an organisation understand about communication styles and make efforts to adapt to each other, the easier it becomes to adapt, and the more people meet in the middle – in 'DISC language', a D-style may soften their tone and an S-style may get to the key point of their message more quickly. Making those little adaptations to the approach is much more satisfying than ‘putting up with’ the typical frustrations a D-style might have with a long-winded story, or the upset an S-style might feel when faced with a seemingly aggressive tone of voice.

When communication styles are understood and people do choose to adapt in those interactions, a team find it easier to collaborate without misunderstandings and to work harmoniously and cohesively.

The Funny Side of Conflict

Wed, 13 Mar 2024 19:00:39 GMT

Is conflict resolution ever 'enjoyable'?

I have had a lot of experiences with mediation, many of which have been serious, emotional, or awkward. Yet, I have also experienced the lighter side of conflict resolution.

In many a mediation, we have laughed.

In fact, in one recent mediation, there was a whole room of people in full force belly-laughs. Unfortunately, I cannot take credit for cracking the joke that made them laugh to this extent, but I was pleased to be part of a process where people felt able to laugh and joke.

Conflict is so very often avoided because it is uncomfortable and feels painful to endure. That does not sound very funny, does it?

Conflict is also often seen as being very personal. Yet, you can be ‘in conflict’ with someone that you really like. The conflict may, perhaps, not be about the person but about how they work with you or communicate ideas. Conflict, in essence, is not necessarily about disliking someone but having differing perspectives.

Conflict resolution enables people to communicate productively about what those differences are that are creating a disconnect or tension , and exploring how to work in collaboration and communicating in a peaceful manner.

When I first started out as a mediator several years ago, I thought I might need to be serious all the time. Which, as someone who leans more towards optimism than pessimism, felt quite disconnected from who I am in all other scenarios.

It has been a pleasure to discover over the years that mediation does not have to be totally serious, all the time.

Humour is a great way for people to connect on things they both find funny and to release the sense of tension and discomfort. People use humour all the time to deflect from awkward moments. Humour within mediation normally occurs during the human interactions at lunch, or when directly calling out the issue at hand in a light-hearted - yet somehow appropriate - way.

Yes, there are moments when you need to gently handle sensitive topics or difficult dynamics between people. And there are times as the facilitator of the mediation, you need to ensure that topics are covered in a constructive manner, so bring people back to the focus of the conversation and the issues to be addressed.

It is also important for me to note that the humour needs to be respectful and not targeted at people in a way that makes them feel attacked or unsafe. Participants to a mediation should feel able to stop the interaction as soon as it does not feel respectful, and the mediator should be vigilant about noticing body language and facial expressions in response to the joke, so that the room remains a psychologically safe space.

Sometimes uncomfortable truths are shared in a mediation session, but the communication should always be respectful. A professional mediator will often set ground rules during a mediation to ensure that participants know what is expected of them and that, if they are disrespectful to another participant, it will be challenged.

Nevertheless, conflict resolution is not intended to be a formal process but to make the management of conflict feel more informal and ‘human’ than the more common methods of dealing with issues between employees – such as with grievances or disciplinaries.

So, when the common phrase “I can’t believe we got to the point of needing mediation” is uttered, I know that those individuals will be expecting a far more negative experience from mediation than they are likely to get, and that they may conclude with a phrase they really didn’t expect to say – but one I have heard very often too – “I actually enjoyed it” .

Find out more about workplace mediation and other conflict resolution services .

Emma Jenkings is an accredited workplace mediator, conflict coach, interpersonal skills trainer, and DISC Practitioner at Mosaic Mediation . Emma is also a lead facilitator with (2) Bloom Mediator Mentoring: Overview | LinkedIn and Director at CLA Mediation and Training Ltd .

The Third Option

Tue, 23 Jan 2024 17:32:47 GMT

The importance of considering all options in conflict resolution

Have you ever heard a ‘ false dilemma ’ logical fallacy?

You probably have, even without realising it – villain or victim, good or bad, yes or no…

Essentially, a ‘false dilemma’ is when you are presented with only TWO options – such as, you can choose between cheese or jam sandwiches – when other delightful sandwich fillings are also available to choose from. (I’m a big fan of the brilliant BLT sandwich!)

Applying this to an interpersonal scenario, an example could be someone presenting you with unnecessarily limited perspectives. Such as, “If don’t agree with me, you clearly don’t understand the situation.” Meaning that you can either agree and be considered reasonable, or you can disagree which means you have no idea! Clearly, there are other more reasonable options in this example which are also possible, such as agreeing in part rather than in full, or the speaker in this example potentially NOT being as knowledgeable as they’d like you to think. Or you may completely understand the situation!

In many similar scenarios, a third – or fourth, or fifth – option is often available. It just has not been realised or explored.

When having difficulties with another person, it is easy to fall into this ‘false dilemma’ way of thinking. Conflict conjures up so many confusing thoughts and feelings that we try to simplify the situation – sometimes, unfortunately, to the extent of an over-simplified fallacy.

A common pain-point in the employee relations situations I get brought in to help with is when they have been labelled along the journey, as ‘lazy’ or 'nasty' or – the big one – a ‘bully’ . All these weighty words are hard to hear and leave a lasting sting, particularly if it feels like it is in total contrast to how you identify.

Many a time, I have had someone speak with great emotion about being accused in a grievance of ‘bullying behaviour’ and yet, they identify as a ‘kind person’. With the false dilemma way of thinking, it can feel like you can either be a bully or be kind – with no in-between. However, there is a third option! You can be a well-intentioned, kind person AND display behaviours which could be considered unkind.

You can be a person who gives of your time, or helps a colleague when they are struggling, or gives to charity…AND be someone who talks negatively about a colleague you are in conflict with. You can be a person who has been on the receiving end of harsh words and torment from another ‘bully’ yet also be someone whose words or actions have caused offense and pain too.

In the coaching world, some might refer to the ‘false dilemma’ fallacy as being a form of a limiting belief – one that prevents the coaching client from seeing the full extent of possibilities available to them. In a mediation, mediators often need to challenge a mediation participant to consider an alternative perspective to the one that they have believed for the extent of the period of conflict.

In all scenarios, the more entrenched a belief is, the harder it can be to consider a third option. However, using insightful questions, problem-solving, and digging into basis for forming that belief, a coach or mediator can skilfully empower the individual to see beyond the belief they have held onto.

An experienced mediator will help mediation participants to consider alternative perspectives on what has happened and will also facilitate discussions around out-of-the-box options to improve the future too. Also, in this latter discussion, ALL options are allowed at first (it is only later on that the feasibility of these options are examined further. This contrasting approach to ‘false dilemma’ thinking allows individuals to be creative and not feel like they are limited or powerless.

Mediation works so well in the 'grey area' of colleague disputes because the focus is not on hard evidence but on understanding and resolution. The intention is not to confirm who is the villain or the victim in a scenario but to provide a psychologically safe space to perhaps take responsibility for their contribution to the current situation and take ownership of what they will do to improve the situation.

So, as a challenge to you, when you are talking about a situation or considering your options, notice whether you are perhaps limiting yourself unnecessarily. Is there a third option you have yet to explore?

The author of this article, Emma Jenkings, is an accredited workplace mediator, interpersonal skills trainer, Peaceful Leadership Coach, and DISC Practitioner. For more tips on how to communicate assertively and practical methods for having productive, honest, and peaceful conversations, go to https://resources.mosaicmediation.co.uk to access a wide range of resources. For support in developing yours or your team’s communication skills, or for advice on handling workplace conflict, go to the Contact or Services page.

Truth in Like

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 12 Dec 2023 13:36:09 GMT

How to tell the truth without damaging relationships.

For many, holidays are an exciting time of year - the anticipation of special food, celebration, traditions and time with friends and family.

For others, holidays are a time of building anxiety as the holiday season gets closer and the need to interact with people whom they find it difficult to be around. And it is all well and good for well-meaning individuals to tell them to “just set boundaries” or “not accept that kind of behaviour” .

Particularly with long-standing relationships where someone really cares about the person, setting boundaries can be far more complicated than those outside the situation may fully appreciate .

It is a very difficult balance to set boundaries and communicate with full honesty, whilst not harming the relationship or unnecessarily offending the other person. There is often a desire to keep the relationship but simply change the parts about the current dynamic that have not been good.

The same can be said for workplace relationships, where the potential consequences of getting the approach wrong could potentially impact your reputation, role responsibilities, or career progression.

So, how do you ‘tell the truth in love’ (or ‘like’)?

In mediation, the aim is that people feel able to speak honestly, yet are helped to do so by the mediator, so that their truth is delivered without escalating the situation.

Unlike those who do not see an alternative to brutal honesty, there are so many ways for people to be completely honest whilst demonstrating care and respect for the other person.

The added complexity of long-standing relationships – whether family, friends, or colleagues – is that the pattern of communication and behaviour will have become ‘normalised’ and embedded. So, from the other person’s perspective, attempted changes to that may feel unnecessarily disruptive and that it has come out of the blue. So, no, it is rarely as simple as “just set boundaries” , if you want to maintain a positive relationship with them.

Assertive communication does not have to be brutal, antagonistic, nor should most situations require a ‘take it or leave it’ approach to the relationship. (And, in my experience, so-called ‘brutal honesty’ is more of an exaggeration, aiming to make a point, rather than being the full truth.)

Yes, there will be some relationships, where even the most slow and delicate of approaches is not handled kindly or reasonably by the other person. There will also be relationships where one person has no intention of respecting the healthy boundaries of another, and so some distance - or a complete retreat - may be a necessary course of action .

As someone who has successfully mediated very difficult workplace conflicts and coached a range of individuals in assertiveness, I would argue that for most situations , this is not the case.

Most people DO want those in their family, workplace, or friendship circle to feel comfortable and respected. They DO want to honour healthy boundaries of others. Yet, they may need some time and understanding to adjust to them. It may be a very unpleasant shock to hear how behaviour, which they previously believed was acceptable, no longer is.

And it may feel very uncomfortable to be perceived as someone who has hurt/offended/harmed/made someone else feel uncomfortable. We all have a narrative about ourselves , and it does not feel nice to have that narrative challenged (unless it feels positive).

If you are the person needing to be truthful, here are some things to bear in mind:

- Will this truth be a shock to them? If so, how can you gently present the concept to them?

- How will you frame the truth? (Working out how to be honest without escalating the situation is often a large part of my coaching conversations – particularly around giving feedback to employees or wanting to change a personal relationship dynamic.)

- What outcome would you like to come out of this conversation? Do you need a big change to happen now, or would it be beneficial to start with a smaller goal?

- Is there anything that might be an obstacle to this change happening?

- Boundaries are intended to demonstrate what you prefer and will accept? They are not about controlling or changing someone else. If, upon hearing the truth and understanding your boundaries, the other person chooses not to accept them, consider calmly what your next course of action could be to maintain these boundaries still?

If you are the person on the receiving end of a difficult truth or new boundaries… Here are some helpful reflection questions:

- How much do you value the relationship?

- Are these boundaries reasonable? Is this truth something you can respect – even if you don’t fully agree?

- If your automatic response is to reject this truth or boundary, reflect on whether your narrative about ‘who you are’ and your character might be influencing your response. Can you not be both a well-intentioned, ‘good’ person AND someone who is capable of causing offense and who benefits from accountability?

Even in the workplace, dealing with relationships that are not a familial or romantic ‘love’ but involve people that you do – or want to – like, the above considerations are of benefit. A relationship where healthy boundaries are understood and respected will be far more productive than one where issues are dealt with through brutal (so-called) ‘honesty’, passive-aggression, or frustrated silence.

If you want to have positive and peaceful relationships, it is very possible to tell the truth in love – or ‘in like’!

For more tips on how to communicate assertively and practical methods for having productive, honest, and peaceful conversations, got to https://resources.mosaicmediation.co.uk to access a wide range of resources. For support in developing yours or your team’s communication skills, or for advice on handling workplace conflict, go to the Contact or Services page.

Now or Next Year?

Tue, 28 Nov 2023 13:00:33 GMT

What happens if you delay in resolving conflict?

It can be an unpredictable time in the mediation calendar right now. As organisations gear up for various leave requests and parties and end-of-year reflections, they make a decision – whether conscious or subconscious… To address an issue between team members before the Christmas season or wait until the New Year .

I can see the dilemma because it is a busy and often chaotic time of year. It takes a bit of organisation and time to find the right person to manage the conflict resolution process. So, it could seem like there is just no capacity to deal with it in this season.

From my experience, however, when someone is finding it tough to interact with another person – or group of individuals – at work, delay in resolving the issue takes up a lot of their mental capacity and will impact the situation negatively in other ways too.

Thankfully, I am glad to see the blocked out mediation days in my diary being filled by organisations who are choosing to tackle the situation proactively NOW. Why am I so opposed to delay?

Delay is NOT a friend of conflict resolution.

Though time may help cool emotions down after an argument or series of difficult interactions, too much time will often aid in embedding beliefs about what happened and assumptions about intentions.

Delay will often allow time for those at the core of the situation to speak with others about it. Some of whom may offer wise counsel, but we know that when most people go home and tell their family or friends about what happened, they are likely to be offered biased advice and support. Any initial feelings of being treated 'unfairly' will be magnified.

And any part that individual may have played in the breakdown in communication or trust is likely to be brushed over or justified by well-meaning loved ones.

The inevitable consequence of this is that the individual is less likely to be open to alternative perspectives to the one they feel more certain about over the time that has elapsed.

Delay is NOT a supporter of wellbeing.

People’s feelings and thoughts are not put on pause when away from work. Although for those slightly outside of the core concerns, they can put it to one side while on holiday or ‘away from my desk’, for those in the middle of it, there is no reprieve.

Conflict in the workplace is a key contributor to elevated feelings of anxiety. For those who already experience poor mental health, difficult relationships at work will likely aggravate their symptoms further. It is a rare situation for me to hold a workplace mediation without one or more off the participants mentioning the negative impact the situation has had on their sleep or level of stress.

When I am first brought in to mediate, as soon as the participants are aware of the mediation opportunity, they are keen to book a date as soon as possible. They can feel like they are waiting in anticipation for something to bring closure to the situation.

Delay does NOT foster productivity.

While individuals are finding it difficult to interact positively, this has a natural impact on the smooth running of an organisation. Other people end up being the ‘go-between’ or communication is diverted. If the individuals typically work together, they may:

a) Have to keep working together but with strained communication and the potential for escalating the conflict

b) Be separated , so others have to take up additional responsibilities

c) Avoid each other intentionally – meaning that some necessary communication is also avoided, and levels of productivity is affected

When people are finding the strain of the situation too much to be in the middle of, they may feel unable to work under normal conditions – and so choose to work from a different location or avoid being at certain meetings. Or they may be signed off under the stress of what has been going on.

Projects may be delayed, processes may be re-structured, and other team members will feel the effects of the change in atmosphere and processes.

All in all, delay in conflict resolution can be disruptive in terms of productivity, wellbeing and the level of intervention required to resolve the conflict.

I am pleased that this year, Mosaic Mediation have been receiving similar levels of enquiries and the decision to delay was not made by these clients. Perhaps, being able to outsource the mediation, made the decision a little easier. A the mediator resolving the situation and not needing to unravel the consequences of delay, I am very grateful that they decided to tackle the situation proactively and seek conflict resolution without delay.

Emma Jenkings is an experienced and accredited workplace mediator, speaker, communication skills trainer, a trained DISC practitioner and conflict coach. Mosaic Mediation offers conflict resolution services to prevent, manage and resolve conflict including: training, e-learning, DISC profiles and workshops, assertiveness coaching, executive coaching, small business mediation and workplace mediation, and advisory services on fostering peaceful relationships in the workplace. To find out more about the different services available, CLICK HERE .

Too Little, Too Late

Thu, 24 Aug 2023 10:58:32 GMT

Is it ever too late for mediation?

Is there a point at which mediation no longer a viable option - that it is a case of 'too little, too late'? Unfortunately, yes.

I am a strong believer in the power of having essential conversations, even when the ideal time to have it has passed. Because, sometimes, having the conversation late is SO much better than never addressing the topic.

Yet, let’s not ignore the fact that delays do influence the effectiveness of a conversation. Delaying initiating the conversation, or avoiding it until you are forced to have it, can lead to the following consequences:

Your colleagues or team members lose trust in your ability to manage situations.
The issues that would be the focus of the conversation CONTINUE to be an issue.
The core issues escalate and become more complicated – involving additional factors or individuals.
Perceptions of the issue become more embedded, even though memories of the facts may become more ambiguous.
Grievances or complaints are raised – leading to further delays in resolution and additional layers to work through.
Good people will leave.

Even if the above have become reality, mediation is still likely to be a beneficial tool for conflict resolution.

Mediation provides the space to get clarity on ambiguous situations, to de-tangle multi-layered issues and start to re-build trust again. The magic of mediation is in acknowledging the different perspectives of the individuals but allowing for the possibility of an alternative perspective – through asking curious questions, listening, challenging assumptions, and approaching the situation in a collaborative, problem-solving way.

However, for some individuals, too much time has passed and so the mediation is either a) only able to improve the situation to a small degree , or b) not an option because they do not want – or even believe in the possibility of - conflict resolution .

Why do people get to this point?

1. They have repeatedly asked for assistance and intervention with an issue from senior leaders but have felt ‘fobbed off’ for too long – so their trust in the organisation’s desire or ability to support a conflict resolution process beyond booking a mediation is depleted.

2. They have been dealing with the issue for so long that they cannot picture an improvement.

3. The situation with another person has escalated to the point of such dysfunction and toxicity that there is no desire to communicate with them at all.

And, yes, sometimes individuals are open to mediation but not necessarily to participating in a way that will achieve the results they hope for.

Delay often means that people become quite fixed and embedded in their opinion of the situation or the other person. What they originally recognised was an opinion will more and more feel like fact – especially if their opinion was corroborated and encouraged by the other people they talk to, who are not involved.

Willingness is a HUGE benefit to the mediation process though, so an experienced mediator will probably be able to facilitate a positive process and encourage the use of additional tools along the way to increase the likelihood of a long-term peaceful outcome – such as complimentary training, psychometric profiling , or individual conflict coaching sessions.

Sometimes, delay may increase the desperation of a person to resolve the issues, but an experienced mediator will be aware that more often, it will be more of a challenge for someone to change their opinion or take the steps to resolve the issue. So, extra steps in the process may then be required to lead to a more peaceful outcome.

Those steps may involve additional tools as mentioned above, or it may be that the mediation requires the contribution of additional people. If the mediation had been done earlier, perhaps the process would only involve the people at the core of the initial issue. However, as time has gone on and the issue has brought in others in the organisation, to achieve a full and effective resolution, it may be that others need to also be part of the process.

What can be done to prevent this situation?

Firstly, notice when someone has asked for help with a situation and choose to respond rather than go with your instinctive reaction (which for most people is just to wish it away!). If an intervention is requested and seems to be required to improve things, the next step is to decide whether you or an external mediator would be best suited to manage the conflict neutrally and effectively.

Secondly, if factors are leading to a delay in the situation being resolved, acknowledge that the situation will not go away by itself and could cause damage to your reputation, the atmosphere in the team, productivity, and could even lead to losing valuable members of staff.

Thirdly, develop the skills and confidence of the leaders in your organisation and their team members. This can be done through training or offering coaching for them in conflict management skills, assertiveness, or leadership skills. Many people do not delay out of bad intentions but a lack of confidence in their ability to manage the situation effectively.

If as many people in the organisation as possible feel equipped to handle difficult conversations and communicate effectively with their colleagues, then you will develop a culture of regular feedback, productive conversations, and peaceful communication .

My final comment on this is to say that as a workplace mediator, I have a unique insight into how much courage it takes to have conversations which are awkward and difficult. Nevertheless, I have also seen the cost of conflict resolution delay on the mental health, physical wellbeing, and careers of so many individuals. It does not benefit anyone to delay in resolving issues.

If you would like to know more about how Mosaic Mediation can support individuals or teams in your organisation with workplace mediation, executive conflict coaching, assertiveness coaching, or training in communication skills, find out more here – www.mosaicmediation.co.uk/practiceareas

I'm Not There... Yet!

Fri, 07 Jul 2023 11:49:05 GMT

The challenges of a successful coaching journey

“Are we nearly there yet?!” – the delightful phrase parents all over the country will be hearing over the next couple of months on the way to their various holiday destinations.

And I get it! Waiting is hard. (Harder for some more than others). I naturally look for the next thing to happen and if it takes longer than expected, I have different techniques to keep me measured and calm.

What is so unsettling about waiting? I think we generally like to know what is happening, what our role is and what might happen next. It offers certainty and a steady foundation for making decisions and responding appropriately to a situation. The waiting period doesn’t provide that – it’s transitional, changeable, and ambiguous. It’s the uncomfortable ‘in-between’ .

Waiting also suggests that we are not in control of the situation – we are waiting for the situation to change or for someone else do doing something. Though some people prefer not to be the one taking charge, very few of us like our lives to be completely reliant on external factors.

I was thinking about this recently, when reflecting on the progress of my coaching clients. They don’t come to me at their first realisation of needing support in assertiveness, communication, or leadership skills (let’s face it, not many do ask for help straight away!).

They come to me after a few instances of feeling ill-equipped to handle a tricky conversation or noticing a pattern of self-doubt or overwhelm . Initially, most clients are tentative about their goals for coaching because they aren’t really sure what is achievable.

Then, as their initial goals start to be fulfilled, their minds are open to bigger possibilities. And yet…

…Then comes the frustration with themselves - that they haven’t conquered this ‘assertiveness’ skill fully yet. They now see what is possible and so this in-between stage can be really uncomfortable.

Coming from someone who finds it hard to wait… the uncomfortable ‘in-between’ stage is a key part of the process. Like many skills in life, it takes time and persistence to become an assertive communicator, who can so whilst creating peaceful, boundaried and authentic relationships.

The in-between stage is where you are highly cognizant in your interactions. It’s when you will notice the small details in someone’s body language, tone of voice or facial expression. It’s when you are on the lookout for potential ‘hot buttons’ or external factors which could improve the outcome of a conversation.

This uncomfortable in-between is necessary if you don’t just want to learn the basics of communication. Or, to prevent from becoming someone who knows the actions but doesn’t really get the purpose of the skills.

My belief is that to become an effective and confident communicator, you need to:

a) START by wanting it (which is why I don’t ever try to convince someone they need coaching in this area)

b) PERSIST through the frustrations of the ‘in-between’ of having made progress but wanting to achieve more!

c) EMBED the habits of noticing, adapting and being proactive in interactions – keeping putting those learnings into practice.

d) EMBODY the habits until they become instinctive.

This final stage of the process is the sweet spot of communication skills. Just like when you are learning to drive… checking all the mirrors or finding the clutch biting point takes up so much brain capacity. And you’re certainly not able to hold a meaningful conversation during a manoeuvre!

In building assertiveness, communication, or conflict management skills, when you have the motivation to ask for support, you have persisted, you embed new habits and now they are part of your instinctive responses… You will then feel calm enough to further deepen those conversations, confident enough to initiate interactions, and skilled enough to handle the unpredictable.

So, you may not ‘be there’ yet, but if you have plotted the sat nav correctly and you stay on track, you will be. So, just remind your inner 7-year-old to be patient. They will know when you have arrived!

Emma Jenkings is an accredited workplace mediator and a trained conflict coach, DISC practitioner, MHFA and communication skills trainer. Find out more about COACHING or E-LEARNING for assertiveness skills HERE .

Two Against One

Mon, 26 Jun 2023 17:09:13 GMT

The problem with having alliances in a dispute

Don’t you love it when you find your ‘people’ – a group of like-minded individuals who get where you are coming from and share the same values, interest, and principles?

We human beings love a feeling of connection.

So, what about those times when you are around someone who you feel very disconnected from? Perhaps they have a different opinion to you, or you simply don’t understand their behaviour…?

It doesn’t take a sociologist or psychologist to be able to predict that you are less likely to align with them than you are with those who you form an easier connection with. And, on the face of it, there is no huge problem with that very natural, human instinct.

Now, let’s step into my arena for a minute and picture the relationship process that happens in the workplace involving these natural instincts…

Imagine that you are in a team and there is one person in that team that seems to always have an opinion that opposes yours. (Yet, most of the other people in the team resonate with you.) It starts to get a little irritating. During one team meeting, which this individual could not attend, it became clear that you are not the only person feeling this way. The situation continues and from the messages you are getting from other team members, it’s clear that you all are getting a little sick of it.

Tensions are now becoming more palpable to the leadership team and so I get a call to see what I can do.

(Just to be clear, the scenario I am describing does not relate to a specific mediation but refers to common themes I have noticed in multiple mediations that I have facilitated, and my fellow mediators have too.)

Now, what I often see in scenarios where there are more than two people involved is this:

- It looks like the issues of the pair/group against the individual are the same – there are always some differences, even if subtle!

- The individual is often the last to know about the issues.

- The pair/group have discussed the individual on multiple occasions with multiple other individuals.

- The longer these frustrations have been bubbling away, the less keen the pair/group are on finding a win:win resolution to the issues and are more keen for their side to ‘win’ overall.

So, are the pair/group the only protagonists in the situation – the ones who are entirely responsible for the conflict?

In a word, no. Among the shared issues, there will be some legitimate reasons for needing a facilitated resolution. And, sometimes, it can be helpful to have a few voices to highlight concerns that may otherwise be ignored or not come across clearly.

However, as you can see from the above list of common occurrences in this type of scenario, when conflict is handled as a ‘them vs. one’, you may miss some of the necessary factors that would get you to a fully resolved conclusion.

Shared concerns

There may be unity surrounding some of the behaviours or issues, so that is helpful in terms of knowing what needs to be discussed and it may also help empower those who would typically shy away from raising concerns. However, each person in a mediation will have a unique experience of the other people and the situation. Their relationship and the journey to resolving issues may require a slightly different approach and awareness of the issues that are unique to them.

Ignorance is bliss…

…Until it is not! So many individuals in a multi-person conflict situation are surprised by how the pair/group perceive them and their behaviour. Why? Because the pair/group will have discussed this within their small group (and probably with others outside of it too) and feel absolutely clear on the issues. But they are yet to have a calm, productive and direct conversation with the individual. So, the individual has a quite unpleasant realisation about what the issues are but also that other people seem to be aware of them first.

Three’s a Crowd

It can feel very overwhelming, anxiety-inducing and disempowering to have multiple people facing up to one person – even if this individual is seen to be confrontational or overtly confident. It may also feel like they are going to be pushed into submission because it’s ‘two against one’ – a perception of undefeatable power imbalance.

Three is a tricky number for a mediation but it is also quite common. An experienced mediator will be able to judge how to handle each unique case to ensure that the process feels comfortable and fair to each person.

For the Team!

As a general rule, teams want their side to win. You look at any sporting event and the crowd’s reaction of dissatisfaction when the result is a draw…a collective of people want a win for the team. And, sometimes people will do all sorts for the sake of the team, that they would not dream of doing on their own! (I still remember some haunting case studies from my Psychology A-Level classes on the ‘bystander effect’!)

It can lead to people going along with the majority and being desensitized to what ‘fair treatment’ looks like if the group says it’s fine!

If you were to get individuals from each team in a neutral space to chat together though, there will be a greater likelihood of seeing the other person as a unique individual, rather than the opposition.

What are the highlights I want you to take away from this?

1. Notice when factions start to appear within your teams. Friendships are natural and positive, opposed ‘them vs. us’ situations will lead to issues if unaddressed. Encouraging people to relate to each other as individuals, regardless of any developing pairs/factions, will make a thorough resolution much more achievable.

2. Be aware of power imbalances. Even if the individual has behaviours which are perceived as aggressive, (and require attention and challenge) multiple people against one individual will always feel threatening.

3. Multi-party disputes can be resolved fairly and without it feeling uncomfortable – but it requires skill, wisdom, and a tailored approach to each situation.

4. Just like onions (and ogres), all disputes involve many layers. So, there may be common themes but - in a workplace dispute particularly – remember that each person will have concerns which are unique to them.

5. Just because multiple people do, say, or believe the same thing does not make that the truth or the objectively ‘right’ thing to do, say or believe.

If you are relate to the above situation or can see a similar situation emerging in your organisation, please get in touch. Early intervention often only requires a light-touch approach and will be far less complex to manage and resolve.

Emma Jenkings is an experienced, CMC-registered workplace mediator, conflict coach, MHFA, communication skills trainer and DISC practitioner. She is also the assertiveness coach for the Altitude immersive coaching experience and a lead facilitator for Bloom Mediator Mentoring .

How NOT to Apologise

Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:37:39 GMT

Tips on restoring peace by apologising well

“Sorry” is a word that has a bit of a mixed reputation, doesn’t it?

Some people think it’s important and necessary, while others see it as a meaningless word. And, unfortunately, so many people have a negative opinion of saying ‘sorry’ that they might avoid using it entirely.

I would argue that it’s not the word itself, but how you use it!

So many times, I see individuals in a mediation who really struggle to believe the other person’s apology. And, I would say it is due to a mixture of things:

· Someone’s own history with broken trust and insincere apologies.

· The ‘apologiser’ not feeling remorseful.

· The ‘apologiser’ committing an apology fallacy – a sincere apology that fails to be seen as sincere.

This third situation is the one that I have spent a lot of time thinking about and talking through in different ways with coaching clients and mediation parties. In fact, I thought about it so much that I created an e-learning course from it, called the ‘Art of an Apology’.

In this course, I came up with 6 Apologiser Fallacies:

1. The Steam Train

2. The Shirker

3. The Persuader

4. The Elaborator

5. The Collaborator

6. The Demonstrator

All of these come from people who do want to apologise but they go about it in a way which doesn’t help the situation, the person they are apologising to, or them. Effectively, they stand in the way of their apology feeling as genuine and sincere as it could.

Have any of the above apology fallacies resonated with you? Perhaps, someone has apologised to you in one of the above ways before and now the sense of dissatisfaction with their apology makes sense, or maybe you can reflect on times when you have apologised in one of these ways and why maybe that didn’t lead to total resolution of an issue?

What I hope to demonstrate through this article is that apologies really do matter . It may leave you feeling like it’s become more complicated, so I will leave you with this:

Remember WHY you are apologising in the first place and what you hope to achieve through doing it.

If it starts focusing on you rather than the other person, then you are more likely to react to the feelings of discomfort and guilt, which lead to rushing or wanting to be consoled by their apology. If it is about ticking the ‘apology’ box, then you may not appreciate the need for total clarity and follow-up behaviour.

But if you remember why you are doing it, you are more likely to come across as sincere, accountable, and worth of someone extending their trust again.

For more information on conflict resolution services, including mediation, training, coaching or advisory services, go to www.mosaicmediation.co.uk . To access the mini e-learning course on the ‘Art of an Apology’, click HERE. Emma Jenkings is a qualified and experienced workplace mediator, conflict coach, assertiveness coach, DISC practitioner and communication skills trainer.

Firm Principles, Flexible Approach

Thu, 16 Mar 2023 15:13:14 GMT

This is a subtitle for your new post

My parents would say to me and my siblings that they wanted to treat us all fairly and sometimes that would look like doing things differently to cater for each of our different personalities and needs.

Now, as a parent to two equally very different children, I can appreciate just how much that approach was helpful.

There are certain things that both my children need from us in equal measure for sure, but they also enjoy different types of activities and have some differences in how they connect with us and need support, accountability, and guidance. For example, my eldest enjoys getting me to do dance routines with her, my youngest prefers me playing on Roblox with her – it wouldn’t work so well if I tried to connect in the same way for both.

For me, this way of relating has firm principles but a flexible approach . I see this concept benefitting other types of relationships and situations too.

Considering someone’s well-being , standard principles are ensuring they feel heard, cared for and supported would be essential for anyone but how that is demonstrated would perhaps be different.

Considering someone’s education , standard principles are ensuring they are as equipped for life as possible and that they enjoy their education is probably what all people want from this stage in life, but they may need to access their education in different ways and will enjoy different aspects of it.

I feel like the same should be said for leaders too. I remember one mediation where the biggest complaint one individual (in a different team) had against another person was that they were “not a strong manager”. On digging into that comment, it became apparent that they had a very rigid idea of how a ‘strong manager’ behaved and managed their team – loud, driven, and authoritarian. The line manager’s approach, however, was calm, gentle, and a listening ear, which actually worked well for their team.

My thinking is that there are certain principles which benefit all managers' relationships with their team members – in terms of being a person they can trust to be capable, demonstrate integrity, have compassion, and communicate effectively. However, they will perhaps have a flexible approach to supporting different individuals in their team, to meet their unique needs, motivate them and provide direction.

There are probably a few reasons why people stick to a rigid approach:

· They have seen it work well before

· Low confidence or knowledge of a different approach

· Instructions from their senior leaders or fixed process

· Low self-confidence (in their ability to do something different or without a fixed process)

When I first completed my workplace mediation training over seven years ago, I knew that one of the principles of mediation was that it was a ‘flexible process’, however, I was nervous to stray from what I perceived to be the accepted structure and approach.

As my experience, confidence and skillset grew, so did my ‘toolkit’ - and, so did my discernment about which approach will likely work for each case.

What have I noticed?

By sticking to the principles of mediation (and my values as an individual) but having an approach that is flexible to the needs of the parties and the situation, the process flows and the outcomes make sense.

Here is how I now approach a situation with flexibility:

· If communication challenges are a key feature in the situation, then I include DISC profiling within the process.

· If there are a few different strands to the mediation and different people are involved in only some of those, then I provide multiple stages to the process.

· If someone has mental health concerns or needs a bit more prep time before the joint session, then I do extra conflict coaching sessions. And, if only one of the parties is having extra coaching, then I find an appropriate conflict coach from my pool of wonderful conflict resolution associates, to do that session so that it feels fair and neutral to all parties.

· If one party wants to mediate and the other doesn’t, it’s not the end of the road! I just coach the willing individual through what has happened and help them feel equipped and empowered for any future situations.

· If parties want to move past the issues but don’t want to converse directly, I don’t push that on them. I go between rooms (virtual or in-person) to facilitate communication.

· If further support is required after the mediation, I offer appropriate coaching, training or advisory support for as long as is required.

It works!

I continue to apply the same concept of having firm principles and a flexible approach to how I run my business, how I approach relationships, manage my boundaries, and where I invest my time and energy.

So, what are your non-negotiable, foundation principles? Knowing those, how does this enable you to have a flexible approach to the different areas in your life?

Emma Jenkings is an experienced mediator, conflict coach, DISC Practitioner and communication skills trainer. You can get in touch by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk or via the ' Contact ' page.

Bearing the Burden Alone

Fri, 24 Feb 2023 17:06:09 GMT

What mechanisms have you put in place to lighten the load?

It’s lonely at the top – whether you are the main decision-maker in your business, a volunteer group or in your home life.

Did you know that the phrase ‘the buck stops here’ was popularised when U.S. president Harry S. Truman had a sign on his desk with 'The buck stops here' inscribed on it? This was meant to indicate that he didn't 'pass the buck' to anyone else but accepted personal responsibility for the way the country was governed.

One of the things that I have noticed about leaders who take their responsibility seriously is that they can respond in a couple of different ways:

1. Get burned out – whether because they take too much on or haven’t managed their priorities effectively.

2. Make fear-driven decisions – to avoid any potential risks that have become all too prominent in their mind.

3. They put together a support system – for both their practical and psychological needs.

The Frazzled Leader

As we all know, burnout serves nobody. You may at the beginning be able to still be productive and creative but in a short time, the cracks will start to show. As with all of the options, the intention behind these behaviours is positive – they want to get things done! However, if someone is trying to do everything, then sometimes even the things that they care about get forgotten or get negatively impacted.

The Over-Protective Leader

When decisions are driven by fear – based on what they have experienced/witnessed happening before, fear of failure, or the unknown potential risks – then a leader will only take the ‘safe’ option or there is a tendency towards avoidance. I see this kind of avoidance regularly when mediating. As an example, from good intentions (not wanting to offend, being willing to over-accommodate others out of selflessness, or not wanting to highlight something which could create tension) leaders might care so much about the feelings of their staff members that they avoid giving constructive feedback. Or they go with the opinion of the most confident person in the room – if they’re that confident, it’s got to be a good idea, right?!

The Pro-Active Leader

They’ve either seen the above two situations before, or they have the wisdom to realise they need to put a mechanism in place which supports their leadership. It’s no wonder that you always see great leaders surrounded by a support team! That’s a heavy burden to bear alone.

This mechanism may be done by having clever systems and processes to minimise unnecessary or unproductive tasks. It may be in the form of the team they have in their organisation, whose roles and giftings complement their own gifts and the needs of the organisation.

It may also be in who they have around them external to the organisation. They may proactively invest and nurture their personal relationships so that they have a partner who supports them through life or a friendship group that they can trust to speak with confidentially and who give them kind and honest feedback. Or, they may have paid specialists to contribute to growth in skills, confidence or emotional intelligence – such as a therapist, a mentor or a coach.

I both love and am challenged by this quote from Harvey Ullman:

“Anyone who stops learning is old, whether this happens at twenty or eighty. Anyone who keeps on learning not only remains young, but becomes constantly more valuable regardless of physical capacity.”

This kind of leader pays attention to where there are areas of growth that require some focussed action and is regularly reviewing whether the methods of working need adjustment and whether the working relationships (or personal) require any adapted behaviours .

They ensure that there are a small group of people to who they can talk in total confidence , perhaps to who they can vent or seek advice.

When you are a leader in your business, there will be many situations that you have never encountered before, so it helps to know others who may have experienced similar situations. It may not be helpful to emulate how they responded precisely but to learn from what happened and their takeaways from that experience.

And, sometimes a leader just needs someone to listen without any potential repercussions or judgement!

Sometimes my clients apologise for venting their frustrations with me – even when they know that’s often part of my process. But, they are also so very grateful that their words will not leave the session. Many often find that having that space to vent allows them to realise what they actually think (which may be very different from what they initially said!).

Through mediating for the past 7 years and providing a coaching service to individuals in leadership roles, I can see just how much clarity and empowerment a person gets from talking through ideas and having a safe space to say whatever they need to. To be asked curious questions which get them thinking, reflecting, discovering their own solutions, and feeling ready to take action .

Whether you are a leader in a community group, family set-up, or business, the same principles apply – if you want to be a proactive AND accountable leader, make sure you have p ut the right people and task-management mechanisms in place to support you in that role. So, you don’t feel like you are bearing the full burden alone.

For more information on coaching or how you can develop the skills to empower you as a decision-maker and leader in your life, check out the coaching and training (workshops and individual e-learning) pages on the website.

STOP talking to a brick wall

Thu, 26 Jan 2023 16:53:27 GMT

How to communicate so people listen to you

It may be with your teenager – “Just another reminder to PLEASE hang up your towel and not leave it on the floor!”

It may be with your boss – “As I mentioned in my previous email, I can’t make that meeting as I can’t work weekends.”

It may be with your staff member – “I understand you have a lot of tasks you are dealing with. Can you remember to send that urgent proposal to me as you promised you would last week?”

It may be with your colleague – “Can you see that it’s MY name written on that stapler, not yours, right?”

The passive-aggressive reminders don’t seem to be doing the job do they? Even the very direct ones don’t seem to be resulting in any action. It’s like talking to a brick wall!

Yes, we all know that communication ‘takes work’. We all know that people are ‘different’. Yet, when we are in the middle of an interaction, we seem to forget that.

Or, perhaps, we are not quite sure precisely what the differences are and how to bridge a gap between them to get the message across properly?

I find that in almost all my workplace mediation enquiries, a common theme comes up: the individuals just clash. They “communicate very differently” , as the line manager or HR professional tells me.

So, I investigated how to tackle this beyond my facilitative role as a mediator… And, I found DISC profiles . At first, I was cynical about them. I have never appreciated the phrase ‘personality profile’ or any psychometric tool which tells people that this is how they are and always will be.

However, what I like about DISC is that the focus is not on categorising someone and putting their whole personality into a ‘box’ but on helping people become more aware about how they communicate, behave and are motivated. DISC also acknowledges that the ‘profile’ you get one year may be different in 5 years if you have developed new skills or have had a significant job role change or life experience.

When I do a team DISC workshop or mediation, what I find quite interesting is seeing the penny drop, when someone realises why their hard-fought attempts to communicate with someone didn’t work out.

· Why a staff member was feeling de-motivated by an approach that their line manager had successfully used for many other people before.

· Why a spouse was finding their communication style aggressive rather than honest or direct.

· Why a colleague always wanted more detail than they first offered.

Communication truly is a two-way process and you have to acknowledge that during a conversation you are each coming from two very different perspectives and will probably communicate, think and behave differently too. So, though it seems like there couldn’t possible be a misunderstanding about the words or intention behind them, it can absolutely happen if you are only thinking from your perspective.

My approach is never to tell someone that their way of communicating is wrong. Just that if it’s not achieving the result you hoped for, something needs to change!

Having this new understanding of different profiles – both yours and other people’s profiles – is not an unsubtle hint telling you to change who you are, but something for you to utilise and adapt how you communicate to the person on the receiving end. It is the most logical thing to do!

I have been a mediator for 7 years now and have been using DISC for over half of that time. Being a DISC practitioner has enabled me to encourage offense-free self-reflection from my mediation parties, empower and develop self-awareness in my coaching clients, and support better communication and interactions within teams in organisations.

So, if you feel like you are talking to a brick wall when you speak to certain individuals – in work or at home – come and have a chat. Get in touch by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk or use the Contact page .

Would you like to understand your communication style? DISC profiles are available for individuals and teams. Click HERE to find out more.

In Consistency, We Trust

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Sat, 26 Nov 2022 17:11:45 GMT

Why does consistency matter at work?

Some of you reading this may have already switched off – “I’ve heard the ‘consistency’ message before!”

And I get it. The word ‘consistency’ can be attached to feelings of burden and responsibility. Of reaching for the impossible! (Nobody can be perfect or consistent ALL the time, right?) So, when I talk about ‘consistency’, take the pressure part of it away for second and focus on why I’m writing this – that in reading this, you might see how consistency helps you personally AND professionally too.

You may have previously only thought about consistency in terms of the impact on your career, your self-development, or early morning gym sessions. What about consistency with people?

I want to talk about the integral relationship between TRUST and consistency. And, how consistency in certain behaviours deepens personal and professional relationships and will even prevent unproductive conflict.

So, what is consistency? What is it not? And how do values, consistency and trust-filled relationships work together?

What is consistency (in the ‘people’ sense)?

To me, it is what gives people a sense of who you are and what to expect from you.

What is people-based consistency NOT supposed to be?

Having fixed behaviours or ways of communicating, regardless of the result. It is not inhibiting change which could be beneficial.

I hear a lot of, “I am the who I am, regardless of who is around” or “I treat everyone exactly the same”. And I get the principle of this is to be authentic and fair. Unfortunately, using one approach and ignoring how that might land differently with different people, is ineffective and will ONLY benefit those who operate the same way you do! Which ends up being a much more exclusive approach than probably intended.

Why does consistency matter?

It directly impacts the expectations other people have of you. And, therefore how they behave towards you and whether they are willing to extend trust to you in different areas of a professional or personal relationship.

Their perspective could be positive…

Consistency in terms of arriving on time will give people a sense of your ability to make good time or follow through on your word to be somewhere at a certain time. Consistency in speaking about other people kindly to their face and when they are not there will lead demonstrate your true character.

OR it could be negative…

Consistency in terms of who you offer opportunities to might lead people to believe that you are someone who doesn’t operate fairly. Consistency in terms of telling so-called ‘white lies’ every now and then might lead people to doubt your honesty.

“Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.” – Albert Einstein

Where do ‘values’ fit in?

Often without being cognisant of it, we all expect things of other people. And they are often based on our values.

Being consistent in a particular behaviour may be noticed more by one individual than another – because it matters more to them.

Where one individual places great value on their time and it not being wasted, being a good timekeeper will really benefit your relationship with them.

Where one individual places great value on kindness and calm, being consistent in communicating calmly and with compassion will reduce the potential for conflict or avoidance behaviours. Unlike, someone who doesn’t really care about how someone speaks to them, if the person is demonstrating capability in their role.

“It’s not what we do once in a while that shapes our lives, but what we do consistently.” – Tony Robbins

ESSENTIAL people-based consistencies

For any leadership or authority role, there are a few things that most people value most for them to be consistent in – fairness, integrity, and support .

1. Fairness in how you offer opportunities and provide feedback. Do your words and actions demonstrate your desire for everyone you are responsible for to achieve success – in its variety of forms?

“Lack of consistency can bring a lack of interest.” - Anonymous

2. Integrity in how you speak about people, to people and behave around people and in private – are you honest? Do you gossip (or allow it)? Do your behaviours match your intentions?

“A person has integrity when there is no gap between intent and behaviour” – Stephen MR Covey (The Speed of Trust)

3. Ensuring support is available and encouraged – especially if people find it uncomfortable to ask. How willing are you to speak up for those who struggle to have a voice? How willing (and able) are you to manage issues between people – rather than just hoping it will resolve itself? What support is out of their control but within yours? And, if you are not the person able to support in certain areas, are you aware of who might be and willing to ask for their support?

“The only way to build trust professionally or personally is by being trustworthy.” – Gerard Arpey (American Airlines)

When people see you being consistent in the above essential areas you are likely to build the foundations for a trust-filled relationship.

And trust impacts everything! If they trust you to be a personal who is capable and of good character, in those times when you make a mistake or behave in a way that is not the norm, they are more likely to be gracious and give you the benefit of the doubt. Especially, if their more specific values – timekeeping, tidying, creativity, peace, openness, fun, etc. - are not typically things you focus on.

When trust is established or re-built, you don’t need to feel the burden of consistency so heavily. Nobody is perfect all the time anyway, are they?

For more on the impact of behaviour and communication on a peaceful workplace culture, get in contact with author and workplace mediator, Emma Jenkings by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

Whose Problem is it Anyway?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 21:27:47 GMT

When they don't want to resolve things, but you do...

It’s an unnerving feeling, isn’t it? Being out of control.

Tim Gunn famously repeats in the TV show, ‘Project Runway’, “Make it work!”. When you are dealing with inanimate objects, that is possible. However, when you are trying to make a relationship ‘work’, you are dealing with human beings – notably averse to being told what to do. And, we can’t control what other human beings do, can we?

The great Stephen R. Covey, in his book ‘The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People’ defined the theory of having the ‘circle of influence’ and the ‘circle of concern’ . The former relates to those things that you can affect and impact – essentially those things which are under your control. The latter circle relates to those things which you are concerned about but that you cannot control.

My take on his theory is that it is pointless and debilitating to focus on those things which are in the circle of concern. However, when we focus on what we can do about those things in our circle of influence, we can feel empowered. Also, there may be occasions when those actions we take regarding the circle of influence may even have a knock-on effect on those things of which we felt out of control.

We can’t take responsibility for what other people do. However, we all have a part to play in the development of a relationship or how pleasant (or not) an interaction might be.

I find it helpful to not use words like ‘blame’ or ‘fault’ when talking about relationships but instead to frame it as our ‘contribution’. People tend to feel a lot less defensive when asked: “What was your contribution to the current situation?” – as opposed to: “And which part of the current situation are your fault?!”

The thing with mediation – or just difficult conversations in general - is that you need all relevant people to want to engage with the process. So, what happens if they don’t want to?!

Sometimes, they need to understand a little more about what to expect or what the intention of the conversation/the other person is. However, even then, they may still not want to address things proactively.

Well, then I suggest that the focus moves away from the other person and onto you - to your ‘contribution’.

What do I ‘contribute’?

1. Our words or behaviours

Do your words encourage or inspire – or might they feel judgmental and condemning? Are your words accurate or are they an exaggeration or inaccurate? If your contribution to a conversation does not feel true, helpful, inspiring, or kind then it is possible your words will lead to a negative interaction.

Similarly, if your behaviour feels defensive, aggressive, or dismissive then this is unlikely to be a positive influence on the other person.

2. Learning new skills

“Every day is a school day!” If you think you have done all the learning you need to do about communication and other people, then you need to think again. People are unique and interesting and confusing. Communication is a skill which takes more than a lifetime to master and develop. So, what can you contribute? You can acknowledge when you need to develop a skill or increase your knowledge and by doing so for the benefit of your relationships and interactions is a true gift to yourself and others!

3. Noticing and changing unhelpful habits or thought patterns

What have you noticed about yourself? Do you notice when your thoughts are not helpful and lead you to make assumptions about other people or to react without a ‘kindness filter’? The self-awareness journey is long and necessary. But it does not need to be lonely.

Recently, alongside mediation, I have been facilitating more conflict coaching and assertiveness coaching. Why? Sometimes, it is beneficial as part of the mediation process, as they can do a couple of sessions to get a bit more clarity and confidence before the joint session. However, in a situation where they are alone in wanting to communicate effectively with the other person (or other people in general), then there is still support available for them to do that.

Conflict coaching and assertiveness coaching focus on supporting, developing, and equipping the individual so that they can take some of the control back.

They don’t have to wait until the other person is ready – if they ever feel ready – to try and improve things. They can take the brave and responsible step to determine that even if the other person does not contribute much at all, or much that is positive, towards a situation, they at least can control what they contribute towards it. And, who knows what impact that might have…?

"What if I fail?"

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Thu, 25 Aug 2022 10:38:41 GMT

The FEAR Factor

No sweaty palms, racing heartbeat, nor even a sense of discomfort for this rare species. There are a select few who jump into tricky conversations without delay or thought. No sweaty palms, racing heartbeat, nor even a sense of discomfort for this rare species.

(On occasion though, it may be of benefit for everyone if they did have a little fear!)

MOST people do find difficult, truth-telling conversations to be just a little anxiety-inducing.

Yes, it may be because they don't want to offend or hurt someone. Or, they haven't figured out quite what to say yet.

But the FEAR factor is also often at play. A keen contributing factor to not having the difficult, truth-telling conversation.

"What if I try - really try - and I don't get the outcome I wanted?"

The Truth

We humans generally love to feel in control of what is happening around us and to us. But, we cannot control the thoughts and feelings of other people. This means that in spite of our best efforts, a conversation may NOT go how we wanted.

Even in mediation, even when a resolution has been reached, some people will want more...

...for the relationship to be completely restored by the end.

...for the other person to agree to all of THEIR terms.

...for the other person to only say positive things about them.

...for their relationship to be without challenge or investment of effort following the mediation.

The truth is that all relationships that are worth something, are worth the effort it takes to produce REAL peace.

And, sometimes that peace means you work hard again at the relationship, following a breakthrough conversation.

Sometimes that peace means accepting the relationship is not perfect (and wasn't even before the conflict) but that you have a better foundation to build upon now.

Sometimes that peace means you hear some difficult feedback about yourself.

Or, even that success is not that 'I won' but that you both came out with something.

And, if I fail...

...what have you gained ?

When I have facilitated a mediation where there has either been no written agreement or where someone still feels a little disheartened, we talk through what the process has given them anyway. And, here are some of the things parties have told me:

"I felt able to speak up honestly"
"I found out something about them which made me see things in a totally different light"
"You helped me understand how to phrase what I wanted to say in a more effective way"
"I feel clearer on what decision I need to make now"
"I felt totally 'safe' throughout - even though I had been dreading talking to them"
"We got to an agreement when I thought we would not be able to agree on anything at all"
"I learned so much about myself during this process and what works or doesn't work when trying to communicate"

...and what would have happened if you didn't try to have this conversation?

More often than not, issues would have gotten worse or remained the same, but without having the clarity required to make an informed decision. Issues would likely have escalated and involved more people. Resentments and assumptions would become embedded rather than checked or corrected.

And, ultimately, you would have missed out on all the potential gains (see above!).

People learn a lot about each other and about themselves when having these tricky conversations - particularly if they have the support and feedback from a professional whilst having the conversation.

Don't let fear get in the way of a necessary conversation. As the saying goes, 'Feel the fear and do it anyway!' (And, with the support of someone skilled in communication and conflict resolution to improve your chances of success.)

Get in touch for guidance on how to improve the success of difficult conversations by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk or going to the CONTACT page.

Enough is Enough!

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 20 Jul 2022 16:06:11 GMT

How to know when it is time to walk away

“How do you know when to walk away?”

I have had mediation clients and coaching clients ask me the same thing in various ways over the year.

As a workplace mediator, I know that most mediations will come to me because one or more of the below have happened:

· A grievance has been raised

· A public or distressing argument occurred

· Someone feels mistreated or discriminated against by the other person or the organisation

· The organisation does not feel the other person is working to their best

· It has been incredibly difficult to interact or work with someone

· Senior leaders are in fundamental disagreement on an issue or their relationship

All the above situations cause damage to trust and discomfort in a relationship. And all the above indicate a need to address what has happened but also for some positive change to happen if the individuals involved feel able to work with each other – or, to conclude their working relationship with civility.

However, what if the people involved are unsure whether the effort required is actually worth the potential result?

Essentially, how does someone decide that enough is enough?

I love seeing people resolve issues and develop even better relationships, however I recognise when a working relationship is not sustainable. It may not even be because it cannot be fixed, but that the amount of effort required by both people feels too much. The gain is not enough to justify the pain!

1. So, the first step is deciding what you want. Why do you want or need this relationship to improve?

2. The second step is deciding whether the steps required to potentially improve the relationship are reasonable and that doing them is worth the effort.

If your response to the first question is confused and uncertain, spend time exploring what has happened before now, what you had hoped for this relationship and whether there are some issues that have cropped up along the way that have not yet been addressed.

If you are unclear on what you want, this will inhibit you from knowing how to address issues and from focussing on resolution.

Sometimes a mediation seems to be going in circles and it becomes apparent that this is happening because there was some incident that happened previously, and one or both people are avoiding discussing it. After a private conversation is had with them, and the individual has figured out how to bring it up, the matter can be addressed, assumptions can be challenged, or context can be provided, and they are able to then focus on moving forward.

If the answer to the second question is: ‘No, it does not feel worth it’, I would then check this initial response for any unhelpful influencing factors.

Such as, does the effort not feel worth it because you have decided they won’t change or acknowledge what went wrong, without giving them an ample opportunity? Do they understand where you are coming from or what they have done to make you feel a certain way – or are you just assuming that they do?

It may be that you have given many chances to them, and they are fully cognisant of what they need to do and have just not followed through – out of choice or complacency. In which case it is entirely understandable to not believe that they will alter their behaviour.

Or are previous experiences with similar people or situations causing you to feel that this situation will end up the same way?

It is not uncommon for an individual to remind you of someone else – in their mannerisms or approach or communication style. Without realising it, some of those old frustrations or hurts we encountered with the other person can influence how we interact and think about this individual.

Perhaps, you have experienced a similar situation before and the ‘fight or flight’ instinct is leading you to behave defensively, or to retreat before there is the possibility of this situation concluding as before.

Or are you putting too much responsibility on them for what went wrong, and actually more accountability is required on your part?

We like to think that we are very aware and self-aware of what is going on around us, but the reality is that we all have blind spots, and no-one is a mind-reader. So, it is entirely possible that there is information that you are currently unaware of.

What do you NOT know about them?

Are there other factors that are influencing their behaviour – stress, relationships, financial worries, health concerns, mental ill health, or assumptions on their part?

We all too often forget that, just as we excuse ourselves for how we behaved when tired or stressed or oblivious to how someone else experienced our behaviour, so too might grace be beneficial when they are in a similar position.

If, however, the answer to the second question is either, ‘I’m not sure’ or ‘Yes!’, you need to determine what steps are required to improve the situation and implement those necessary steps.

It is not enough to just know what the problem is.

If you are unsure what needs to happen next, then it is likely that you need additional support. This could be through seeking advice (legal or otherwise) or seeking an alternative perspective on the situation. Perhaps, what you really need is time, space, and coaching to get clear on what has happened, what you want, and what can be done next.

As Dan Brown says:

“Sometimes all it takes is a tiny shift of perspective to see something familiar in a totally new light.”

If you are currently requiring clarity or support for managing a personal or work-related relationship challenge, then please get in contact. Emma Jenkings is a qualified workplace mediator, conflict coach, DISC practitioner, communication trainer and is a Branch Director for Mediator Network .

The problem with calling people 'toxic'

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 21 Jun 2022 13:08:54 GMT

What makes someone a 'toxic person'?

‘Toxic People.’

This term seems to be used a lot now and there are many memes around referring to ‘removing toxic people from your life’.

I get the message: why have people around you that are causing you harm? However, this phrase suggests more than that, unfortunately. Labelling a person as ‘toxic’ is a description of who you see them to be – the toxicity makes up who they are. In effect, labelling them this way infers that they are stuck that way.

Then comes the socially accepted push to ‘remove’ said people from your life. Which, if you do believe that people are stuck in their toxicity, makes total sense. But what if that is not how people work?

What if seeing people as fixed in that state does more harm than good?

As a workplace mediator and conflict coach my professional life is spent encouraging people to resolve issues and, at times, this also restores relationships. So, I am fully aware that I am predisposed to desire that relationships are sustained. However, this is only in cases where such a relationship is functioning in a healthy way or where making small and reasonable changes make it possible to have a healthy relationship.

I do not encourage sustaining behaviours or relationships which are doing harm to someone – whether that is psychological, emotional, or physical.

My concern here is the mindset of seeing someone as one thing, with no possibility of positive change.

One thing

What makes up a person? You could say that a ‘person’ encompasses their likes and dislikes, their thoughts and their sense of the world and themselves. It could include their quirks and what they are gifted at.

Unlike your average animated film, most people are not either bad or good. People tend to be a whole mixture of qualities, characteristics, and behaviours. When you label someone ‘toxic’ it infers that they are dangerous, not to be trusted and that being in their presence is harmful – they are solely the perpetrator, and you are solely the victim.

The characterisation of someone being totally one thing or other is inaccurate at best, harmful at worst.

This is especially so if the characterisation has been constructed because of a small collection of observed behaviours or unchecked assumptions. What if the observations happened when that person was going through a tough time – which led them to behave in a way they later regretted? Or the conclusion drawn was based on partial or inaccurate information?

What conclusions might be drawn if someone witnessed you on your worst day?

People removal

There are different phases or ‘seasons’ that we go through in life. There is the saying that ‘some people are with us just for a season’, so it may be that a relationship gradually separates.

What I have seen several times, unfortunately, is ‘people removal’ used as a solution when conflict management would have done the job with less collateral damage. Rather than someone seeing someone do [something], drawing a conclusion about the action/meaning/intention behind it, not liking it, and then addressing that with the person… They decide the only action is to remove that person from their life.

No one should feel that they must accept unfair or unkind treatment.

No one should feel compelled to be around someone who makes them feel unsafe or disrespected.

So, in situations where one or both either people intend to cause harm or do not care enough if that is the outcome of their behaviour, the relationship is not likely to have a positive outcome. Distance or complete separation may, in this instance, be a necessary solution.

My challenge is around situations where someone may have formed a premature conclusion that ‘people removal’ is the necessary solution. I have yet to facilitate a mediation where all parties are confident that the other person is ready to listen and resolve the issues. Yet, for the vast majority of those mediations, parties then witnessed each other listening, comprehending the problem, apologising, and committing to positive solutions to improve the situation.

My concern is that premature ‘people removal’ has the following consequences:

· The relationship is damaged or ended perhaps unnecessarily

· It puts all of the blame for the problem onto one person

· Confusion for the person removed – What did I do? Why didn’t they ask me about it? Was the relationship worth so little to them?

· Other relationships impacted as a by-product (e.g., spouses, friends, family members of either person, who would find it too awkward to continue a relationship)

· Accountability in relationships is avoided so ‘blind spots’ remain unchecked

‘People removal’ happens in workplace situations all the time. When there is someone who does not get on with the rest of the team they are labelled as ‘difficult’ and get moved to a different team or are asked to leave. Sometimes, this is to everyone’s benefit. Sometimes, this is done instead of having important conversations with them that provide feedback and the opportunity for them to explain where they are coming from and, if necessary, make reasonable changes.

Toxic [what]?

Some people do leave a trail of devastation and damage behind them. A minority even intend to do so or are consciously uncaring about the consequences of their actions on other people.

However, most people do care and being labelled in such a way would likely be hurtful to them. Characterising someone negatively is not going to be received graciously – especially if they believe they are being mis-characterised.

So, how would I address a situation where someone believed another person was ‘toxic’? I would first get clarity on the root of the perceived toxicity.

a) Is it the person – or a behaviour, the environment or the relationship dynamic that is perceived to be ‘toxic’? People have the power to change their behaviours or break a negative pattern – especially if they understand the negative impact and want to change that.

b) Is ‘toxic’ an accurate and helpful way to describe what is happening? ‘Toxic’ may be a well-used phrase these days but the meaning is still particularly strong – poisonous or harmful. Does this word paint a picture of something which is worse than what is happening?

c) Is the behaviour, intention or consequence recurring or unusual for that person? Could it have been an ‘off day’ for them?

d) How does my experience, unintended biases, or assumptions influence my perception of this person or their behaviour?

e) What else is contributing to the negativity of this situation? Other people or other factors?

f) Using my reasoning for calling them ‘toxic’ could someone else label me the same way?

Language matters

When we repeatedly label someone as that ‘thing’ it starts to feel factual, rather than perceived. The belief that someone is that ‘thing’ then influences other thoughts about them, and how we experience their behaviours. It inhibits empathy and understanding. We forget that people who might behave in a way that causes offence, can also be hurt and vulnerable and kind and generous…

When we label the issue accurately – i.e., “When they BEHAVE that way, I feel really disrespected” – it provides a sense of whether that can be addressed and changed.

Whereas, labelling someone a ‘toxic person’ creates a personalised ‘cancel culture’. Yet, the alternative of either communicating directly with the person or having an alternative perspective on what happened, could lead to an even better relationship than before.

Yes, there are individuals who will not respond well to feedback or who have no intention to stop causing harm by their behaviour. You cannot control how another person behaves and as mentioned above, you do not have to accept behaviour which causes you harm. If you need to remove yourself from being around them to safeguard your psychological, emotional, or physical boundaries, that is a perfectly logical and reasonable thing to do.

If that is not the case, however… The first step to making beneficial changes to your life and relationships, is to ensure you are clear on what the problem is first and if something can be done to improve the situation – while remembering that the best solution may not be ‘people removal’.

For more on how conflict coaching equips people to be clear, confident and kind communicators, or how facilitated conversations resolve issues efficiently and effectively, go to www.mosaicmediation.co.uk/practiceareas or email enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

The 5 Appreciation Languages (at work)

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 27 Apr 2022 10:51:33 GMT

5 Ways to Show Your Colleagues That You Appreciate Them

As a parent and partner, discovering the '5 Love Languages' by Gary Chapman was a total game-changer!

Like some psychometric testing models can do, it demonstrates alternative perspectives on actions and thought processes, (I am obviously also a huge fan of using DISC with clients!).

So, what are the '5 Appreciation Languages'? Answer: the 5 love languages, but applied using terms that may be more helpful in the workplace. (There is always a fun response to asking if someone 'loves' their boss!)

The theory goes that though ALL 5 languages are positive and can benefit relationships, each person tends to have 1 or 2 specific languages that will make them feel extra appreciated and respected.

The 5 languages are:
�� Acts of Service - doing things for others
�� Words of Affirmation - compliments, kind feedback, etc.
�� Gifts - tangible objects that demonstrate care and understanding
�� Quality Time - making positive memories and feeling connected
�� Physical Touch - tangible comfort and connection (obviously, there are a few additional conditions with this one!)

Let me go into a little more detail for each love/appreciation language...

For support with improving work or personal relationships or developing the leadership skills of the people within your organisation, get in touch or find out more about the various services on offer.

How Assertiveness can Prevent Arguments

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 01 Mar 2022 11:43:52 GMT

What is 'assertive communication' and why is it helpful?

There is a common misconception around assertive communication – that assertiveness instigates issues or arguments. However, in my experience as a mediator, for most of the disputes that I have been asked to intervene with, I notice a lack of assertiveness. And that if there had been some more assertive communication, the dispute was likely to have either been resolved or be less complex.

So, why does ‘assertiveness’ get a negative reputation at times?

Well, often because the behaviour that has been defined as assertiveness, is not assertiveness.

The behaviour that most people find irritating or too confrontational tends to be aggressive communication, where there might be unnecessary volume, an accusatory tone, speaking over others, not listening and a lack of demonstrating curiosity in communication.

What is assertive communication?

I would define ‘assertive communication’ as communicating clearly and confidently.

Assertiveness and arguments:

Conflict is part of life. As a mediator, my intention is not to prevent conflict in its entirety but to equip people to argue well, without any unnecessary complications or harmful escalation of conflict. What I notice is that painful arguments and misunderstandings occur most often when there is a ‘gap’.

There is a ‘gap’ in knowledge, understanding and communication ability. And, this gap is replaced by assumptions, unhelpful conclusions, and seeking support or guidance from those with a biased perspective. Essentially what happens is that when someone does not get clear and confident communication (assertiveness) from the other person, they form their conclusions – perhaps also influenced by the opinions of those around them.

When people get to a mediation session, I spend the majority of the first half of the session unpicking assumptions and miscommunications. Most of which would not have taken place if one or all of the parties felt confident and able to communicate directly with the other parties.

I have yet to do a mediation where there has NOT been a moment where one party shares something which is ‘new information’ to the other. Though many people believe they know what the other person is thinking, in my experience they are very rarely correct.

The power of assertiveness

Assertiveness is not just about being seen as a ‘clear communicator’. It is a powerful tool for developing healthy communication patterns in relationships. By choosing to have awkward – yet essential – conversations, an opportunity is given for clarity between people. Such clarity can put a stop to questioning intentions, forming incorrect assumptions, and allowing the opinions of others to shape your thoughts about the other person. In essence, it can prevent unnecessary arguments.

Assertiveness can inhibit resentment from developing. Although an individual may not speak up about their opinion on a subject, or their desire to be included in a project, or feels misunderstood or overlooked, this does not preclude them from feeling resentful. If instead, they feel equipped and empowered to communicate their thoughts, feelings and needs, they are more likely to be in a situation where they are listened to, understood and their needs met.

Assertiveness is essential in establishing new boundaries and maintaining current healthy boundaries – in relationships at work and your personal life. People are much more likely to honour your boundaries if you can communicate them confidently and clearly.

Assertiveness is also a powerful conflict resolution tool as it can involve delivering your message with clarity, but also asking insightful questions to gain clarity for yourself. Which, in addition, demonstrates curiosity about the thoughts or feelings of the other person. When there is an expression of seeking to understand each other, it breaks down self-protective barriers and provides a pathway to empathy and connection.

To summarise…

Lack of assertive communication leads to: ambiguity around intention and thoughts; resentments developing; unnecessary arguments; complex disputes involving others; and incorrect assumptions .

Whereas, feeling equipped and empowered to communicate assertively leads to: open and honest communication; clarity around healthy boundaries; fast and effective conflict resolution; empathy and trust .

Why then, would you not choose to learn how to be more assertive in your communication?

For more information on conflict resolution go to www.mosaicmediation.co.uk/workplace-mediation . For self-development resources on conflict management and assertive communication, check out the ‘Mosaic Mediation Vault’ .

Myth-Busting Mediation

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 08 Dec 2021 13:52:53 GMT

What is mediation? What is mediation not?

What do you know about mediation? Are you sure that belief is factual? The reason, I ask is because I regularly hear statements about mediation that are just factually inaccurate, so hopefully, this article will be able to ‘bust’ any remaining myths about mediation…

Firstly, what is mediation? It is a process that involves a conversation between people who want to resolve an issue or find a solution to a problem, and a neutral facilitator (the mediator). Mediation comes in many forms – in person, online, in one room, in separate rooms, or a mixture.

What are the main types of mediation?

· Family mediation - generally resolving financial, housing or parental responsibilities after separation or divorce

· Workplace and employment mediation - resolving employee relations issues, personality disputes, or any issue which involves a company and someone who works for them (or is leaving them)

· Civil mediation - resolving matters which might others end up in small claims court

· Commercial mediation - resolving complex business matters

· Community mediation – resolving issues that have arisen amongst neighbours or communities – i.e. noise disruption disputes, antisocial behaviour issues, etc.

I specialise in workplace and employment mediation. My reason for zoning in on this area is because of my education in UK law and my experience of working at the Employment Tribunal. It is also an area of mediation that is often very focussed on relationships – even if at the beginning the issues appear to be task or process-based.

Let’s bust some myths!

What is a 'Win:Win'?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 27 Sep 2021 09:29:30 GMT

(If it is NOT a compromise...?)

What do people say about the success of relationships often is? ‘Compromise’.

Though I would agree that in a long-term relationship, it may feel appropriate at times for each person to make small sacrifices for the benefit of the relationship, compromise is not the ideal result . It even says so in the definition of the word…

Compromise =

1. an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.

2. the expedient acceptance of standards that are lower than is desirable.

Reading the above definitions of compromise, the phrase that stands out to me most is the concept of accepting something that is ‘lower than desirable’. Who would want to start with that aim in mind?

So, let me unpack what a ‘win:win’ involves. Firstly, there will be – at least – two different sides to the dispute or conversation, and secondly there will be some desire to get to resolution. It is distinct from other forms of outcome though, in that both parties find a solution that is agreeable to all.

Other types of outcome include:

- Lose:lose – nobody is happy with the outcome of the conversation. Often it involves all parties giving up on even finding a solution.

- Lose:win – the other party gets the outcome they wanted but you leave unhappy. Normally this happens when you have given in to them.

- Win:lose – you are happy with the outcome but the other person is not. They have given in to you.

- Compromise – neither party is particularly satisfied but not totally unhappy.

So, is a ‘win:win’ outcome, where everyone is satisfied, an unrealistic possibility ? No, and I will explain why:

Often when there is a dispute, the core of the problem is that people want different things. Sometimes, the situation escalates because the differences are tackled ineffectively, which results in communication breakdown, or a damage to the trust in the relationship. When this has happened, people tend to lose any motivation to problem-solve together. They may even be at the point where they do not even want to help the other person.

With two people holding this view, it is very difficult to move the issue forward.

This is why mediation is often the forum used for reaching a ‘win:win’. With the mediator being a totally neutral third party, they will seek to understand all parties involved. And, a mediator tends to be a specialist in relationships, communication and conflict, they will have the insight to understand what might be blocking each person from moving forward.

Before parties feel able to problem-solve, they will likely need to feel heard by talking through their perception of what happened and to gain understanding by hearing the different perceptions of others. Possibly, one or both parties may acknowledge what they did which didn’t help matters.

Quite often, by having the discussion and being challenged by the mediator along the way, a party will gain clarity about any assumptions or unrealistic expectations they may have had, and what is actually important to them.

Once the obstacles to problem-solving are removed and the individuals are motivated about what they want to achieve, the focus becomes less about the person and more on the issue. Then, the mediator will uncover what it is that each party really wants to happen, and what might be required to do that.

When seeking a win:win, the aim is not just to find a quick and easy solution , but to creatively discover a solution - or multiple solutions - that accomplishes the core aims of each party. Sometimes what a party is interested in is tangible (like money), but at other times it is a feeling, a word, or an action.

The difference between a ‘win:win’ and a ‘compromise’ is that:

- Compromise involves settling for less and walking away slightly disappointed.

- ‘Win:Win’ outcomes encourage creative solutions that enable both parties to feel acknowledged and satisfied.

Getting to a ‘win:win’ solution is rarely easy when combined with conflict between people, but there are often mutual points of agreement that can be built on, and is often very possible if you get the right support from a conflict specialist, or if those people become motivated to find a creative solution.

For more information on what is involved in workplace mediation, CLICK HERE .

Not agreeing to disagree

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Thu, 15 Jul 2021 19:45:06 GMT

How to discuss opposing opinions peacefully

You will disagree with hundreds of people in your lifetime. There will be topics or views that are an automatic trigger for conflict when discussed with certain people.

So, what do you do? Do you avoid tricky topics, or do you find a way to discuss them? Do you agree to disagree? Perhaps you find debate or conflict really uncomfortable to be around?

Though it may be appropriate at times to hold off until you are in a more appropriate environment, have developed a more effective approach, or to ‘agree to disagree’ after a conversation, to proactively not discuss a topic largely results in unspoken resentment, misunderstandings, and division.

People will think differently and it may not even be an issue at times. The potential for conflict arises, however, when one person thinks the other person is ‘wrong’ for having their alternate opinion.

You see though most people will inclusively and compassionately say that ‘everyone is different’, in daily interactions individuals are more likely to feel at ease with people who share the same opinions as them - which creates a feeling of validation and community. It can feel unsettling to not understand someone’s perspective or thought process.

In relating to others with differing views, the difficulty generally occurs when there is a difference of opinion which extends beyond the two individuals, or when the difference is portrayed as a morality issue.

Difference of opinion or morals?

Exploring this concept a little further:

a) When the difference of opinion is between groups of people, there is an additional factor (on top of the individual perspective) to be considered: the group mentality . In this case, the opinion is validated and solidified by the shared opinion of the group so I would want to understand the following questions…

o What does the individual gain from being in that group?

o Does the shared opinion provide a sense of community, identity or purpose?

o What shared experiences exist in the group?

o What led to the group being formed?

o What does the group offer that other people/groups/society does not?

b) When the differing opinion is portrayed or perceived as an issue of morality it adds a layer of complication to the discussion. It stops feeling objective and starts to feel personal. To tell someone they 'should' have a different opinion will likely feel like an attack on their morality and identity.

o An opinion which results in offence being taken or verbal condemnation being given then shuts down the potential for a productive conversation.

It is a challenge to understand even mundane differences, let alone issues which cut a little deeper. For example, many would find it difficult to understand the perspective of someone who felt it was acceptable to make racist comments. One of the most successful examples of a peacefully proactive approach to an extreme perspective from Daryl Davis - a black man who, since 1983, has managed to collect more than two dozen Klan robes from men who changed their minds about white supremacy after he befriended them. He attends rallies, he enters conversations, and he asks questions.

Though the above situation may feel more extreme than your average 'difference of opinion', the approach would apply just as well to other less intense topics. So, what is to be done when someone has an opinion which is not only different to your own, but also has the potential to lead to unproductive – or even destructive – consequences if they maintain their opinion? Put simply, if they are willing to, have the difficult conversations and seek to understand.

I always try to establish certain fragments of information from a client who is going through or managing conflict, when determining the most relevant method of support.

I would find out about:

 The history of the relationship

 How important or sensitive they are about the topic

o How important or sensitive the other person may be about the topic

 What is to be gained by discussing it

 What the consequences could be if it is avoided, or brought up in an ineffectual way.

This type of background information is hugely important when deciding how to approach the conflict in a way that addresses the topic but does not cause further conflict or damage to the relationship. Each of the above elements would influence how I would support and equip the client in having an effective conversation.

There are, however, some do’s and don’ts that tend to be universally applicable if someone is open to a discussion:

1. Don’t attempt to shame someone out of their opinion – rather than leading to an informative discussion and greater understanding, the result is likely to be aggression or defensiveness… and an even more embedded opinion

2. Don’t start with persuasion – (see point 1). People generally do not enjoy being convinced about a topic they feel strongly about and will likely be less open to exploring a different perspective if they sense that is happening. Healthy debate – if appropriate at all - works best AFTER seeking to understand first.

3. DO ask questions without inference of criticism – remembering that something or someone has informed their view on the topic. There will be a reason.

• By asking questions, not only do you understand why they have formed that opinion, but it is also likely to lead them into greater self-reflection.

• This in turn can lead to either doubts to explore, or clarity on what they really think and why.

4. DO give them an opportunity to adjust their opinion – When we tell someone what or who they are as if their personality or behaviour is fixed, it can damage the trust in the relationship and lead to the other person withdrawing and becoming more entrenched in their opinion.

• Focussing the communication around behaviours, outcomes or issues rather than the person’s identity will enable them to explore their beliefs and adjust them without a sense of judgement.

5. Look for points of mutual agreement – Divisive language does not encourage positive change but rather it enforces and entrenches people.

• Whereas when you find common ground, it leaves the door open for developing the relationship, having open-hearted conversations and the potential for change.

Finally, remember to be mindful of the fact that everyone will have different experiences, backgrounds and beliefs – even those people that you truly care about will have different opinions to you on an aspect of life, work, parenting, relationships, communication or beliefs. Talking through these issues has the potential to strengthen and deepen a relationship, even if you do still disagree. Also, having productive and compassionate conversations around these different opinions may be the only opportunity some people will have to hear a different perspective and perhaps see things differently for themselves.

Though the conversation may not lead to positive change, there will still have been some benefits:

- You will have a greater understanding of their perspective

- It will make unity more likely than division

- You will feel a greater openness in the communication

- It can lead to future positive conversations

- You may learn something new about the topic too!

There is no getting round the fact that such conversations are likely to feel awkward at first, but they could be exactly what is needed for everyone involved. Remember that a helpful aim for such conversations is NOT to convince the individual to change their mind, but for each other to learn something new about the other person, and to approach them with curiosity rather than condemnation.

#leadwithcuriosity #leadwithkindness #timetotalk

When is a Manager NOT a Leader?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Thu, 10 Jun 2021 09:40:07 GMT

Tips on how to prevent a leader from avoiding issues or micromanaging

What is the difference between a manager who micromanages and a manager who avoids tackling tricky issues? Not that much really. Essentially, both management styles are probably lacking three things: knowledge, skills and confidence in themselves to lead their team effectively.

Why would a manager start micromanaging?

Often this is due to a lack of trust and confidence – either in themselves being able to manage well, or in their team being able to do their jobs well with management input. So, the micromanaging acts as validation for them and provides a sense of certainty. It will either validate that they are needed or that all the many things they are doing must mean that they are fulfilling their managerial role.

A manager who micromanages will often end up over-complicating a process and their team will sense a lack of trust in them. The manager may repeat the same rhetoric until it loses its purpose or provide more detail than is helpful. Micromanaging also tends to discourage open conversations around ideas and opportunities, and feedback will likely be one-sided.

Micromanaging can take the form of physically standing over someone while they work but it can also involve unsubstantiated criticism, preventing reasonable autonomous decision-making or having burdensome and unnecessary procedures and methods.

Yet, equipped with knowledge, skills and c onfidence, a manager would feel less of a need to control the actions of their team and validate their position.

Why would a manager choose to avoid issues?

Firstly , it may not be a conscious decision. Some people do genuinely feel that many issues resolve themselves, and while this may be true in the minority of cases, often issues are resolved due to a pro-active choice or action taken by individuals. Not just time itself.

Secondly , managers who avoid are often doing so due to fear or a lack of confidence in their ability to tackle the situation successfully – perhaps because they feel ill-equipped to do so. They may find tackling issues with specific members of their team difficult because of the particular communication style or personality of those individuals. Many managers may also wish to avoid doing anything which could have the potential to hurt or offend – though being equipped with advanced communication techniques can prevent this, and instead lead to positive and productive conversations.

A manager who avoids issues is likely to refrain from getting involved in a situation or decision unless compelled to – largely sticking to the ‘simpler’ people management tasks. In teams where a manager is avoiding tackling issues, you are likely to see: performance issues where little to no positive action is taken; disputes or frustration between individuals which is left to ‘resolve itself’; negative feedback being averted at all costs; and there are likely to be ambiguous expectations and boundaries.

Yet, equipped with knowledge, skills and confidence, a manager would feel more able to step in before issues escalate, be clear about what is expected and be comfortable in giving beneficial feedback.

Most managers that I come across do truly care about the individuals in their team. Many managers want to manage effectively but find it challenging to do so under the weight of responsibility, the pressure of time and not being equipped with the advanced communication and people skills necessary to deal with the daily needs and complexities of people management.

There is a quote from Peter Drucker, which says:

“Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.”

To me this suggests that leadership is not just about ‘checking the box’ of tasks to be done around management, but on applying the principle of ensuring that what you do as a leader is the right thing to do – for your people, your organisation and you.

Is there just ONE style of good management?

Another obstacle to effective management is the societal stereotype of what a manager should be like. A view that every team, department and organisation would require and benefit from the same type of person – a view which I personally and professionally would heartily disagree with.

And, just as I believe that it is important to not have a fixed view of what a leader looks or acts like, so too do I believe it is important to teach a leader to adapt to the different needs, styles and approaches of their team members too.

Rather than requiring specific approaches, personality types or standard of experience, instead I would advocate for a leader being equipped with a toolkit of techniques and aiming to operate in line with certain principles of leadership. To have a leader which would be able to effectively lead the specific people in their team, in that organisation.

These techniques could be applied then to the various – and often unique – scenarios that lands on the desk of someone who manages people. They would equip the people manager when dealing with conflict, performance issues, team dynamics, difficult decisions and giving feedback.

The principles would be around how to care for their team whilst also ensuring that they operate productively too. The three principles that I focused on in my ‘The People Manager’ course are: kindness, clarity and confidence .

Based on my experience as a workplace mediator and conflict coach if a leader is kind , then their people will feel supported and able to approach them with questions and concerns.

If a leader is clear in their communication, then expectations will be clear, conversations will be beneficial and assumptions or misunderstandings will be significantly reduced.

If a leader is confident , they will feel more able to trust their team and their own judgement; and their team will feel able to rely upon them for guidance.

When a leader is given the tools to adapt to their team members, to manage conflict effectively, and how to effectively apply the principles of being kind, clear and confident, then the risk of them resorting to micro-management or avoiding issues is significantly lessened.

So, if there are managers in your organisation who are stumbling in a few areas of people management, it may be worth identifying whether there are any gaps in their skills, knowledge or confidence. Once identified, productive action can then be taken to develop them as leaders and leave room for the possibility of them actually becoming pretty great at it.

So, in answer to my original question – When is a manager not a leader? – In my experience that would be when they are acting out of fear, uncertainty or unproductive self-validation, rather than being equipped with the skills, knowledge and confidence to do the right thing for their team, their organisation and them.

There are lots of training courses, coaching packages and leadership development tools out there which could be used to equip your people managers. If you are interested in ‘The People Manager: Leading with Kindness, Clarity and Confidence’ as an e-learning or live training course, then click HERE for more details. For more information on the other services that Mosaic Mediation provides to organisations, including mediation, conflict coaching, training and DISC profiling, then click HERE .

Emma Jenkings is a qualified mediator, conflict coach and trainer in communication skills, specialising in workplace disputes. She set up Mosaic Mediation in 2016 for the purpose of helping individuals and organisations have more peaceful, positive and productive relationships.

The Intentional Pause

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 23 Feb 2021 16:36:18 GMT

How to change habits to improve your communication skills

Pausing is a skill.

Pausing to reflect. Pausing to re-think the next step. Pausing to leave room.

As a mediator, I value it when people have the skills to know when to pause and how to utilise the pause. Pausing is not the same as inaction or laziness. Rather it is an intentional choice to not act ‘in automatic’.

I have an automatic car and I love it! When I became a parent, I realised how much benefit there is to having a hand free – to (safely and responsibly) pass drinks or [insert alternative here]; or to silently communicate with young passengers while on a hands-free phone call. It also made driving in slow traffic a lot less uncomfortable. When my automatic car went in for a service and I had to drive a ‘manual’ for the first time in a few years, I really noticed the difference. Particularly, in how much I had to do!

It is so easy to allow habits formed over years to influence our interactions with other people. Or simply to influence our automatic thought-process. Sometimes these instinctual responses may be helpful. At other times though, such responses have the ability to cause people to behave in a way that leads to unnecessary conflict, or exacerbated issues.

Something which learning to pause has the ability to prevent.

Let me count the ways…

1. Pausing to reflect:

Provides the opportunity to notice what is happening – internally and externally. What thought is driving our behaviour? Is that thought true and helpful, or an assumption and unproductive?

What is happening with the other person’s behaviour, tone of voice, words being used, gestures, etc.?

When individuals get caught up in the conversation cycle that seems to spiral rather than head in any productive direction, taking a moment within the conversation or at another time can provide clarity on what you really think and what you really want. It also gives you the opportunity to take a different, more neutral, perspective on maybe what the other person was intending to communicate with you.

2. Pausing to re-think the next step:

Provides the opportunity to behave intentionally, rather than automatically. That automatic response to raise our voice to match the other person’s, or to accuse rather than clarify, or to revert back into silence rather than speaking up. Pausing to think will put you in a better position to make wise decisions, as opposed to reactive decisions.

Whether in coaching, discussing DISC profiles, or in mediations, I encourage clients to reflect on those automatic behaviours and thought processes, and evaluate whether they are helpful. If they come to the conclusion – as tends to happen – that there are some things which are not serving them or leading to positive interactions, I get them to think through an alternative.

This is a difficult thing to embed though because it tends to be a change to a long-term habitual behaviour or way of thinking. So, here is where the PAUSE comes in to be a habit-breaker.

3. Pausing to leave room:

Provides the opportunity for revelation. It intrigues me how quickly conflict can escalate and I often wonder how much this is due to not leaving space for heightened emotions to settle and awkwardness. Yes, awkwardness. Awkward silence, in my experience, is when people tend to open up, to fill the silence. They begin sharing and reflecting, rather than simply responding.

This skill is particularly helpful if you are in a managerial role. If you really want your team to be self-reflective, to look at situations from different perspectives, and feel that you want to hear from them – that one-to-ones are NOT simply a ‘tick-box exercise’- then allowing for pauses in meetings is likely to encourage people to speak up. Humans like to fill a silence and it is amazing what comes out when they do.

Also, I want to reiterate that pausing indefinitely, or for an unnecessarily long period of time, is not the intention here. It is intentional pausing, so that it can be followed by considered, wise, intentional action.

We have just experienced a year of reacting to changes and often making decisions very quickly with little information. Some people have found a way to pause amongst it all, but if you have not felt like you have had the opportunity to pause recently, I encourage you to remember the benefits of pausing and invite you to find a way.

For more on how to clarity in challenging workplace situations, communication skills, or automatic behaviours or thought processes, feel free to email emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk for more information on coaching, team or management training, or conflict resolution tools. Click HERE to get in contact.

Resolutions that WORK and why other ones DON'T

Fri, 01 Jan 2021 16:36:06 GMT

New Year's resolutions and conflict resolution - similarities, differences and what makes for an effective resolution?

When the very much ‘at-home’ New Year’s Eve celebrations are over, you may have started to think about what next. What you want to commit to doing differently this year. Some people are put off from making resolutions – maybe because they feel reluctant to commit to a goal they may struggle to keep; perhaps because they prefer to make changes in their own times as opposed to when society says they should; or maybe because they can’t think of one…?

I sometimes make resolutions at the beginning of the year. Other years I don’t. What I have done the past couple of years is to have a phrase for the year – provides focus rather than committing to a specific activity. So, I resolve to remember that phrase when making decisions and choices throughout the year.

Conflict resolution is a little different to New Year’s resolutions but there are many shared principles:

Resolutions normally revolve around a positive intention, so why do people find them so difficult to keep to? I would suggest that it is often due to people not having enough clarity on point 2 (knowing what you want) or figuring out the necessary steps to point 3 (what needs to happen) and whether the goal is achievable. Also, it is rare for people to have someone they appoint to keep them accountable to their resolution.

What happens if you don’t have clarity on what you want?

Your resolution may be based around a goal that you don’t really care about. Therefore, will you have enough motivation to stick to it… probably not. Clarity comes from thinking, asking yourself challenging questions to examine your true motivation, talking it through with someone who can give helpful feedback and ask helpful questions.

What happens if you don’t figure out what needs to happen to achieve what you want?

Consistency with change can feel just too challenging to keep up with – especially if obstructions or difficulties come up. Or, it becomes apparent that the target was just a bit unrealistic – at this time or due to your mindset or situation.

Many people enter the mediation process with skepticism about the fact that for workplace mediation, (unless it is a situation which requires a legal settlement agreement document to be drawn up afterwards) if people arrive at agreeing on actions going forward, it is not enforced. The whole situation is built on trust that people stick to what they resolved to do.

So what makes it possible for resolutions around conflict resolution to stick more than a typical New Year’s resolution? Because there is no rush to get to point 4. Time and energy is spent on examining, reflecting and getting clarity on all four steps. Here is how:

1. The mediator will get the participants to think through what has happened and what isn’t working. Time is spent ensuring each person has clarity about their contribution to the situation and any potential assumptions or misunderstandings that may have occurred.

2. Questions are asked and rapport is built between the mediator and participants (largely possible due to the mediator’s rapport-building skills and also the underlying principles of the mediation process being completely neutral, without prejudice and confidential). The rapport and sensitive questioning helps the participants reflect on what outcome they want from the mediation and the situation in the long-term.

3. The mediator then helps the participants pin down what needs to happen to achieve these outcomes, sometimes referred to as ‘reality-checking’:

a. Does it work for everyone involved?

b. What timeline for achieving various elements is achievable?

c. Are those actions possible within the organisation’s procedures or way of working?

d. If some of the points are ‘intentions’ rather than ‘actions’ is there anything that needs to be done/said/thought through before setting those intentions?

4. ONLY THEN… do the participants resolve to keep to what they have all agreed to in the document. Sometimes this involves the act of signing the document. Previously this could include the act of ‘shaking on it’.

What about accountability? Around 4-6 weeks later, the mediator will then also check in with the participants at various points to ensure everything is happening as agreed. If not, why not? What needs to be done to get back on track?

A lot gets achieved in the day of the mediation session but all mediators recognise that for long-term relationship challenges or behavioural/mindset patterns things take time for new ways of working, thinking and behaving to embed themselves. Often, mediations are enough to set people on a more positive way of interacting or working through a challenge. Sometimes, value is gained from further training (for the individual, team or organisation) or to follow it with one-to-one coaching with one or all of the mediation participants.

This is why the mediation process works and can lead to long-lasting positive change. Mediation provides: clarity, reflection, reality-checking and accountability. Having these elements is why mediation resolutions resolution are more likely to stick, and why alternative conflict resolution is more likely to help people have more positive, peaceful and productive working relationships – in the short-term and the long-term.

For more information on the process or benefits of workplace and employment CLICK HERE . For more information on coaching CLICK HERE . This article was written by Emma Jenkings, qualified workplace and employment mediator, and trained conflict coach. To get in touch, get in contact by emailing enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk or go to the Contact page HERE .

When Does it Stop Being ‘Funny’?

Wed, 09 Dec 2020 17:12:09 GMT

Workplace banter or workplace bullying?

It is the question that gets asked in workplaces across the country and I often get asked this as a mediator and conflict coach:

“What constitutes acceptable workplace banter and when does it stop being ‘just a laugh’?”

The ‘b’ word comes up regularly as the pre-cursor that leads to mediation. These are the most common mediation situations where bullying is mentioned:

· In the course of the day, it becomes apparent that an objective person might reasonably consider the behaviour to be bullying.

· There is a genuine case where it seems that workplace banter went too far, despite having innocent intentions.

· A catalogue of misunderstandings led to a diagnosis by someone that they were being bullied, and the mediation bring clarity that perhaps that was not the case.

Humour, positive energy and fun are definitely attributes you would find in a happy and productive working environment. So, when does the humour cross the line from being ‘harmless banter’ to being destructive bullying behaviour?

(NOTE: I will use the keywords ‘aware’ and ‘notice’ a lot going forward...)

Here are some things to be AWARE of when enjoying a laugh with colleagues:

1. Do you notice anyone go quiet or look away? That could indicate discomfort, embarrassment, or disagreement with what has just been said.

2. Is the comment/joke being said regularly and do you notice whether it is getting the same reaction or has that changed?

3. Does the comment/joke relate to a sensitive topic, such as race, religion, gender, mental health or disability?

a. If so, are you absolutely sure that the comment/joke is not causing offence to anyone involved in the conversation, or overhearing the conversation?

b. Does the comment/joke reflect well on you or your organisation?

c. Are you aware of the ramifications if someone believes the comment/joke constitutes bullying or discrimination?

Writing this article, I am so aware of the discussions I have had over the years with clients feeling like they ‘can’t say anything anymore’ for fear of causing offence. I know that it is extremely difficult to find that balance between being yourself in the workplace and having fun, and not knowing when you might cross the line.

There are many genuine people out there who have no intention of causing offense or hurting their colleagues feelings and are simply UNaware. There are also people who intend to belittle others through seemingly minor behaviours or comments, so how do you differentiate yourself from them ?

The key really is to take notice of what is happening around you. Notice people’s reactions to what is being joked about – not just whether they laughed or not, but did the laughter feel genuine or instinctive? What did they do next?

Be aware of the type of communication style the people around you have and what kind of relationship or history you have with them, as that is highly likely to affect their perceptions of your intentions and meaning behind the words or behaviour.

Stephen M.R. Covey said that ‘We judge ourselves by our intentions and others by their behaviour’.

It is often in the small things that the relationship challenges start – noticing how people interact with you in comparison to other people, or how included they are. (Yes, adults are greatly impacted by that sense of inclusion or exclusion in the workplace!) So, if your intentions are innocent, does your behaviour make that clear?

In the year of 2020, never has technology seemed so important and integral to how we communicate with colleagues. The huge uptake in videocalls have led to another form of behaviour to learn and understand. And, not seeing people regularly may make it even more difficult to clarify your intentions. So, it may seem either funny at first or totally innocent to…

· Keep your screen off during videocalls – But what is that action communicating to the other person? Does it make them feel respected or vulnerable?

· Not thinking through what you are sending in emails or messages – Will they be fully aware of the intended tone or intention of the message?

· Leave people out of correspondence or change meeting times without informing them – What does this communicate to them? What is the impact on them or their reputation? How will this impact the necessary trust required for a productive and positive working relationship?

Again, I am not trying to be the ‘fun police’ here. Rather, my intention is to make people see what is happening before it leads to unnecessary conflict – to prevent misunderstandings and protect relationships.

The key is to NOTICE what is happening within your relationship with the other person and how they response. To be AWARE of the type of relationship you have with your colleagues. ‘Harmless banter’ only remains ‘harmless’ if everyone involved or around believes it to be harmless and is sure of the intention behind it.

Emma Jenkings is an accredited workplace and employment mediator and trained conflict coach. Through mediation, coaching, advisory services and training, Emma enables organisations and individuals become more effective at managing conflict and developing more positive, peaceful and productive working relationships. For more information on the services Emma offers, click HERE .

Getting Better at the 'People Stuff'

Thu, 15 Oct 2020 15:53:39 GMT

A guide to the benefits and the process of conflict coaching

A very well-liked manager was talking to me about the support she provides her staff. Support that clearly extends beyond her job description! It was clear that she saw potential in people that others had not realised, and she wanted to help them achieve that through encouragement, praise and, sometimes, challenge. The results were clear – she was respected and listened to, and her people became more confident in their work roles, their personal lives, and relationships. We discussed that the vast contribution towards this positive result was the focussed, one-to-one coaching that she regularly did with them – though it was not formally described as such.

Coaching is a conversation between individuals, where one person inspires reflection and clarity in the other. It has become an especially popular profession in the last few years. The ‘not-quite-requiring-counselling’ side of people are drawn to those who can help them gain clarity on various elements of their lives: career change, money, business development, life purpose, confidence, relationships or communication.

Conflict coaching encompasses the last three: confidence, relationships, and communication . As I said to one client the other day, “Essentially as a ‘conflict coach’ I teach people how to talk to each other effectively” . I say ‘effectively’ because us complicated beings often find it difficult to get people to listen to us, understand us or not be offended by what we say.

I do not teach people how to be better at performing tasks, nor do I give advice on matters which I am not a specialist in. That would not benefit their lives, nor my professional reputation. In fact, advice does not really come into it.

Conflict coaching increases:

- Confidence – Many people either rush into delicate conversations or avoid them, or are surprised by the outcome of them, because they are unsure on the most effective approach. Once they are given these tools, they are more confident at having difficult, but essential, conversations – and doing them well!

- Relationship skills – Issues in relationships often come down to concerns over trust, communication or understanding the other person. Once these foundations are strengthened, it overflows into other areas of the relationship.

- Communication skills – When there are communication challenges between people it is often due to: having different ways of working or communicating, listening skills not being in place, or unresolved issues impacting present interactions.

As an accredited workplace mediator, I was already trained in having conversations with people to facilitate understanding, feedback, and reflection. My input encourages individuals to move forward in a positive direction, once they have the clarity to know what they need and what is possible to achieve.

A coach’s purpose is not to judge and direct them towards their own idea of a ‘good outcome’. Great coaches ask pertinent questions that allow for self-reflection and they listen. A great coach is someone’s personal cheerleader and accountability provider.

So, who would benefit from conflict coaching? Quite simply… Anyone who wants to get better at communicating! More specifically, the individuals who often benefit from conflict coaching are those in managerial or customer-facing roles. Senior management tend to find it helpful to have someone from outside their organisation with whom they can be completely open and honest with about the communication or relationship challenges they are having at work or home. Coaching is completely confidential, so there is no concern that the information may get back to someone higher up in the organisation or that it might impact their professional reputation.

The hardest part of most people’s job (or life!) is figuring out the ‘people’ bit. Wanting a conflict coach goes hand-in-hand with wanting to develop and grow as an individual. Most people who want to do conflict coaching are actually pretty effective in their role. They may also have great relationships or use effective methods of communication with many people in their personal or working life. However, there may be one or two people that they find it challenging to have positive interactions with. Or maybe they struggle to tackle difficult conversations – especially when they are not giving ‘good news’ or are providing critical feedback.

Most conflict coaches have a background in resolving conflict or disputes, and so they will be able to use that experience, their processes to getting to a solution, and their ‘toolkit’ to understand what might be blocking someone from communicating effectively. It may be that some coaching on ‘assertive communication’ would be beneficial, or maybe – insert, almost always! – a greater level of self-awareness would improve how they perceive their own behaviours, and others too.

Why do people become coaches? It is SO rewarding to see people see themselves and others in a new way. To see people’s relationships flourish – especially those that were experiencing real challenges. It is incredibly purposeful to watch someone’s confidence increase, and to see their communication skills mature and develop.

If you would like to know any more about coaching, conflict resolution or training for you or for others in your organisation, please email enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk or use the Contact page.

When they tell you there's tissue stuck to your shoe...

Mon, 14 Sep 2020 15:40:25 GMT

Feedback at it's best - at work or in your personal life.

Why has there been so much research, training and writing done on what is typically a part of every workplace?

One-to-one’s, annual reviews, target setting, performance reviews… Why is so much time invested on learning about feedback, when feedback is essentially communicating relevant information to another person, based on your observations? It doesn’t sound difficult. You observe something and pass that observation on.

So, why is this topic revisited so often?

Why is this a skill that team leaders, directors, spouses and teachers continue to fine-tune? Because...

“Feedback without thought is feedback with friction!” - Emma Jenkings

Positive feedback is a topic that is discussed less. Yes, this practice of encouragement and praise will always benefit from focus and re-evaluation, and it can be a challenge for some people to offer positive feedback. So, it should not be assumed that positive feedback doesn’t require attention or learning.

However, positive feedback tends not to be actively avoided. Generally, when you give positive feedback, the response by the person on the receiving end of it is going to be very favourable. So, positive feedback is pretty much an ‘easy win’ for relationships - whether they are friends, family or co-workers. There’s very little risk of issues arising from it.

Whereas when there is a need to give feedback that contains an element of criticism, challenge or that highlights a ‘skill gap’, people tend to be much less willing to be the bringer of ‘bad news’.

And, maybe that’s why people avoid it…? Because, people view feedback as a wholly negative action.

Critical feedback often gets a bad reputation. Instinctively, people get defensive when they are being told that they didn’t do something well, or they are surprised with criticism, when they expected praise. If you thought that the act of giving critical feedback has no upside, why would you want to do it?!

If you expect that people won’t take it well. Though, when feedback is reserved for annual reviews, or when the balance of praise and challenge falls heavily on the latter side, I can see why it’s not received well.

Yet, I also see the unfortunate results of feedback NOT being given.

Sometimes, managers avoid feedback because they aren’t sure whether it’s worth doing - if there is a possibility that they might get a bad reaction, or they hope that the issue will resolve itself. For many it may feel like feedback can be the trigger for conflict and issues, rather than something which has the potential to prevent future conflict.

When this happens, people’s blind spots remain unnoticed and errors keep happening. I know of situations where one manager (who ignored mistakes and only praised) leaves, and the next manager provides a more balanced approach – this new manager will naturally look like the ‘bad cop’ in comparison, whether their feedback is accurate or not.

Feedback done well, however, is helpful!

What does feedback done well look like?

This is the ideal scenario in a workplace:

· When everyone involved in a situation understands their contribution and is encouraged to improve for next time.

· When a workplace culture inspires regular, informal feedback that demonstrates care and inspires self-development.

· One where there isn’t a focus on blaming, naming and shaming.

· One where there is a balance between praise and critical feedback.

“Mistakes should be examined, learned from, and discarded; not dwelled upon and stored.” – Tim Fargo

So, how can you determine whether to provide feedback on something or not?

A very popular acronym to help with deciding on this is ‘T.H.I.N.K.’ So, is what you are going to share:

· True

· Helpful

· Inspiring

· Necessary

· Kind

In preparation for a mediation, I reassure participants who are concerned that they may fall into unhelpful communication habits during the day, that they can run things they want to say passed me first. It’s amazing how much a little thought, and the outside perspective from someone who can help them frame their words and approach, can improve the positivity and productivity of a conversation.

“Criticism, like rain, should be gentle enough to nourish a man’s growth without destroying his roots.” – Frank A. Clark

In moments of heightened emotions, it’s easy to remove the ‘grace filter’ from our communication. To just ‘say it like it is’. However, it is worth noting that feedback without thought is feedback with friction! Using the above acronym, you can give feedback in a way that is honest and gracious.

TIP: People often need a little heads up about feedback. Sometimes – particularly in personal relationships – it may also be helpful to get their assent to you giving them feedback. (Even if you have followed the ‘T.H.I.N.K.’ acronym, that individual or that relationship may not be in the necessary ‘space’ to receive feedback from you at that time.)

I use the ‘Johari Window’ (Luft & Ingham, 1955) as an illustration during my mediations for how the session can be used for everyone’s benefit. And also to demonstrate that neither we, nor others, are all aware of the same aspects of our personality or behaviour. There are 4 parts to this window: the Public part – that is known to us and others; the Private – which is only known to us; the Blindspot – which is only known to others; and, there is the Unknown part of us – that no one is aware of.

However, the aspects of each person which is currently contained in the Private, Blindspot or Unknown area can become ‘public’:

· Those things which are private can be disclosed to others – rather than assuming they already know.

· Those things which are unknown can be revealed through coaching – encouraging self-reflection, questioning and gentle challenge.

· Those elements of our personality which are blind spots can be realised through… FEEDBACK.

And, that is why feedback done well is a ‘gift’. Feedback done well is the equivalent of someone telling you privately that you have toilet roll stuck to your shoe. The equivalent to a neighbour reminding you that it is ‘bin day’ as they are passing (the black one, not the green one!).

I wonder whether the approach to giving feedback would be different if they, instead, saw feedback as a gift – as having the potential to transform a person’s perspective, to level up their self-awareness, to benefit their relationships, to remove another blind spot and open up the conversation for continual improvement and self-development .

Feedback takes away the assumption that ‘they already know’. It has the power to reveal something about them that they had no idea about. Something, which had it remained ‘unknown’, could have led to irreparable damage to their reputation, relationships, or wellbeing.

So if you ‘T.H.I.N.K’ and attempt to:

· Recognise and acknowledge positive action and achievements

· Be gracious about mistakes or areas of improvement

· Offer specific solutions or suggestions

· Use positive assertive communication

· Inspire a culture where there is regular, balanced feedback.

…It’s much more likely that your feedback will be received graciously too!

For more information on 1:1 Conflict Resolution & Assertiveness Coaching, or Workplace Mediation, please click HERE . To book a ‘Power Hour’ session with Emma Jenkings, click HERE . Make sure you sign up for the Mosaic Mediation newsletter to receive updates, articles and information on the resources constantly being updated for individuals and companies.

What’s Involved in Workplace Mediation?

Sun, 24 May 2020 17:56:52 GMT

Answering the focal question: What happens in a workplace and employment mediation process?

After, the initial response to finding out I am a mediator (“Oh, how fascinating! You must have seen some interesting situations!”) …there tend to be 4 main questions people have when they are deciding whether to use workplace and employment mediation to resolve a situation in their organisation:

What’s involved in a mediation? How long does mediation take? What does mediation cost? Does workplace and employment mediation actually work?

I’ll address each of these concerns:

a) What’s involved?

Normally this is how a mediation comes about… There are 2 or more people at odds with each other in a company. This could include: an argument between colleagues; a difficult relationship between a manager and an employee; the start of a grievance/disciplinary procedure; bullying and harassment allegations; or figuring out the return-to-work transition.

The organisation is often very aware of the immense cost, company time and stress that is often involved in legal procedures (especially if it came to the employment tribunal). They also often want to see if mediation can do anything to improve the relationships or resolve the issues; so that the situation remains as positive as possible.

The team leader, HR lead, a director or the CEO will then contact me to understand more about mediation. In so many words, this is how I tend to describe it: “Mediation is a way of helping individuals get the chance to be heard and to hear another perspective. I facilitate a conversation between them so that they each come away having hopefully learnt something new about themselves, the other person, and the situation. I then help them think through potential options to move the situation positively forward, and then come to an agreement that everyone is happy with.”

The process itself:

Before the mediation , I speak to each person who will be there to get their perspective and get them prepared for the day. Often, there is a sense of people both feeling misunderstood and wanting to understand WHY someone behaved they way they did.

We either book a date for online mediation , or we book a date and venue that’s appropriate for face-to-face mediation .

During the day , I tend to do a mixture of joint conversations with everyone and private conversations. I only divulge information from those conversations if: the person has specifically agreed to it being shared AND I think it would be helpful to do so.

Mediation is confidential (so if necessary, only those involved in the different discussions will know what was said). Mediation is ‘without prejudice’ (so nothing said can be used as evidence in a legal proceeding). Mediation is also voluntary (so if one person isn’t up for it, it doesn’t happen, and an individual can leave at any time). It also doesn’t affect anyone’s legal rights (so, if for whatever reason it doesn’t help a situation, people are not forfeiting anything by agreeing to mediate).

As the mediator, I am totally neutral and do not give legal advice . So, any agreement that the individuals come to is what THEY want. My role is to facilitate the session by asking questions, getting individuals to reflect and see things from different angles and I encourage them to engage with the process – knowing from experience that the more they do, the better the outcome!

If we reach the point of agreement, the individuals can decide who sees it – if anyone else at all – and all the wording is theirs. I just make sure that the mediation agreement makes sense and any points of action actually can be ‘actioned’ – both practically and within legal/company guidelines.

I then do a follow-up call 6-8 weeks later to make sure everything is going smoothly, or if any other support is required – such as 1:1 coaching, training, etc.

b) How long does mediation take?

Generally, for workplace and employment mediation, it is done over the course of a working day. (Sometimes it is over by mid-afternoon.) With online mediation, the time can be less due to no travel time allowances. (Online mediation for small business mediation tends to be around 1-3 hours – so can be done outside ‘regular working hours’.)

c) What does mediation cost?

For workplace and employment mediation, Mosaic Mediation charges a fee that is inclusive of the pre-mediation calls, the mediation and the catch-up calls. The organisation covers the mediation fee for workplace mediation. (For small business mediation, there is an hourly rate.) There is also a reduced rate for online mediations. Click here for our updated fees.

d) Does workplace and employment mediation actually work?

In short, yes. Not always… but for the greater majority of mediations (the average for most mediation organisations is between 75-85% settlement rate) , individuals are able to reach the point of agreement. For me, the true sign of ‘success’ is also hearing the positive changes that have occurred since the mediation, during my follow-up calls.

Even if a mediation does not reach the point of agreement, I would argue that the process itself is so effective at providing clarity and new perspectives, that it has the potential to still improve a situation.

This is why I remain passionate about the benefits of mediation. Legal procedures have their place in the organisations. Mediation is an alternative that has so many emotional, cost and time advantages. It is extraordinary what positive transformations can be achieved over the course of a day, compared to the months (or years) that legal procedures can take.

Book a call to discuss any situation involving members of your team or organisation that is causing you stress, worry or concern. It is likely that mediation can help.

Find out more about the different services, Mosaic Mediation can offer here . Or, contact enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

What Do You Expect Of Me?

Wed, 01 Apr 2020 13:36:01 GMT

How to support your employees and your business by adjusting expectations during 'out of the ordinary' times.

What’s going on with your employees at home?

One thing that I have noticed a lot online are the many discussions and requests for advice on balancing working from home and having children at home when all the adults are working. While there used to be an assumption – sometimes justifiable but often not – that those working from home were doing anything but ‘work’ or the bare minimum that they could get away with.

In this current situation where COVID-19 has forced much of the country’s workforce in to being ‘homeworkers’, what I am noticing is that most people are trying to work and struggling with figuring how to – especially when they are in a caring capacity for others who are also at home with them.

Unless workers are considered ‘essential key workers’, there is no childcare available – not even those wonderful grandparents can help now if they don't live in the same place! Therefore, many parents or carers are parenting whilst working. Something which is even more of a challenge for those who are new to working from home or had previously made use of their child’s time in nursery or school to get their work done. So, this situation is new and 'untrod'. Many are desperate to be seen to be conscientious – or genuinely valuing the supply of work – due to the uncertainty of whether this workload or employment will continue.

So what are doing to ensure the new system of ‘home working’ really does work effectively for your business and your employees?

Now, clearly this is also a time when many businesses are also dealing with the pressure of having less resources, people, finances and certainty potentially too. So, it would maybe seem unreasonable to expect employers to also carry the burden of an employee’s home life - which to a certain extent, I agree with. However, in my experience facilitating workplace mediations, conflict at home and conflict at work do not stay in their separate 'boxes', rather any conflict or stress will impact every area of life. So … if you have the opportunity to prevent difficulties from negatively affecting your employee, it will likely benefit your business by default.

Here are some of the potential conflicts I see happening if this situation is not managed effectively:

· Mistakes being made due to stress, tiredness or distraction – which leads to further stress and impact on business.

· Conflict and tension occurring between partners regarding: who is responsible for childcare; who is responsible for household duties; whether one partner has the ‘right’ to work more than the other, etc.

· Stress of working amongst the chaos of a worldwide pandemic and the natural worries that come with coping with that situation.

· Stress and anxiety due to the uncertainty of their job security – does the person with the most ‘secure’ job get priority for working over childcare responsibility?

· Tiredness from managing job, household and childcare (with the potential additional responsibility of overseeing home learning) all at the same time.

· Stress and worry if one of their household’s earning has reduced or stopped.

…to name a few!

All of the above, if not managed, will impact both the employee’s home life, and their work productivity and effectiveness.

There is no one-size fits all solution for the above situations, however, there are some things that can be done to get ahead of issues and prevent unnecessary difficulty or conflict:

1. Provide as much ‘certainty’ as possible.

When individuals don’t feel ‘safe’ in their jobs it may push them to excel but it is also highly likely to cause inner panic, which will infiltrate their thoughts; thus becoming a distraction and added pressure whilst working. If there is anything you can communicate to your employees that they can 'hold onto' during this time where so much has changed and may continue to change, may alleviate some of the panic. Which, in turn, will help your employees feel settled and able to be more productive.

2. Speak to each employee or get a ‘general consensus’ on what changes may be helpful.

It’s likely that though each employee’s household will be different in some ways, many of the same concerns will be occurring in each household. Finding out from them what might be hindering their productivity, or what would help support them in this new way of working, will hopefully provide appropriate options for supporting both your business and your employees. Often it is difficult to know how to support, even if you want to. Your employees may have already thought of the perfect solution!

3. Recognise that this is not ‘carrying on as normal’ situation – even if the transition to home-working seemed relatively simple and undisruptive. This is not a ‘normal’ situation. Therefore, the way we think about and manage our expectations of ourselves and others has to take this into account if the objective is to be mindful of BOTH the business and the employee’s needs.

4. Communicate your expectations.

There WILL be discussions (possibly heated ones) in many households right now regarding which person should have the responsibility of childcare whilst the other one works. Discussions, also, about whose job should take ‘priority’ - especially so if they are used to working hours set by their employer. Many in the latter situation may be under the assumption/understanding that they should carry on as normal. If your expectations are NOT that they are to do this, saying so expressly could make a huge difference to households across the country - whether it be changing expected working hours, limiting work hours, adjusting expectations of complete focus during working hours, etc.

You may not be able to see any alternative options to what you are currently doing if your business is to survive. And, it is for everyone’s benefit that your business survives this situation. However, I would encourage you to go through the above four suggestions so that you have the knowledge that equips you to both: be realistic about your expectations of your employees and be aware of any considerations that could be taken into account when setting expectations. 'Out of the ordinary' times call for 'out of the ordinary' expectations.

It may be that you are having difficulties knowing how to communicate with your employees and this situation has aggravated the problem. If so, Mosaic Mediation offers online mediation services for small and large organisations to resolve all types of disputes. We can also provide DISC assessments for your employees so they can understand themselves better and become more effective communicators with other individuals. Get in touch to find out more about our services. Email: emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or go to the 'Contact' page on the website.

Change - why, what and how

Thu, 02 Jan 2020 16:26:05 GMT

Change is an interesting concept.

This is the time of year when many people will be making changes – perhaps a small change as part of a bigger vision, or even a powerful life-altering change. Significant life changes can be scary and often feel overwhelming but sometimes the trickiest changes are the small ones – not in terms of doing it for the first time, but because it involves changing a habit; a pattern of thought or behaviour (or both!).

I am currently coming to the end of an online course on CBT (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy) – for my own knowledge and development – and what seems apparent from the principles and thought concepts behind CBT, is that it will often require mindful and repeated thought management and actions to change long-standing thought patterns and behaviours in the long-term .

I have always found relationships between people to be quite fascinating. The patterns different people have developed within that relationship often emerge quite quickly during an interaction. Watching siblings interact as adults often subtly – or quite obviously – portrays how they interacted as children and what ‘roles’ each sibling took.

People tend to get into patterns of relating with anyone who they meet regularly - in their social and personal life, or their work life. Sometimes these patterns are positive and enable a relationship to deepen and flourish. Whereas, at times these patterns can unwittingly do damage to a relationship.

When I am able to facilitate a conversation through mediation, where such patterns and behaviours come to light during the discussion, it gives room for reflection. Reflection over what contribution they may have had to the difficulties within their relationship; and, also reflection over what changes can be made to their current pattern of relating to improve the situation. Depending on the particular scenario, such changes may be to communicate more, or to communicate in a different way. Or, there may be a mutual decision that the best change is for one person to leave the organisation.

Once the ideas for the future are worked over, clarified and agreed, it would be a mistake to assume the situation is now tied up with a nice neat bow. I then have to make sure each person is aware that they are agreeing to change a pattern of behaviour – a pattern which is likely to change irrevocably overnight. In other words, the work is not finished when they leave the room. It is likely that when changes are made, at times people are will at times revert back to the pattern that they are used to. For example, if their thought pattern was to previously distrust whatever the other person said, it will take time for that not to be their immediate response.

Change is an interesting concept, largely because I think true and lasting change does not happen when the focus is solely on the change itself. Yet, it is often the main area of focus for people, whether they are trying to make a change for themselves or if they want other people to make a certain change.

For true change to happen I have come to the belief that you need 3 things: a reason (why), some reflection (what) and a plan (how).

1. A reason

To be fully aware of the ‘why’ for the change – why it’s worth doing and what value it will bring.

2. Reflection

To have a clear perspective on the current situation – as if your perspective is biased or inaccurate, you may not understand what actually needs to change.
To also be fully aware of your own contribution to the current situation.

3. A plan

Very clear and achievable steps to making the change. Ambiguous or unrealistic goals make change harder to measure and makes the process unnecessarily more challenging than it already is.

“The first step toward change is awareness. The second step is acceptance.” Nathaniel Branden

People also need to recognise that this pattern or ‘habit’ may take multiple attempts to alter, and when someone else is attempting to make changes, it will also be beneficial to understand that it may take time – and probably some ‘slip-ups’ during the transition stage – for those changes to take effect in the long-term. When mistakes do happen, reminding yourself of the three elements above - the why, what and how - also serve to help get you back on track.

To conclude, true changes in relationships and behaviours are achievable - but they will probably take time. So, if you are making changes this year, remember to be gracious to yourself if it’s harder than expected. If, on the other hand, you want to change your patterns of relating to someone and want the relationship to improve , you will most definitely require a bit of grace to see you through the transition stage. Change is often hard and imperfect but if you have a clear reason, you have reflected on the situation and have a plan, it will most likely be worth it.

You can contact emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk for more information on conflict resolution or communication and conflict prevention training.

What's Your 'Starting Point'?

Wed, 09 Oct 2019 12:44:26 GMT

We hear all the time that everyone is different and has a different story. A different upbringing, childhood, insecurities, relationship histories, communication style and work experiences. However, during a disagreement or moment of strong emotion, we tend to forget this.

Instead of making allowances for these differences, we can become subconsciously confused or unsettled by people behaving or communicating differently to how we would; or we make assumptions about what they are thinking or feeling - because that is how we would think or feel in that situation.

The reality is that everyone is influenced by their ‘starting point’ – a ‘this-is-where-I-am-coming-from’. In particular:

the way people were taught how to communicate
how they experienced conflict and conflict resolution (if, in fact, there was conflict resolution)

For example, someone who was heavily criticised or bullied in childhood may find constructive criticism to be a painful trigger for feelings of unworthiness or failure. Whereas another person, who feels secure in themselves and has had positive experiences of feedback and accountability within relationships, may see constructive criticism as necessary and a helpful tool in development.

Primary & Secondary Emotions

Often when conflict begins, it ignites over an issue which touches a nerve with someone. However, the primary emotion that was triggered by an event is rapidly overcome by another, less ‘vulnerable’ emotion. Maybe, an individual feels that they are being excluded from an ‘inside joke’ shared amongst their colleagues. The first feelings the individual in this example experiences are probably sadness and rejection, but this is quickly overshadowed by anger and resentment. Unfortunately, it is only these secondary emotions that are being communicated. So now the other individual/s are only responding to the secondary emotional response (anger), not being aware of the primary emotion (sadness).

Connection

Human beings crave connection, and the feeling of connection often comes when it feels like another person ‘gets’ them. Similarly, if it feels like someone doesn’t seem to understand them, or maybe has judged them inaccurately, there is a feeling of disconnection.

When we don’t actually communicate where we are coming from, but instead communicate our secondary ‘safer’ emotion, it follows then that people won’t understand – people are not mind-readers ! And, if we aren’t aware of the core feeling being triggered it is even less likely that anyone else will realise what the core issue is.

Through being a DISC practitioner I find it fascinating to see an individual have more clarity on how they communicate, relate and think about situations - and how that might be different to other people they are around. This increased self-awareness and 'others-awareness' helps them see how interactions can be approached more effectively.

Unrealised interests

Frequently when I begin the mediation process, the people involved will tell me what they think led to needing mediation. Often, they will talk about the other person’s performance at work or general behaviour in the workplace.

What becomes apparent - both during my initial conversations and on the day of mediation - are the deeper feelings that had been evoked by something else. These feelings are often related to feeling disrespected, left out, misunderstood or hurt but it is rare for people to express such feelings to a work colleague. It is also clear to me how frequently external factors contribute to conflict occurring in the workplace – such as a person’s financial situation, family or marital relationship issues, health concerns, etc.

The 'Catch-22'

So, why does it sometimes take mediation for people to find resolution in these situations? Well, it seems to me that though people want connection, their experiences or assumptions (based on their 'starting point') cause mistrust, and then they struggle to be completely open.

This becomes a ‘catch-22’ scenario because they will not understand your starting point - your 'interests', your primary feelings about the issues, and what you really think. Connection is only found when you allow yourself to be a bit vulnerable and honest about your feelings and needs – avoiding the core issue or feelings makes connection or resolution almost impossible.

Here are 5 ways to reduce the likelihood of unnecessary conflict:

1. Challenge assumptions

So often we attribute characteristics, intentions or feelings to people when we don’t know them that well, we cannot read their minds and we don’t know how they truly feel - we do not understand their starting point.

Most people find it extremely frustrating when others make assumptions about them. Realise this will equally be true if you make assumptions about them , so don’t assume you already know their ‘starting point’. Challenge thoughts you have about them or the situation if they are not objective or factual.

2. Seek to understand

Recognise that you will only resolve things if you first learn where they might be coming from. The only way to get that information is to ask questions…

Are there any external stressors affecting their behaviour? Could there be something you did which contributed to how they feel and how the situation spiraled? Is the emotion you are witnessing, the primary or secondary emotion?

Asking questions not only helps communicate that you are interested (which tends to decrease defensiveness), but it also provides clarity on why someone may have reacted as they did – which, in turn, will widen your perspective and impact how you respond.

3. Be aware of your ‘starting point’

If you know where you’re coming from, you’re better equipped to communicate that to other people. How has your background, experiences, relationship history, culture, or communication style influenced how you see the situation or approach an interaction?

Some might call this your 'frame of reference '. In NLP terms, you may call it your 'map of the world'.

Understanding what behaviours or situations may act as a trigger for you will also give you a wider perspective on the situation. If that trigger causes you to act disproportionately to the event, it would surely improve your relationships if you acknowledge how your actions may have contributed to the current situation.

4. Educate with context

You can’t expect someone to behave as you would want, nor to be sensitive about certain subjects if you haven’t made them aware of what is specifically helpful or hurtful to you.

If you realise that you may have reacted in anger/frustration, but your primary emotion was hurt/sadness, then acknowledge that the other person can only respond to the emotion they have witnessed . They can only respond appropriately to the deeper emotion if they are made aware of it.

If it is appropriate, I often encourage individuals during mediation to talk about their story – workwise or personal – if they think that the other person has made inaccurate judgments about them. This often brings insight into a situation and can be impactful to both parties.

5. Acknowledge the importance of trust

If there is difficulty communicating or working with someone, it is likely that there is an issue of low trust within that relationship. Think about where the trust either has not yet been formed or has been damaged. What actions, words or behaviours will help to build trust in that area?

For example, if someone has little trust that you will keep the discussion private, how can you reassure them that they can speak freely without concern that what they say will be shared with others?

The point of acknowledging 'the starting point'

Communication is difficult , even with those who know us well and have learned to live with our quirks and triggers. If you continually try to interact with people who have different backgrounds, communication styles, quirks and triggers - and learn how to be self-aware and curious about their starting point - then you are much more likely to prevent unnecessary conflict and have more enjoyable working relationships.

Emma Jenkings is a conflict resolution specialist - supporting organisations with training and mediation, and equipping individuals to communicate more confidently and clearly through coaching and DISC assessments. You can email emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in touch via the website: www.mosaicmediation.co.uk/contact/ .

Taking a Step Forward or Backward?

Wed, 20 Mar 2019 11:56:53 GMT

Are you a ‘people-watcher’? Not in the stalker kind of way, but in the ‘fascinated by human interaction around you’ type of people-watching. That’s me - I can’t help but be intrigued by people and wondering what they are talking about or what their history might be. Normally what catches my attention is a sudden change in someone’s voice or body language in response to what the other person says or does. Sometimes the change is meaningless but often it reflects a desire to create distance or draw closer to the other person.

‘The relationship cha-cha’

Communication is so important because it has the potential to either strengthen or damage relationships. Your words or actions can progress your relationship forwards but also bring it backwards – the latter of which will likely lead to distance and conflict within the relationship. It may be easier to think about the progression of a relationship in terms of ‘steps’:

It is virtually impossible to have flawless communication with another person, however if you have had more ‘steps’ forwards than backwards then your relationship is probably quite strong and healthy. Relationship progression may involve one step at a time of positive/negative words or actions but sometimes a conversation or action can be so impactful that it has the equivalent effect of taking multiple steps in either direction. You could potentially have had many steps backwards in a relationship but there was subsequently such a grand gesture – or lots of consistent little gestures – that it enabled your relationship to be stronger than with other relationships where you haven’t had many ‘backwards steps’ nor many ‘forwards steps’.

“It’s important to make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.” ― Barack Obama

Communication is made even more complex because everyone has had different experiences and personality traits which will in turn affect how they relate, communicate and receive what is being communicated to them. In short, everyone has different triggers. For example, where a certain phrase might have a neutral or positive impact on one individual – if something might be said in jest about them – it may create a step backwards for another individual. A ‘step backwards’ could take the form of: subconscious or pro-active withdrawal from the relationship; passive aggressive behaviour; or even perceptible aggression and conflict.

Clearly, a balance needs to be found between having self-awareness in your communication, yet also still being genuine and authentic, so that it doesn’t allow a particularly heightened self-awareness to give rise to social anxiety, or self-consciousness. Also, a balance should be found between being accountable for your words and actions, yet not unnecessarily taking responsibility for a disproportionate response by the other person. Communication is such a fine art at times!

“Talk is free, but the wise man chooses when to spend his words.” ― Neil Gaiman, Odd and the Frost Giants .

What do you want?

It may feel at times that there are so many ways to make mistakes in communication that it is not worth the effort. However, there is a reward to communicating well and appropriately to different individuals in that you are more likely to achieve your objective. When communication feels particularly taxing and increasingly less ‘worth it’, it may be helpful to keep your objective in mind:

· If your objective is to complete a project, then effective communication is more likely to enable you to work with others in a productive and time-efficient way.

· If your objective is to help an employee raise their levels of performance, it is more likely to be achieved if you can communicate in a way that doesn’t make them defensive, aggressive or withdrawn.

· If your objective is to progress your career, having the ability to communicate effectively with a variety of people will demonstrate leadership skills and how to get things done productively and without any fuss.

Communication includes what you relay through your words, actions and body language and your response to what others say, do and express. So, in effect, it is more than just being self-aware – it is being emotionally sensitive to other people too. Even if you can express yourself effectively it is less than useful if you don’t compliment that skill with also listening well – both visibly listening and genuinely listening to what is being said and taking note of how others are expressing their thoughts and emotions.

When communication works…

Processes can be refined and improved – Open and honest communication leads to constructive feedback and productive changes.

Teamwork makes the dream work! – Most clichés are based on truth and this is one of them. If you want to achieve great things, being able to work well with others means you are more much more likely to do so, in less time too!

Staff retention increases – People want to work in jobs that are fulfilling but they will only stay if the environment is friendly and they feel valued. This can only be achieved through good communication – which, in turn, can only be achieved by people becoming self-aware and emotionally sensitive to others.

Decrease in conflict – Good communication skills means that individuals are less likely to have misunderstandings as there should be less ambiguity. They are more likely is to seek clarification, rather than make assumptions, if there is any ambiguity. Self-awareness tends to organically produce greater self-restraint, more graciousness towards others and a willingness to be accountable for mistakes.

Less affected by outside factors – There will always be additional pressures or outside factors that can impact a team or an individual – whether it is time pressure, reduced resources, personal financial stress, personal relationship issues or health concerns – but if there is a basic level of good communication, the potentially negative impact such factors could have on individuals and the organisation will be limited.

For some individuals, it may be easy to work out what behaviours or forms of communication would improve or damage your relationship; whereas for others, it might take a bit more time and understanding to recognise what might be a negative trigger and what might improve a working relationship. It can also take a lot of time and effort to facilitate a working environment that generates and fosters good communication . For some individuals, good communication is a more natural skill than for others, so in the latter situation it may be helpful to consider whether training, coaching or focussed support from a colleague or manager is appropriate.

“Communication
Is a work of art
Some are normally born with it
Some may need a chart”
― Amal Saleh, Poetry Eyes

Good communication in a workplace is achievable but it takes effort and self-reflection. If you do or say something which takes your relationship a step backwards, it does not preclude you having a better relationship in future. Most working relationships are recoverable by making small consistent forward steps or with the help of a mediator. Having supported organisations through a number of conflict situations - which maybe would have not occurred had there been more effective communication - I believe the rewards (and the avoidance of unnecessary conflict) far outweigh the investment of time and effort.

If you would like to hear more about how our services could help to support your organisation – whether that be through mediation, communication training or a Conflict Prevention Assessment – please get in contact. You can do so by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page on our website www.mosaicmediation.co.uk/contact .

There's Power in Prevention

Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:48:33 GMT

Often by the point I get brought into a situation, the conflict has already occurred – there has already been a falling out, someone has been off work with stress, or productivity levels have already been badly affected by organisational changes or disputes. The process of mediation at this point can still have a positive impact on the situation and help the parties to the dispute move forward. I am also very aware that so many situations could be avoided if addressed before it becomes a problem .

The reason I wanted to become a mediator was because I saw the consequences of unresolved conflict while working at the Employment Tribunal, when I would read the cases and feel confident that it didn’t need to have got to the tribunal. Surely, the situation would have been resolved earlier if someone could have helped them through it. Conflict can cause tremendous emotional stress, sleepless nights, performance issues and can have a bearing on a person’s physical or mental wellbeing . It will also have an impact on the organisation – taking up management time, productivity levels dropping, stress spilling over to employee or client relations and the cost of employing new staff or to fund representation for an employment tribunal , if it gets to that. So, ideally it is better to avoid having conflict in the first place, which then would avoid the cost of conflict.

Conflict is unfortunately never totally avoidable , due to people having different ways of communicating, levels of emotional intelligence and ability to work through issues. Yet if some elements are present, it will reduce the likelihood of unnecessary conflict or conflict that is more drawn out than necessary. The three main elements that will influence conflict arising or being diffused are: skills, relationships and the culture.

1. Skills

· Communication skills – how well a person can communicate with different personalities and in different situations is clearly going to be a major factor in whether conflict arises or whether minor issues can be worked through without conflict.

· Emotional intelligence – some people are very reflective, self-aware and sensitive to what is going on with other people. Other people don’t realise the effect of their actions on other people or cannot read other people’s body language. Those with less emotional intelligence are more likely to fail to spot the behaviours, wording or changes that start conflict with different individuals.

· Empathy – to communicate effectively with others, you need to attempt to understand their perspective as much as you can. To do that requires empathy, which is the ability to put yourself in ‘their shoes’ and understand why they might act as they do – which is different to knowing what you would do in their situation!

· Patience – working with different personalities and in pressured situations can be difficult, and under those conditions it is harder to communicate positively and effectively. The more patient a person can be under such conditions, it makes it less probable for conflict to occur.

· Graciousness – this is a word that is rarely used in a working environment but in my role as a mediator, I find that conflict occurs most often when individuals struggle to be gracious with each other. If people proactively choose to be gracious when they might otherwise have the excuse to get angry, it reduces the potential for unnecessary conflict.

2. Relationships

· History – what has occurred between the individuals? If there has been previous conflict, knowing what triggered it and how the conflict ended (if it in fact did ‘end’) will help to predict what may trigger future conflict in future.

· Unresolved issues – just as it is helpful to know the relationship history, if the conflict technically ‘ended’ but without resolving whatever triggered the conflict, it is likely that conflict will happen again – whether it’s due to the same issue or another issue which just triggers previous feelings.

· Nature of relationship – some colleagues feel able to provide honest feedback to each other when issues crop up and the process is uncomplicated. Other relationships are not so simple, or people are not comfortable with that kind of honesty. If the latter is the case, when an issue does come up it may be difficult for those individuals to work through it effectively without conflict of some sort.

3. Culture of workplace

· Stress levels – if a working environment involves a lot of time pressure or high performance-related targets, it is the breeding ground for conflict - especially if stress levels are ignored, rather than acknowledged, supported and managed.

· Change – most people struggle with change, which is why so many organisations have a department dedicated to change management. Change means learning new processes or working with new people or being in a new environment, all of which takes people out of their comfort zone. Anyone whose emotions are heightened are likely to have heightened reactions to triggers which they wouldn’t normally have.

· Feedback – if there is a culture of providing constructive feedback to both management and employees, individuals are less likely to respond negatively to constructive feedback but instead use it to make improvements.

· Awareness of trends – if organisations take note of what trends occurring and what triggers different responses from management and employees, they will be more prepared to either handle those triggers differently or how to manage the response.

· Effective management – leadership that offers support but also doesn’t shy away from making difficult choices or have difficult conversations with employees – by equipping management with the tools to do so - means that it is more probable they will be able to nip smaller issues in the bud before they become big issues. Management that provides clear expectations of what is acceptable or required make it less likely to have to deal with unacceptable behaviours that tend to arise due to ambiguous direction.

Having all the above elements in place would be difficult for any organisation, and even then it does not guarantee a conflict-free workplace. What it does do, however, is reduce the potential for unnecessary conflict, and when conflict does happen, having the necessary structures and the environment is in place will enable the organisation to manage a way through the conflict effectively and expediently.

“Peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of creative alternatives for responding to conflict -- alternatives to passive or aggressive responses, alternatives to violence.” ― Dorothy Thompson

At Mosaic Mediation, we offer a service that acts like a ‘conflict health check’ for organisations - a Conflict Prevention Assessment – which seeks to assess all the above elements and help organisations address any ‘red flags’ before they develop into conflict. Conflict tangibly costs time, energy, increases staff turnover rates, negatively effects productivity levels and it impacts staff morale and team dynamics. If it can be prevented, it is better for everyone.

If you would like to know about this service, or about the communication training that we offer, or if there is a situation which may benefit from mediation, please get in contact. You can do so by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in touch through the Contact page on our website.

Ending Well. New Beginnings.

Thu, 10 Jan 2019 21:59:01 GMT

It is easy to scoff at making New Year’s resolutions, particularly because it is estimated that over half of those who make resolutions fail to keep to them within the first month! Though the success rate of keeping to them is so low, one of the reasons I am not opposed to resolutions is that it offers the chance for reflection and re-evaluation - a chance to make a fresh start. It's a way of putting a mental ‘full stop’ to the previous year and all that happened before. So, even if the big goals are not attained, it is likely that small changes will be.

New beginnings normally also involve endings – For habits or behaviours, a new approach to ‘healthy’ eating habits for example involves also putting an end to ‘unhealthy’ eating habits. How should we extend this approach to work and relationships, when things are often a lot more complicated and emotional?

When there has been a difficult end to someone’s employment, sometimes the aggrieved party will bring a claim to the Employment Tribunal. During the time that I was working there, it was common during the build up to the hearing for parties to be impatient for it just to be over, so that they ‘can get closure, whatever the decision’. The relief was often palpable once the case was done with. However, in my experience, though many were happy with having seen justice served, very few found that they felt the closure they had been seeking, solely through the tribunal hearing – particularly in the long term. Whether that party ‘won’ or ‘lost’, the feeling of having things left unresolved, or things left unsaid, remained. Years after leaving a job, it may still be upsetting to think about their past employer and how things ended.

This was one of the many reasons that led me to become trained as a Workplace and Employment Mediator – it felt like there must be another option available which would offer the opportunity for people to say what they have not felt able to, and maybe to get some insight into the other person’s motives and intentions.

Almost always during a mediation session, parties will talk about their previous jobs or experience as having influenced their current situation in a certain way.

Sometimes a fresh start may be a new job, or it may be a new career path, a new team or simply a new approach to the same job. Whatever the case may be, it is much easier to enjoy your new beginnings if there aren’t loose ends left behind. Often, the reason endings can feel so ‘messy’ is because of the ‘unknown’ of if you had said/done something differently or if you had not said/done something, would things be different? Would you feel better about everything?

‘Loose ends’ could involve:

· Having not explained the real reason for leaving the job, role or team to the relevant people

· Work relationships which have awkwardly drifted apart, without explanation or obvious reason

· Not finding out the reasons behind someone’s behaviour towards you

· Leaving on a bad note and regretting how it ended after time has passed

Though these issues may not seem particularly major, feelings of regret or of things being unresolved tend to stay with until they are addressed - either by confronting the situation or mentally ‘putting it to bed’. I am sure many people have imaginary conversations in the car or the shower, when you say what you wish you had said to the people involved. These conversations often just leave you with feelings of frustration that you hadn’t been able to do so in real life. You can’t go back and undo what has been done but it is much easier to enjoy the ‘new’ when you can think about the past without overwhelming negativity. So what can you do about it?

Previous ‘endings’:

1. Confront the past

Sometimes you can tie up loose ends by having a conversation with the relevant people about unresolved issues or unanswered questions - those people who you have probably having imaginary conversations with! For example, you may be able to have a conversation with someone where there was ambiguity about their intentions, etc. If that is possible, it is definitely worth deciding first whether you feel it is important to have the conversation, even if their response is not what you had hoped. Depending on your relationship history, it may be what is required to move on. If it seems highly unlikely to yield a positive result, then maybe think about the other options below.

2. Addressing your summary of events

It is often easier, when a situation has not turned out how we had hoped, to encapsulate everything that happened in that job/team/relationship as being as 'negative' as the situation which prompted the change - though generally there will be positives to take away. The positives, when acknowledged, may lessen the damaging impact of the negative memories. Maybe it is worth re-visiting those events which felt totally bad and reassessing whether the reality of the experience was 'all-bad' or whether the memory has actually been tainted by the stand out negative memories.

3. ‘To everything there is a season…’

As the quote suggests and whatever your philosophical views, most people will relate to the concept that sometimes phases of their life ended when they had not expected or wanted them to; but later on when they look back on it, they realise that it was the best thing that could have happened, because of what it led them to. It can be easy to cast everything in a bad light when you are not happy with your situation – unfriendly co-workers, incompetent managers, negative working environment – when potentially the reason for feeling that way was solely, or partially, just because it was time for change. Time for a new season.

Future 'endings'

You can’t change the past, but it is possible to put into practice some principles for future ‘endings’, so that you could ‘end well’ in future:

1. How do you want to be remembered?

I remember when I was in a previous job and nearing the beginning of leave, that I was determined to get as much as I could humanly do to get it done so that the last memory of my co-workers had of me was not the mountain of work they had to do once I had left! Even in a more complicated situation, if you want to avoid having ‘loose ends’ with people or finishing with a negative memory which overrides any positive moments, being aware of the lasting memory people will have of you can help to regulate how you behave, so that you don’t have lasting regrets.

2. You can only control your own actions

There will always be external stressors which have the potential to make it difficult to maintain composure and keep behaviours in check. However, it is worth remembering that we cannot control anyone else’s behaviour but only how we respond. If someone else behaves unreasonably, that will be noticed – just as whether the response to such behaviour is equally unreasonable or instead, notably professional.

3. You get a ‘fresh start’ by ‘ending well’

It is very difficult to have a ‘fresh start’ when there has been a messy ending. Sometimes you can’t control how well things end but in moments where you are at a cross roads about how to respond to someone or an event, it may be helpful to think of the future in two ways: firstly, that the moment you are in will not last forever and hopefully there are more positive things to come; and, secondly, that what you do in the lead up to an ‘end’ could impact your future. This is especially true if it has earned you a certain reputation which could brought up at a future in-opportune moment. In addition, there is always the possibility that ex-colleagues might re-enter your life or career at unexpected moments.

So, if you are currently having a moment of reflection and plan to make changes or to have a ‘fresh start’, take some time to think first about how you plan on ending the current phase. Whether that change involves a new job, a new team or simply a new way of prioritising your work and home life, how are you going to ensure that you can make a positive change by ‘ending well’?

If you want to know more about how mediation could help to resolve concerns or disputes in your workplace, or if you would like to know more about the services we can offer to prevent unnecessary conflict, please get in contact. You can email emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page on the website.

That's Not What I Would Do

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 18 Dec 2018 11:00:41 GMT

“Human behaviour is an enormously complex set of things, and that mixture of underlying things is different for different people, so it’s not just complex, it’s meta-complex.” Vivienne Ming

How often do you observe other people and are baffled by what they say or do - how they drive, or parent, or do their job or how they treat other people? Human behaviour can be very difficult to understand at times – particularly if we come from a completely different perspective or background.

Upon talking to other parents about the approaching festivities, it is interesting to hear how different each family approaches the different traditions they have around Christmas with their children: the story behind Christmas, which presents come from Father Christmas and which from the family, how Father Christmas can get in the house if there’s no chimney, etc. Every family has a different way of doing things or explaining things, and each tradition may seem like a lovely idea to one family but yet completely bizarre to another.

It is generally accepted that people will have different Christmas family traditions. It is only when their approach or tradition directly impacts our own, that conflict may occur. For example, when two people with different traditions begin a romantic relationship, they then must decide which traditions from each person’s family to continue with or compromise on. This process may sound simple but is often fraught with tension in practice! I have heard about very heated discussions between couples about whether to buy a tin one brand of chocolates or another, or whether a star or angel should go on the tree, or even whether to open one gift on Christmas Eve, all gifts first thing in the morning or only after Christmas dinner.

The same can be true when we are interacting with others at work. Often subconsciously, we take note of our colleagues’ performance or methods of working and measure them up against our own. We will notice potentially trivial things – such as their speed of typing up a document, how they speak to a client, or their willingness to do the ‘drinks round’. And we will also make note of potentially more significant behaviours – such as how well they perform against their targets, their ability to handle pressure or how they communicate with others. And, if their approach, speed or ability is different to our own, it will be noted.

As a society we are getting better at accepting differences in how people live and look but differences in how people relate, communicate or do their job is still likely to frustrate or cause annoyance. For example:

· Some people keep their desks tidy and some do not.

· Some people seem to take lots of breaks and some don’t seem to stop working.

· Some people greet everyone as they enter a room while others keep their heads down and get straight to work.

· Some like to sing or chat while they work, while others prefer to work silently.

· Some people handle stress calmly, while others can be reactive.

All these differences in approach have the potential to cause friction. Depending on how individuals respond to these frustrations, it could lead to nothing, or there could be a build-up of little annoyances to the point of incredible frustration, arguments or even an eventual unwillingness to work with the other person. So how can these little annoyances be managed so as not to lead to conflict?

1. Be aware of what triggers your frustration/irritation

So often we can get frustrated with another person but are able to rationalise our reaction. More often than we would like to admit, there may have been a build-up of little niggles about how the other person does things and it may only be a minor things that happens but will feel like the ‘final straw’ – for example, noting small annoyances about a colleague generally being untidy or clumsy, and to getting really annoyed if they simply drop some paperwork on the floor. Here by the time the person realises their frustration about their colleague (having not realised the impact of the little frustrations previously), they attribute it solely to that one final event – justifying their reaction as reasonable – when if there had been no build-up of niggles, they may not have reacted as strongly.

Knowing what triggers your frustration may help to keep your reactions in check and in proportion to the event.

2. Decide how much it matters to you

This is basically another way of saying ‘pick your battles’. It is human nature to be wound up by other people and their idiosyncrasies. However, in order to have good friendships and productive working relationships, we need to decide what behaviours or irritations to address and what to label in our minds as ‘not an issue’. Allowing minor irritations to jeopardise a positive relationship (or potentially positive relationship) would not be helpful for you, the other person, or your work. Is it worth addressing? If not, it would be advantageous to all concerned to decide whether to consciously ignore behaviours that irritate you, or whether you allow those behaviours to impact your ability to work productively with that person.

However, if the behaviours that irritate you are also impacting other people or your organisation negatively, then they could be addressed by having a private conversation and approaching the subject sensitively. This approach would be more beneficial than allowing the issue to become fodder for gossip or the source of more frustration.

3. Different does not automatically = wrong

“People who think they know it all are especially annoying to those of us who do.” Anonymous

It is so easy to assume that how we do things is the best way. Sometimes it may be the case, but unless it is very clear that a different approach is going to be damaging for people or for the organisation, it is beneficial to allow for the possibility that there is more than one ‘right’ way. It is possible to have an untidy desk but a very organised mind, and to have a curt way of communicating with colleagues but be engaging with clients, and to not do the ‘drinks round’ but be a great teammate in other areas of work life. We don’t always ‘know what’s best’.

4. Learn about your colleagues

It is fascinating as a mediator, to observe parties to a mediation learning more about each other in a way that changes their perspective on previous events. So many people assume they know all they need to know about another person’s background or experience or reasons behind decisions or behaviours. When, on hearing more about the other party’s motives or professional experience or personal history, it provides understanding about them, which often automatically reduces the conflict. We tend to get frustrated with things we don’t understand, so essentially understanding the ‘why?’ is likely to lessen frustration. How well do you really know your colleagues?

5. You are annoying too!

It is much easier to be gracious about other people’s idiosyncrasies when we are equally aware of our own idiosyncrasies. We all have little habits that may seem sweet or funny to some people but very annoying to others. Having the ability to laugh at – or moderate if it’s appropriate – our own quirks or habits, will make it more likely to laugh off other people’s quirks and habits, rather than get annoyed at them.

"Acceptance (once you get the hang of it) instantly frees you from the frustration associated with difficult people, no matter who they are, whether loved ones or total strangers, and no matter what form their offensiveness takes, whether it be meanness, rudeness or selfishness." Richard Carlson PHD

In short, it is natural to get irritated by others, but it is more enjoyable not to if possible. I am sure that you will have had people coming to mind as you have been reading this article. It would be good to hear your experience after employing the 5 tips above and what difference it makes to your relationship with them.

If you would like to hear more about any of our services – including mediation or communication training and conflict avoidance, please get in contact. You can do so by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page on the website www.mosaicmediation.co.uk .

Who's The Boss?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 14 Nov 2018 11:54:39 GMT

The manager-staff member relationship is a very tricky dynamic and, increasingly, I am aware of workplace situations where there are allegations of workplace bullying made by a staff member about their manager. In this kind of situation, there could be multiple factors coming into play: the management style of the manager; performance-related issues; workplace culture; home stresses; organisational changes; and difficult behaviours of the manager or staff member.

A mediator is not there to judge whether bullying has taken place, but they will recognise the need to raise the parties’ awareness about what may have led to such allegations being made. Though there are cases where intentional bullying has occurred, very often people are unfortunately unaware of how their approach is being received and, if not effectively addressed, will lead to situations of conflict. Encouraging self-awareness and space to think about what led to the point of conflict can give both the accused and the accuser clarity on whether bullying had taken place or whether any other factors may have played into the situation feeling like bullying.

Management style

"Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things" - Peter F. Drucker

Without a doubt there are different types of management style and, unfortunately, almost every approach will work for some but not for others. There is often a divide between the stereotypical ‘old school’ way of managing – to make decisions and relay instructions for staff members to carry out – and a more ‘democratic’ way of managing – listening to ideas from staff before deciding on an approach which suits the majority.

Where for one person an abrasive and authoritative style may be appreciated and what is required to push someone to achieve their best; for another such a style may make them feel de-valued or patronised. Where a ‘team player’ or ‘hands off’ manager may feel supportive and relatable to one staff member; to another, this approach may feel directionless or weak.

So, how can you manage staff effectively - or respond positively to being managed - when it seems to be such a subjective ‘ideal’? If the management style of the manager and the preferred way to be managed do not mesh, it is inevitable that there will be a dispute or conflict between them – even if it only manifests passive-aggressively.

Way of working

“The best executive is the one who has sense enough to pick good men to do what he wants done, and self-restraint to keep from meddling with them while they do it.” – Theodore Roosevelt

Some people like to be given clear directions on what to do and how to do it. Other people prefer general guidelines and a lot of freedom – the preferred approach of Theodore Roosevelt in the above quote. Some people prefer the latter approach but actually need the former. There are many theories on which management style and which way of working is the best, but in reality it can be very subjective, depending on the type of organisation, the workplace culture and the personalities involved.

Invariably I find that when a staff member is complaining about bullying from their manager, it is because they feel they are being ‘micro-managed’. Very few people enjoy being told what to do, but if that person feels like they are constantly being watched or the person giving the instructions doesn’t really understand their role, it can create serious difficulties for the manager and staff member to work together. This is especially true if they have previously been managed by someone who had more of a ‘hands-off’ approach. Even if it was a proactive decision to change the approach, such a dramatic change is likely to relay a completely ‘out of the blue’ sense of mistrust in their abilities.

At first it may appear that one person’s way of working and the manager’s approach to managing are worlds apart, yet it is very possible for people with different approaches to have a good working relationship . Mutual support with a united goal is the ideal: where the manager is supporting their staff member regarding external stressors or the stresses associated with their role; and, where the staff member is supporting their manager by presenting a positive and productive attitude at work.

So, how is this idyllic working relationship achievable?

1. Time

· Most relationships – social and professional – have ups and downs. When people have opposing ways of working, the ‘down’ is likely to happen in the first six months or so of working together. Both people then have a choice to make about how to deal with what’s going on so that working life is as stress-free as possible.

· It is totally possible to end up having a great working relationship after a bad start, if people allow for the possibility of change and improvement. A mindset that expects the worst is not likely to enable positive change.

2. Effective communication

· When people have different ways of working, assumptions can very easily be made about the other person’s intentions or character traits. The only way to handle this is to proactively be clear about your intentions and try not to let miscommunication or misunderstandings go unaddressed. If someone is struggling to trust you, make it clear that you can be trusted by honest communication and acting with integrity.

· Feedback given and received in an open and genuine way will speed up the process of reaching a positive way of working.

i. One of the biggest complaints made about managers is that they are telling staff what to do without truly understanding their job. If a manager noticeably seeks to understand the roles of their staff and is open to listening to ideas and feedback from them, the staff are less likely to feel that they are being managed ‘in ignorance’.

ii. Similarly, it is helpful to remember the pressure of management – often under the instruction or constraint of other management decisions or organisational restrictions. Managers often need to have difficult conversations, which they would prefer not to have, and to make decisions which may be taken personally, though they were not intended to be.

· The working relationship will also benefit from trying to judge when it is appropriate to challenge a decision or method, and when to give the benefit of the doubt. Then when it becomes necessary to challenge a decision, it is more likely to be well received rather than if challenges are made combatively, frequently or seemingly without ‘good basis’.

3. Patience

· It can be very frustrating to work with someone who doesn’t do what you would or doesn’t seem to understand you. It requires a lot more patience and giving the benefit of the doubt more than you would with someone whose management or working style is complimentary to yours.

· Being intentionally patient will prevent any unnecessary arguments or conflict.

4. Willingness

· It can be all to easy to write off the possibility that you can have a positive and productive working relationship if the experience so far has been negative. However, if one or both people can approach the initial concerns as an achievable challenge, the likelihood of eventually being able to work effectively together is completely possible.

· Willingness to seek to understand the other person’s intentions or their reasons behind decisions or actions, and a willingness to give the other person the benefit of the doubt rather than making assumptions, will provide clarity and further speed up the process of learning how to work together.

What starts off as being great effort to keep things working smoothly, with time, patience and effective communication, less effort is required, and a mutually beneficial way of working can be found.

This is not to say that such issues are always the fault of both people in even measure, or that managers don’t bully – some do. Nor, do I want to imply that difficult behaviours on behalf of the manager or the staff member should be overlooked – most should not. Sometimes, managers overstep the mark, get personal and make the workplace environment difficult, and in such a situation, the appropriate organisational processes should be followed. Equally, sometimes, staff members don’t perform to the standard required and when their performance is questioned, they may take such feedback constructively or receive it as bullying behaviour – whether it would objectively be considered as such, or not.

In most situations where the conflict between manager and staff member relates to their different working styles, following the above guidance should itself positively impact the working relationship. However, if the conflict has become entrenched or it has reached the point where an objective and external perspective is required, it is worth finding out whether mediation could be beneficial. Mediation is an extremely useful tool to break a negative relationship cycle; by helping each person understand the other, figure out how they got to the point of conflict, and how they can move forward positively.

If you would like to know more about mediation or think training on communication or conflict could benefit your organisation, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page .

Left Out

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 16 Oct 2018 11:33:03 GMT

“The only thing worse than not knowing where she belonged...was knowing where she didn't.” Tessa Shaffer, Heaven Has No Regrets

It begins at school – finding out that you are not invited to someone’s party but your other friends are; or being left out of a game. Any form of ‘rejection’ from friends is painful and the feeling doesn’t change when you become an adult. In the workplace, there are very few differences from school; it is just that instead of being excluded from a party or game, it is more likely to be a night out, a shared lunch break or a conversation.

Whether the workplace place is big or small, friendship groups or cliques are going to emerge, and it is perfectly natural to be drawn more to some people than others. These friendship groups will then shift and change, and it is often during the transitional phases that tensions arise - sometimes people start to drift away from the group or acquaintances start to become close friends. There will probably be those internal deliberations: whether to invite the new person to the group to every coffee/lunch break? Whether the one being ‘excluded’ should graciously wave them off or ask to come along? How to be kind when it’s clear one person is separating themselves from the group? All these seemingly minor dilemmas have the potential to cause awkwardness and for someone to feel like they are being alienated or not welcomed into the group.

If someone feels ostracized or rejected, it can lead to feelings of loneliness, alienation or shame. The reality is that being rejected by anyone psychologically ‘hurts’ in a similar way to being physically hurt and the feeling of social belonging is a fundamental psychological need. Feeling ostracized or rejected will have a knock-on effect on a person’s self-esteem, which will then also impact on their ability to communicate and relate to those around them – particularly with those who they feel excluded them in the first place. It could also have a knock-on effect on how easily people can work together.

In the above scenario, though there may be awkwardness or a bit of tension, it is unlikely to create too much conflict. However, when there is a fallout between people in a social group, an otherwise unintentional ‘faux pas’ like leaving someone out will probably come across like passive aggression, creating a much greater likelihood of conflict. Forgetting to offer to make one person a coffee when doing the ‘drinks round’ can be taken as a personal dig. Not saying ‘hello’ in the morning might look like they are proactively ignoring someone and having a private conversation can be perceived as gossiping about the other person. People need to tread very delicately in such situations if further conflict is to be avoided. Sometimes, no matter how hard a person tries to act kindly and respectfully, it can be taken the wrong way, but a little bit of self-awareness doesn’t hurt.

Though someone may initially feel sad by what they feel has been ‘done to them’, most people will put up a barrier between them and other people as a defence mechanism, rather than communicating that they feel hurt. This can lead to arguments in the workplace, refusal to work with certain people and making it a very difficult working environment for everyone.

The idea that someone might be being rejected typically first starts because of how they viewed another person’s actions. Stephen MR Covey said that, ‘we judge ourselves by our intentions and others by their behaviour.’ It is very easy to assume that people’s intentions are negative – particularly during a sensitive situation. So often though, when working through situations like this during a mediation, it emerges during the session that what one person took to be rejection or passive aggression, was completely innocent or they were simply oblivious to any hurt feelings. Unfortunately, once someone takes something to be negative, it is hard to change that perception, even if it was inaccurate.

Most people feel insecure about certain areas with certain friendships – particularly work friendships. So, thinking about directly clarifying with the person whether something was intentional is difficult enough, but even more so if the friendship has become fractured or distant. It takes a lot of maturity and self-confidence to be gracious when friendships change or when you aren’t included. In my experience, there are three choices in situations where a person feels left out:

1. Have a conversation to clarify where they stand in the friendship.

2. Be quietly gracious when left out and try not to have bitterness about the situation.

3. Invite yourself along to the event or involve yourself in the conversation and see what happens!

1. Having the conversation

As I have already indicated, it can be nerve-wracking to bring up the ‘white elephant in the room’, yet often that is the only way a person will know for sure what’s going on. It tends to be the ambiguity of the situation that makes it all feel so bad. Also, it is highly probably that the other person is unaware of how their actions may have made them feel. And, even if the response is as negative as it was presumed to be, and the clarity hurts at first, it at least provides a point to move on from.

2. Being quietly gracious

If you decide on the second option, it is worth remembering that hurt feelings are always valid, but that they also have the potential to ignite further conflict or inhibit someone from moving forward, if those feelings aren’t worked through. Being gracious is not the same as allowing someone to continually hurt them or cause damage to their reputation. Rather, it is not letting someone else’s actions dictate how they behave or respond. Friendships do shift and change, and it is a choice about whether you fight for a friendship, get angry with what is happening, or allow it to organically drift or get closer, without resentment.

3. Invite yourself

The third option may sound comical or arrogant even, but in situations where someone is feeling left out to the obliviousness of their ‘friends’, inviting themselves to a lunch outing or by getting involved in a conversation may happily result in everyone getting to know each other better or re-establishing a friendship. Now, there is always the chance that they invite themselves and is clearly not welcomed. If that is the case, you can go back to the first or second choices. It is much more enjoyable to be around people who enjoy being around you.

When someone feels alienated, it can also make them feel shameful about being put in that position. Being left out is akin to feeling out of control – in that it can feel like other people are making the choice for them about who they can talk to or socialise with. Sustained feelings of hurt and awkwardness tend to come from not knowing what to do next and feeling like there is nothing that can be done to improve the situation or change how they feel about it. If a person can recognise that there are choices and that doing something may be what actually makes them start to feel better – whatever that ‘something’ is.

For others, childhood hurt from being left out or feeling rejected can play a big part in how they respond to situations as an adult that seem to mirror what happened as a child. It is easy to transfer feelings of hurt from when they were a child to the person ‘leaving them out’ as an adult. If past hurts could be affecting how you respond to present situations, it would be worth thinking about the best way to work through those feelings to figure out how to work through similar issues as an adult – whether that is talking to a close friend, family member or maybe trying therapy.

Being left out leaves a scar – as a child and as an adult. It is a reminder to all of us that our actions can have consequences, whether they are intended to hurt or not. Issues of feeling rejected or excluded are not limited to the playground but exist in every kind of workplace. Choosing to invite someone to coffee or making conversation with someone, may be the difference between them going home feeling ignored and left out or acknowledged.

If there are difficulties in your workplace – relationally or otherwise – that you may feel might benefit from getting a neutral third party involved, please get in touch. If you have any questions about how the mediation process works or whether Mosaic Mediation can offer communication training on areas that could benefit your workplace culture, please email emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page.

First Impressions - Lasting Impressions?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 11 Sep 2018 16:50:37 GMT

“The world would be a better place if even a fraction of us became the kinds of people we have deceived others into believing we are.” ― Mokokoma Mokhonoana

Meeting someone for the first time can be a bit like an interview process – you only have a few moments to make a good ‘first impression’. Often subconsciously, we make a snap judgment about a person within those first few moments of meeting them; about their appearance and personality traits we perceive them to have, or not have. What people tend not to be consciously aware of is the long-lasting impact these first impressions may have in shaping their interactions and feelings towards the other person.

Generally, making these snap judgments is helpful. It is natural for human beings to assess whether another person is a ‘threat’ very quickly during their first encounter. Sometimes, the judgment will be accurate and, though it would not fully capture the many layers to a person, it can alert us to any potential ‘red flags’.

The risk to relationships lies in remaining oblivious to the judgments we are making , and also the way such judgments may bias our interactions and relationships with people. There could be one of many reasons for an individual to have a ‘bad’ first impression of someone, including:

· The person’s behaviour seeming rude or negative in some other way

· The person having had a ‘bad day’ – so they are less able to be cheerful, positive or gracious

· Having a ‘bad day’ ourselves – so our negative frame of mind predisposes us to perceive interactions with other people more negatively

· Misunderstandings – often due to not knowing the other person enough to clarify miscommunication or understand their real intentions

· Minor or major trauma from previous relationships – which is highly likely to prejudice new relationships

“Two things remain irretrievable: time and a first impression” – Cynthia Ozick

As I have alluded to already, the reason that first impressions can be so significant is because of the potential for them to have such an impact on a relationship. A concept about first impressions is called the ‘halo effect’, which suggests that when we initially observe that someone possesses positive/negative qualities in a certain area, we might subconsciously also assume that they therefore possess positive/negative qualities in a related area. For example, if a salesperson greets you in a warm and friendly way, you may perceive their social ability also extends to their to them being trustworthy. The same concept can be applied to a negative first impression – i.e. if your perception of a person is that their appearance is dishevelled and untidy, the ‘halo effect’ might be assuming that they are not very organised in their job.

The effect of a first impression doesn’t end with your thought process. Just as we dissect and process what we observe about another person; when we interact with them and have made a judgment about them, so they will also be dissecting and processing our behaviour. So often, a bad first impression may lead to a frosty interaction, which then invites a negative response, which then provides ‘behavioural confirmation’ about the initial first impression; generating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If, instead, a person acknowledges the potential for their first impression to shape their interactions, it may help them to override any ‘negative’ behaviour they would otherwise exhibit, and then the response from the other person could well prove their initial impression to be inaccurate. Thus, prohibiting inaccurate behavioural confirmation. So often a negative first impression of someone overshadows how they think of that person, even if they begin to notice other positive traits about them.

First impressions can have the power to stop a relationship or tarnish one before it has even begun. However, if you speak to any two people who have had a relationship lasting decades or more – whether it be friendship or romantic – a common thread is that they admit to having had ‘ups and downs’ throughout that time. The same would likewise apply to work relationships – sometimes getting on with a colleague whereas, at other times, clashing with them. It is helpful to appreciate that no relationship is rosy all the time – whether it be at the very beginning or at different points over a longer period. Not allowing negative first impressions - or snapshots of negative behaviour during the relationship – to overshadow or negatively influence your interactions or shape your relationship entirely, could provide the basis for a potentially great relationship.

Equally, it would be helpful to remember the long-lasting effect of a first impression and how someone’s initial perceptions of you may be shaping their interactions with you or their opinion of your abilities. Creating a positive first impression will provide a good footing for developing positive relationships with others - even better if you are also able to demonstrate consistency in positive character traits. Are you aware of how other people respond to you?

Nevertheless, if you have clearly not made a ‘good’ first impression, remember that how you respond to their interactions with you could have the potential to either correct inaccurate perceptions, or otherwise to provide behavioural confirmation. Could any of the reasons for creating a bad first impression (as above) be present in your situation? “One never gets a chance to make a first impression. But remember that the first impression is not the last chance to make a good impression.” (Unknown)

If you know of a situation where colleagues are in conflict and they seem unable to take positive steps to diffuse the situation, or if you want to know more about how workplace mediation or communication training could benefit your workplace, please get in contact. You can email emma.jenking@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in contact via the Contact page on our website.

Taking sides: A lose-lose situation

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:32:45 GMT

If you have ever witnessed a relationship breakdown between mutual friends or maybe you were the child between warring parents, you will understand the pressure to may be pick a side. As an adult, if you refuse to, you may be called ‘Switzerland’ or a ‘fence-sitter’; essentially, perceived inaction tends to be viewed as being disloyal or cowardly.

Having witnessed the breakdown of friendships, marriages and workplace relationships , and then in my profession as a mediator, having to deal with the aftermath of disputes, it is clear that people taking sides rarely benefits anyone in these situations.

Yes, there are times when an injustice requires us to speak up for someone, or for an issue, out of principal; the intention being to prevent further injustices, or potential damage to a person’s reputation, relationships, or career. However, I would suggest that it is rarely necessary in such situations to actually ‘pick a side’, in terms of choosing one person over the other or criticising the other person. Instead, focussing on the issue that needs addressing is what is required to realise a positive and productive outcome.

As an example, in relationship breakdowns where children are involved, the parents that can maintain a good level of respect in their communication effectively are usually those where ‘protecting the welfare of the children’ is the first focus of both parties. Doing so doesn’t diminish the pain caused by hurtful behaviours but it can prevent further fallout or damage being done to their relationship – and, by default, also helps to ensure the protection of their children’s welfare.

When disputes concern colleagues or friends, being asked to pick a side tends to occur when someone believes one side of the dispute has ‘behaved badly’. It is instinctive to want to right the 'wrong' or defend the 'victim' and so we get involved, speak our mind and make sure everyone knows whose side we are backing and why.

Here are some reasons why taking sides may not be the best course of action:

1. There are three sides to every argument – one person’s side, the other person’s side, and the truth

In other words, no one truly knows the fully story and it is unlikely that you have always heard an unbiased versions of events. So, to proactively take one person's side over the other may be imprudent; you may later discover additional facts that suggest your initial conclusions weren't correct.

2. Everyone is human

When you decide you are backing someone or are against another, it is hard to remember that no one involved is totally innocent or totally evil.
Unfortunately, having chosen your side, you may begin to defend behaviours you otherwise would have disagreed with, or criticise good behaviours you otherwise would have applauded.

3. Reciprocal altruism or friendship?

Reciprocal altruism describes when you do a good thing for someone with the - perhaps unspoken- understanding that the other person will reciprocate the good deed for them later – i.e. ‘if you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours’.
This kind of loyalty can put pressure on relationships and create resentment over having a friendship that has burdensome expectations attached. There is a tendency in these situations to also blindly defend without first assessing whether the behaviours are even defensible.

4. The dispute is exacerbated

This is not ‘a problem shared = a problem halved’ scenario. The more opinions thrown into the mix, the harder it becomes to resolve the conflict and heal broken relationships.
More often, those at the centre of the dispute maybe able to resolve their issues in time but those third parties who got involved from the side lines remain entrenched in their ‘loyalties’ and so find it harder to mend their relationships with the ‘other side’ or resolve their own anger or hurt.

5. Feelings are temporary

So often people get involved in another person’s dispute at the height of emotional turmoil: someone has just ended the relationship, or they have just had a shouting match with the other person, or they have just discovered a deception or have just heard a rumour.
At such times, people usually say what they are feeling but not always what they truly mean once they have processed the situation. It would be unwise to take what they say as a consistent reflection of what they always think. I can recount multiple scenarios where someone will say how they feel at the peak of emotional turmoil which they would either: genuinely not remember, or adamantly disagree with, later.

Does this mean that when someone is having difficulties with another person, you should quietly back away into a corner or bury your head in the proverbial sand? No, preferably, you can support someone and stand up for your principles, without creating additional and unnecessary conflict .

Here are some tips on how to walk that fine line:

Focus on the issue

When people have a disagreement, it may seem like the appropriate time to air all the things you didn’t like about the other person - all their faults and previous failings. Unfortunately, though this may provide a temporary feeling of comradery with your ‘wronged’ friend or colleague, it’s overriding effect would also potentially be to fan the flames of their anger, solidify their feelings of solely being the injured party and make it harder to resolve their issues with the other person in future. Focussing on the main issues that caused the dispute will also be a helpful way to encourage forward-thinking and providing an environment that allows for problem-solving ideas and steps towards some form of resolution.

Empathise without agreeing

It is generally considered to be healthy for someone to vent when they are going through a difficult time. You can empathise with their feelings during a situation without verbalising your agreement with their opinion of the other person. It is almost impossible to know exactly what went on and how much you have been told is factually accurate or an emotionally driven recollection of events. More often – especially for emotionally volatile relationships - people don’t stay angry at each other forever and though they may forget what they said in the heat of the moment, they more than likely will remember your words.

It is also wise to ask before offering advice and, when you do, remember that all situations are different so what may have worked for one person may not necessarily work for another. Be aware of the benefits of having accountable relationships where you can talk to each other about behaviours that may not be helpful. If appropriate, the kindest way to help your friend or colleague may be to help them reflect on what part they may have played in the conflict, even if isn’t well received at first.

Have boundaries

Choosing not to take sides can make your friend or colleague feel insecure about the strength of your relationship. However, on reflection, they will have seen your ability to support without needing to bad-mouth anyone else. If you are honest with each other and respectful of their right to have an opposing view, it is very possible to have a strong and healthy relationship with people and agree to disagree at times. If the situation continues to escalate and all advice is replied to with a 'Yes, but...', it may be time to take a step back and just provide emotional support from the side lines.

‘To err is human…’

It is so easy to view the other party as the ‘villain’ but, unlike the portrayal of cartoon villains, most people most of the time don’t want to hurt anyone . They are also likely to be hurting or feel disrespected or betrayed, depending on what has occurred. Even if from the outside, they seem unfeeling or the main perpetrator, the root cause of their actions could well come from genuine hurt or fear. In my experience – both personally and professionally – it is also worth remembering that most communication between people is flawed and misunderstandings are often the principal causes of conflict. Is it possible that someone just heard or received something differently to how it was intended?

Stay in your lane

When we see someone getting hurt or witness what we perceive to be an injustice occurring, it is difficult to resist getting involved. What starts off with great intentions may have the potential to cause further damage or prompt further fodder for gossip. Here are some questions to consider before getting involved:

Are you the most appropriate person to get involved? Is it better coming from someone more neutral?
Why do want to get involved? What is your motivation and aim?
Do you have all the facts you need to engage with the situation reasonably?
Could your approach possibly cause further unnecessary conflict or is it likely to help resolve the issue?

As a mediator it is imperative that, throughout, I remain neutral. In fact, beyond passively NOT taking sides, I am actually proactively on BOTH sides, aiming for a win-win situation. Feelings are respected and valued but the focus is on finding ways forward that work for both parties, not on placing blame. There is a difference between standing up for what you believe is right and taking sides against another.

To improve the chances of conflict not being exacerbated: focus on the issues, empathise without agreeing, have boundaries, remember each person’s ‘human-ness’ and stay in your lane.

If you think there is a situation at work which may benefit from a neutral qualified mediator’ s input; or, if you are interested in hearing about how training on communication could improve your workplace culture and reduce the likelihood of unnecessary conflict, please get in contact . You can email enquiries@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in touch through the Contact page .

You Don't Know Me

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 04 Jul 2018 17:31:00 GMT

Think about when you receive gifts for a birthday or Christmas. Everyone has received a gift which makes them question how much the giver of the gift actually understands them. Often that kind of situation can be laughed off, but it is still likely to cause friction – particularly if it happens more than once or twice. The reality is that we want to believe that people we associate with – particularly family and close friends – understand us and know our interests.

Every individual has traits that they identify as being part of what makes them ‘who they are’ – for example, a ‘good father’, a ‘strong person’, ‘trustworthy’, a ‘good friend’. If someone else then communicates that they don’t think they are that type of person, it creates conflict both within that person and with the person who gave the feedback. It creates conflict, whether this person is factually correct or not. While most people are all too aware of their faults and failings, they still don’t want to be perceived in a way that conflicts with how they see themselves – particularly if it is on the more negative side.

This is even more challenging if it happens with colleagues or someone in management at work as it may affect, not just relationships, but potentially their career development. There is always the risk that feedback from other colleagues, management or staff members will include observations or opinions that conflict with how an individual perceives themselves. When this happens, it may be difficult to know how to move forward – especially if you don’t initially agree with the feedback.

Some comments can be ignored or intentionally forgotten but, often, these comments stick in the mind and can fester or cause concern about how their character or skills are perceived by others. For some people it may affect their confidence, their ability to socialise with colleagues or even their sleeping patterns. For those who already deal with social anxiety – which is defined as fear of being judged and evaluated negatively by other people – hearing that other people see you in a negative light (or at least in a way that contradicts their own perception of their personality), will only heighten those pre-existing fears and worries.

In terms of relationships, it is likely to cause friction and also maybe a tendency to avoid the other person or act defensively around them. When the opinion is left unaddressed but is still in the back of the person’s mind, the friction or defensiveness between those individuals will only be reinforced and will then increase the likelihood of conflict developing. In my experience as a mediator, very often people become defensive when they are all too aware of how they might be seen by other people – even if they are not being judged that way - and it can be the start of strained communication and a tumultuous relationship.

To move forward, efforts need to be made to improve the situation but also to not allow it to dominate your attention or damage your relationships. Here are 7 different ways you can do that:

1. Accept that people will always have an opinion – however, that does not mean that they are factually correct. We all know that if you put ten people in a room to discuss a topic, you are probably going to hear ten different opinions on it. They can’t all be factually correct, but it is inevitable that they will have different perceptions.

2. Consider the source – unfortunately, some people are more likely to criticise or point out the negatives in someone (whether it’s there or not!), so bearing that in mind will hopefully mean you take their comments less personally. Similarly, if there has been any previous conflict with that person, it is worth acknowledging that the past could influence their opinion. That being said, there may still be an element of truth despite the bad history.

3. Self-reflect – consider whether there is any truth to the feedback. Nobody likes negative feedback, but it can be utilised for good if, on self-reflection, there are elements of your behaviour that would benefit from being acknowledged and worked on – there may even be a need to make reparations for behaviour which has adversely affected someone else.

· Consider that allowing insecurities to prevent you from developing yourself or your career would not benefit anyone.

· Even, if the feedback turns out not to be applicable, taking a minute to check before you put it out your mind, is likely to still be helpful.

4. Character is shown through actions – regardless of opinions, showing consistent character traits through how you act speaks volumes.

5. Stop comparing – there may be people who we see as role models but if we start to compare ourselves to other people it can form new insecurities or even amplify existing ones.

6. Challenge the feedback – it may be appropriate with some people to have a conversation about the feedback or opinion that you have received about yourself. This type of conversation has the potential to create more conflict, so it may be helpful t o write down what you want to say before you have the conversation and to proactively seek to understand how they have arrived at their opinion during the conversation.

7. Be forward-thinking – focus on the future and on any positive changes you intend to make, or behaviours you intend to continue displaying. Try to not allow any resentment or negativity to dominate your mind, or adversely influence your relationships or your behaviour.

Even the most emotionally secure individual will be disappointed if other people see them in a way that is negative, or is at odds with how they see themselves or their behaviour. However, conflict does not need to be an inevitable outcome. Implementing some of the ideas above should help to avoid unnecessary conflict and enable a positive and forward-thinking mentality.

If you would like to talk to a mediator about how mediation could improve a difficult situation in your workplace or how communication training could help to establish a work culture of positive and healthy workplace relationships and may help to avoid unnecessary conflict, please get in contact. You can do by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page .

Un-Cloud Your Judgment

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 06 Jun 2018 09:56:58 GMT

I remember clearly all the predictions that were made during the build-up to the 2012 Olympics. Almost everyone I spoke to thought that England was going to make a fool of itself, the opening ceremony would be a flop and we would barely win a medal. All those predictions ended up not happening and it was a roaring success!

With the FIFA World Cup 2018 upon us, the same jokes are being said about the England Team - not needing to pack much luggage as they wouldn’t be away for long, etc. This self-deprecating humour is an entrenched part of ‘Britishness’ and - particularly when it comes to sport - though it is said in jest, there is still an underlying hope for a better outcome.

A trait consistent amongst almost all nationalities is that we often subconsciously allow our previous experiences or expectations to cloud or influence our judgment – specifically, our opinions about other people. Numerous times a day we will make snap judgments about people based on small moments of observation. We tend to have an internal monologue which essentially makes an assessment about them, such as: what we think of their behaviour/appearance/personality or how they compare against our looks/intelligence/behaviour.

We do this with total strangers and also with people we know, socially and professionally. Largely, we will be making such judgments without realising, although, sometimes people will proactively make a judgment call about a person, particularly if they think of themselves as a ‘good judge of character’. Unfortunately, almost without exception, such judgments are based on very limited information about a person – often, it’s during a first impression, where they have a personal objective for building their opinion or from only seeing them under specific circumstances, like only in the workplace. How we think about a person inevitably influences how we interact with them and perceive any further behaviours. Accordingly, it’s important to not make inaccurate snap judgments.

“Surprises are everywhere in life. And they usually come from misjudging people for being less than they appear.” ― Brownell Landrum, author.

Sometimes, we may spot something which seems like a ‘red flag’. Occasionally our judgment is based on tangible behaviour which causes hurt or broken trust to ourselves or others. The situations that are likely to cause the longest lasting damage are when we get disappointed or our expectations are not met. In these cases, it may be prudent to proceed with caution.

However, so often, though mistakes or behaviours may happen again, it is also prudent to not proceed with the certain expectation of disappointment or bad behaviour. By doing so, we allow previous negative experiences to influence not just how we perceive someone but how we interact with them, which can be like a self-fulfilling prophecy .

As human beings we are inclined to remember others faults more prominently and yet hope that others forget our mistakes almost instantly. I often hear people saying, “I am only human, and humans make mistakes” when they have erred hoping for immediate forgiveness and a second chance, but will then say about others who have wronged them that their actions are ‘completely unforgiveable’ or “a leopard can’t change its spots”.

In the words of Stephen M.R. Covey, we tend to ‘judge ourselves by our intentions and others by their behaviour’ . Simply put, we often minimise our actions and explain them away with how good our intentions were, yet at the same time dismissing the relevance or importance of another person’s intentions when they hurt us, instead focussing solely on their actions and the repercussions.

Clouded judgment about individuals can have very negative results, for example:

It influences your behaviour – when you believe someone is unforgiveable, incompetent, a liar or untrustworthy it colours your feelings and therefore how you interact with them.
- Even if it becomes apparent that you were initially incorrect in your judgment, most people would struggle to see or admit this and then change their own behaviour.
- It damages exisiting relationships or potential relationships – with those who you judge and with those around you who hear or see your judgment of other people.
It creates division – particularly if judgments about people are voiced. Though it may serve to justify how you react around that person, it will also influence how other people act or feel towards them.
- With such judgments even if they later appear to be unfounded, the damage to a relationship is then very difficult to undo.
- As a mediator, I am often required to challenge pre-existing – and sometimes baseless - perceptions a person has about the other individual, which have affected how they acted and contributed largely towards the conflict between them.
It is a distraction to a potentially positive work or social life – negative thoughts about other people take up space in your mind which could be otherwise occupied and will eventually impact your own emotional wellbeing if left unresolved.
It prevents forward-thinking – holding onto bad feelings about previous situations or resentment towards individuals can make it difficult to make positive forward steps to rebuilding a relationship or allowing for the potential that there might be a different and more successful outcome.

It is practically impossible to go into a situation or have someone in mind without having made some form of judgment. The key is to be aware of what influences your perception and whether your judgment is based on reality or whether it has been clouded by other influencers.

Here are some tips on how to un-cloud your judgment:

Withholding judgment
- Taking a pause and giving people the benefit of the doubt can be helpful with new situations/people but also when trying to make a fresh start in a relationship.
Keep your opinions and judgments private
- The more public your make your opinions about a situation or person, the harder it is to later correct those opinions if found to be mistaken. This not only influences the opinions of others about that situation/person but it also affects their opinion of you.
Are your expectations realistic?
- So often our opinions are skewed by our own personal experience, upbringing, beliefs, stereotypes, and relationships. Unfortunately, we tend to also be blind to this at the time in question.
- When expectations are not met it can be the cause of resentment, disappointment and conflict. Our expectations may be based on what we believe we would have done (or sometimes we expect more than what we would have done!) but this does not take into account the unique experience, upbringing, beliefs, stereotypes and relationships that influences the other person and their decisions.
Look for positives
- As part of our human nature we tend to focus more on the negatives of a situation or a person’s bad traits, rather than the positives. Acknowledging that there is a tendency to do this makes it easier to break that habit and try to look out for any positives.
Remember that relationships are two-way – so often even if the other person is the first one to do something negative or hurtful, immediately writing them off will influence how you interact with them. This in turn, could bring even more resentment or conflict into the situation.
- Alternatively, following points 1-4 could mean that, given time, the relationship – whether social or professional – could be positive.

“Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around.” Leo Buscaglia, author.

Life is complicated enough without having clouded judgments about a person or situation, which is likely to lead to unnecessary frustration, resentment and conflict. If there is a situation in your workplace which may have resulted from clouded judgments, or if there is any kind of conflict or situation which may benefit from the input of a neutral third party, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in touch via the Contact page .

Promises, Promises

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Thu, 10 May 2018 12:50:08 GMT

Have you ever been let down when someone promised to do something and then didn’t follow through on it? What did that do to how you felt about them and your relationship?

All relationships – whether personal or professional – are built on trust. Every time someone doesn’t keep their word, it damages that trust. Different things are important to each person, but even the small things can affect the relationship. When you have known someone for a while and have built up a certain amount of trust, there may be a certain understanding about each other’s idiosyncrasies – such as a person’s tendency to be late or forgetting things. However, even with close relationships, if a person continues to break promises, it will begin to erode that trust and, unless changes are made, it will do damage to the relationship.

In a purely professional relationship, there tends to be even less grace given for broken promises. The reason why I am so interested in the impact of damaged trust is that so often when people are stuck in a cycle of conflict, it tends to correlate with there also being a lack of trust between them. In a work situation this could result from any or all of the following:

Failing to achieve targets
Repeated lateness
Multiple conflicts with colleagues
Poor performance
Any form of deception
Bad-mouthing clients/colleagues/management

The problem with losing trust in someone is that it leaves room for suspicion and doubt about their abilities and/or motives. So often, I find that those who have decided to use mediation as a tool to resolve conflict or communication issues, have been unable to resolve the concerns previously due to having a fixed view that the other person has suspicious motives. This is normally because they have previously had a concern about a person which was then further reinforced by more behaviours which ‘proved’ their theory.

“Don't ever promise more than you can deliver, but always deliver more than you promise.” Lou Holtz

It is realistic to bear in mind that no one can succeed in keeping their word, or not having issues with other people, or their job, all the time. Not only are we all fallible human beings but other factors and stressors will have an impact on our ability to function professionally and have healthy relationships – such as health or money issues.

Nevertheless, it is just as important to remember the value of being accountable when we do make mistakes . Though trust can be easily broken, it can also be rebuilt. If a person can’t deliver on their promise, not only should there be a genuinely good reason, but if they also communicate both the problem and the proposed solution to the other person, it will go some way to rebuilding that trust. If it goes unmentioned, it will either seem like deception or a disregard for others.

Once trust is broken, promising only ‘to try’ - though it shows a willingness to make positive steps - will not be enough to establish trust. In his book, ‘The Speed of Trust’, Stephen M.R. Covey demonstrates that trust has two parts to it – character and competency. Though a person’s character – through their intentions and their integrity – may be worthy of trust, if they cannot demonstrate that they can do what they say they will do, it places a question mark over their capabilities and whether they can deliver results. Furthermore, if the ‘trying’ consistently doesn’t translate into keeping their word, it will start to negatively impact the other person’s perception of their true intentions and integrity.

“... if the results aren’t there, neither is the credibility. Neither is the trust. It’s just that simple; it’s just that harsh.” Stephen M.R. Covey

So, if you make a promise, if you say you will do something, or if your job requires certain standards of behaviour or performance levels, be prepared to follow through or you might find that other people are not as gracious as you would hope. Likewise, if you make promises to your staff, family members or friends, be aware of how your actions, or inactions, could negatively impact their trust in you and the strength of your relationship – especially if not keeping your word causes harm or pain to people.

It is not impossible to rebuild trust once it has been damaged, but it will take effort and very good communication skills. Mediation is a great tool to enable communication and to work through trust issues. If there are situations in your workplace that might benefit from the help of a neutral third party to facilitate a positive and productive conversation, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page.

Let Sleeping Dogs Lie

Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:50:13 GMT

As a mediator, a lot of my job involves facilitating conversations between people which, if they had been able to have had earlier, could potentially have saved a lot of the hostility and time spent dealing with that conflict. Accordingly, my standard go-to advice to anyone would be to not avoid tricky subjects with people, however, there are times when the best option is to drop the subject. There is a distinction between avoidance and prudence when tackling certain topics with different individuals. The trick is knowing which topics are the ‘hot-button’ topics and which are topics that just need to be approached with sensitivity.

Hot-button issues : often generate a lot of strong opinions and sometimes can lead to heated ‘discussions’. Sensitive issues : are topics that feel particularly personal or subjects (sometimes hot-button topics) which on the face of it, appear neutral but due to an individual’s background or experience, touch a nerve.

Personally, I enjoy a healthy debate. Debate enables you to hear different perspectives and it could also challenge your mindset or any pre-conceived notions about certain issues. It stops being positive when the debate becomes personal – when views are expressed in a way that causes offence or minimises the other person’s views.

Some examples of topics which currently tend to be subjects that people often have strong views about are:

· Parenting

· Brexit

· NHS

· Abortion

· Immigration

· Mental health

· Welfare

· Diversity in the workplace

· Workplace competitiveness

Again, this list is not a ‘subjects to avoid’ list but rather a non-exhaustive list of topics which it would be prudent to approach with awareness and sensitivity to those around you, if you want to avoid unnecessary conflict. The reality is that even with colleagues who we have worked with for many years, there is often a lot of their background and experiences that we aren’t aware of. It is sensible, then, to not assume that we know what they think or believe about these topics. Nevertheless, it is still possible and positive for members of families, friends and colleagues to be able to have healthy relationships with other people that have different – or even opposing – views.

So, when should subjects be tackled or dropped? Here are some factors which make a real difference to knowing which action is most appropriate:

1. History of relationship

a. No serious unresolved issues – It is more likely for you to have a debate without any previous bad history casting a shadow over the conversation. If misunderstandings that do happen they should be able to be talked through without causing damage to the relationship.

b. Previous issues or disagreements – It is still possible to have a ‘grown-up’ conversation but there needs to be greater sensitivity and awareness of body language and phrases which may cause emotions to be heightened.

2. Aim of conversation

a. To share your views AND to understand alternative views – If it is apparent that a person respects and is interested in another person’s views and why they hold them, without passing judgement, it immediately reduces the tension and allows other people to be more open.

b. Solely to express your own views – This is common and natural but tends to only have a positive result if the other people in the conversation agree with you. If they disagree and there is no openness to hearing other views, it is natural that they would feel that that their view is being minimised or criticised. The likely outcome with the latter situation is a heated debate, where neither party feel listened to.

3. The subject is key to the workplace/relationship functioning

a. Discussing privately to seek options – This is often helpful to gather opinions and make positive and proactive decisions about the running of an organisation or changes that need to be made to clarify issues. Doing it privately and sensitively allows concerns to be aired and addressed without it becoming gossip or inflaming strong opinions.

b. Debating it publicly – There is a much greater risk of it turning into a very heated discussion, where the object is to convince everyone else. Often those of a quieter disposition will keep their opinions to themselves so only the views of those with louder personalities get heard. In some workplaces public debate is encouraged and is seen as a positive thing that strengthens relationships, but this normally is only workable where there are established boundaries and mutual respect.

4. Where there appears to have been some wrong or injustice

a. Private discussion with an ‘appropriate person’ – To address the issue directly with the person involved or to seek options to find a way forward or to address the issue is proactive and often necessary. The appropriate person is likely to be a line manager or someone able to discreetly advise on the best options.

b. Gossip with other colleagues – What at the beginning may be the intention to just vent or to seek other opinions, often just results in other people becoming involved in the issue and talking to even more people about it. Unfortunately, this often does little to resolve the ‘injustice’ but instead just makes the issue bigger and the misinterpretations wider spread.

Also, it is worth bearing in mind that the behaviour and phrasing used needs to be appropriate for that workplace and your role at work. There may even be policies in place which put limits on what, or how, you are expected to talk about particular subjects.

As a mediator, addressing issues before they become difficult to manage is a great way to avoid unnecessary conflict. Yet, it is very apparent that some conversations with certain people are bound to turn negative and it is worth deciding whether it is worth it. There will always be differences of opinion on certain subjects and, when it looks like a discussion is going downhill fast, sometimes it is best to just ‘agree to disagree’. Very few people will make a 180-degree turnaround after a heated debate anyway. If someone is going to change their mind, it is likely to take more than a few open-minded discussions, private research and sole contemplation on the topic.

If you want to know more about how Mosaic Mediation can help by providing training on communication or conflict resolution, or if there is a situation you feel may benefit from mediation, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or contact us via the Contact page .

What's Your Point?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 12 Mar 2018 17:43:33 GMT

Have you ever had a conversation which unexpectedly went downhill and just wouldn’t get back on track? Most people have, so what happened to make it fall apart?

In Stephen R. Covey’s book ‘The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People’, the second habit is ‘To begin with the end in mind’. The principle encourages people to picture what you would you like to happen or achieve, with a project or a job, etc., before jumping into it. This principle can also be applied to taking a moment to think before having conversation with someone – particularly if it is of a sensitive nature or difficult relationship; thinking through what you would like to communicate or achieve by having the conversation.

The reality is that in a working environment, not everyone will get along, but it is imperative that individuals find a way to communicate and work productively together even if there is a difficult dynamic between them . Having an important conversation can be tricky enough when you get along, let alone when you don’t; so, it pays to pause and think first.

"Precision of communication is important, more important than ever, in our era of hair trigger balances, when a false or misunderstood word may create as much disaster as a sudden thoughtless act." James Thurber

Focus is the key word here – being focussed on what the aim is and consistently remembering that aim throughout the discussion. This is particularly true for those difficult – yet necessary – conversations.
1. What’s the focus?
Giving some thought to what your goal is before you begin an important or difficult conversation could trigger a conversation that either is productive or one that spirals downhill. If the goal is positive, then you are off to a good start. For example, if the focus is ‘to understand the other person’, then you are more likely to listen carefully; or if the focus is ‘to relay sensitive information effectively’, then you are more likely to be mindful of the wording used and the delivery of the information.

Alternatively, if your aim is not positive or beneficial to your working relationship, then it could put you on the backfoot. For example, if you are doing a project, what’s your aim? Most likely it would be to get it done well, so the focus would be on quality. However, if the aim were simply to get it done quickly, it’s possible that the quality of the project would get lost. Likewise if the aim for a conversation is to understand the other person’s perspective then you are more likely to have a good exchange where you listen and ask questions to clarify your understanding; whereas, if the aim is for them to understand only your perspective, then you may have been able to vent but it’s unlikely that you will finish that conversation with a more positive relationship with the other person than you had before.

2. Keeping focussed
Communication is not a one-way process and as such, it is easy to get distracted from your initial aim if the other person says something which catches you off guard or that triggers you to feel angry or defensive. If during the conversation it becomes clear that you also need to cover other concerns, then you should.The key is to not let your emotions get the better of you and to keep coming back to your goal and to remain focussed on the positive aims that you originally pictured.

Staying focussed helps you filter what you say – not so as to be disingenuous, but rather to give you a heightened awareness of how some words/phrases/topics could cause the conversation to spiral or to be a trigger that cause different individuals to become defensive. I know that if I am particularly tired or stressed, I am more likely to say something insensitive that reflects my tiredness more than anything else. Yet, when I am on focussed, I can have some very challenging conversations with people and still manage to remain on good terms with them – often on better terms than before.

Tips on having a productive conversation:
• Don’t discuss the issue with lots of other people beforehand – Seeking advice from someone you trust to be discreet may be helpful but beyond that, talking about issues with another colleague to other colleagues only tends to create further issues in a workplace. A difficult relationship brings its own complications and it only becomes more complicated when more people are included.
• Avoid name and labels – It may seem juvenile but so many conversations between adults go downhill from being labelled a certain way or being called a name which causes hurt and distrust. Using phrases such as ‘This is what I felt…’ and ‘I thought…’, instead of ‘You are…’ or ‘You obviously did/thought/feel…’ feels less like an attack and more like clarification.
• Avoid assumptions – If you aim to understand the other person’s perspective, that can only be done by asking questions and being open to an answer that is different to what you expected.
• Listen – Being able to listen carefully (and showing them that you are listening) not only lowers their defences and shows them respect, but it also may be very enlightening.
• Look for positives – Where there are differences of opinion or a difficult relationship dynamic, acknowledge anything positive that happens, such as moments of agreement or understanding. This keeps the conversation flowing in a positive direction.
• Lower your defences – It is understandable that you would be reluctant about being vulnerable with people that you don’t get along with, especially if the conversation is also challenging. However, if you allow yourself to begin to lower your guard it should make it easier for the other person to do the same, and consequently make it easier to have an open and honest conversation.

One of the key benefits of the mediation process is the mediator’s ability to keep parties focussed on the goal - which is generally to have a productive conversation and to find a way forward that is mutually agreeable. A mediator will first listen and understand the key concerns and then is best placed to help the parties then focus on future options.

Having a focus before you begin a sensitive or difficult conversation may appear to be overthinking things but, in reality, it gives you the advantage of having clarity beforehand on how to address things in a way that means you leave the conversation feeling like you communicated what you needed to and the other person received it in the way it was intended. In addition it helps you to be mindful of body language and tone and, hopefully, enables you to gain insight into the other person’s perspective as well.

If you are interested to find out more about mediation, communication skills or what other services Mosaic Mediation can provide, please get in touch by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page .

Watch Your Tone!

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 11:36:03 GMT

We have all heard the sayings: “It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it” or “It wasn’t the words, it was the delivery” or, a parenting favourite, “Watch your tone!”

So, it should be no surprise that when we communicate with someone, our tone of voice plays a great role in how well – or how badly – that conversation goes. Research consistently finds that communication is made up of 3 elements: words, body language and tone of voice. Albert Mehrabian developed a communication model around the 1970s which demonstrated the importance of non-verbal communication. Some people refer to it as the 7-38-55 model, because according to Mehrabian only 7% of our communication is verbal. Our intonation represents 38%, and our body language represents 55% of what is communicated.

Just think of the number of times someone has said something which, if their tone had been friendlier or their body language more warm, their words would have been received better. Think of the times you weren’t able to believe someone was being genuine, even if they were saying all the right words.

There may also have been times when you have said something to a colleague and it has been received in a way that you did not at all expect – is it possible that they responding to your tone or body language, instead of your words?

Mehrabian’s theory suggests that to have effective communication, all three elements need to support each other – i.e. that your body language and your tone and your words are all delivering the same message. If you say something with a positive tone but your body language is aggressive, then you will be giving a very mixed message. If you say that you are listening to someone but then don’t give eye contact or respond with a dismissive tone, the other person is unlikely to believe you are being genuine.

Miscommunications and misunderstandings form a large part of unnecessary conflict. So often, people are unfortunately unaware of their own body language and tone of voice and this can lead to offense or hurt being caused but with completely innocent intentions. Being able to communicate effectively with those that you work with, with clients or with management can only be a positive thing. So, it pays to be aware of how you are coming across to other people and whether your words match your tone and body language.

Our tone of voice is often said to ‘tell the truth our words don’t’ . A person could say something very complimentary but if they have a critical tone of voice, it implies negative connotations. When our tone doesn’t match the words used, it is likely to make the other person doubt how genuine we are being. This also applies to what words a person puts emphasis on – i.e. with the phrase ‘I didn’t say I hate you’, try putting the emphasis on a different word each time and notice how it completely changes the meaning of the sentence.

Body language, according to Mehrabian’s theory, is even more significant. Body language can include: eye contact, posture, physical gestures and facial expressions. Picture a toddler stamping their feet and frowning whilst also saying, “I am not cross!” The majority would believe their body language over their words. If someone is being vulnerable and the other person’s body language is closed off – crossed arms, no eye contact, blank expression – but then they say ‘I am here for you’, their words are not going to feel genuine.

It can take time and effort to change habits in communication but here are some tips to help:

Pause – When responding to someone, particularly on a sensitive topic, being able to pause gives you time to be aware of what message you are sending out through your words, body language and tone of voice, so that they don’t get a mixed message.
Reframing – This is when you take something which could easily be taken negatively and reframe it so that it feels more positive and helps the other person more receptive to the comment or question. This is a powerful tool in being able to communicate honestly but yet also ensuring it is received in the best way.
Be honest – By being honest with yourself when there are elements of your communication style which need work, you will then be able to address them. Also allow for the possibility that you could be wrong in how you have received what someone else has communicated – that you may have made incorrect assumptions or your perceptions based on what you have previously experienced may have clouded your judgment.
Focus – What is the goal? For most people, it is for the other person to understand what they are trying to communicate and, most of the time, the aim is also to have a healthy – personal or professional – relationship. When communicating about a sensitive issue and when emotions are heightened, we can lose focus on those aims and doing so is likely to result in poor and ineffective communication.
Watch – When you are talking to someone, they will be responding non-verbally in one way or another. Seeing how their body language and facial expression changes as you speak will give you clues as to how they feel about what you are saying and behaving. If they start to withdraw physically, they may be feeling defensive or hurt. If their response is completely unexpected, maybe you aren’t communicating as effectively as you had hoped.

If two people also have a history of communicating poorly, it takes an even more focussed effort to change habits of communication, seek clarity of intentions and to ensure no mixed messages are received. When trying to communicate effectively with people, it certainly helps to understand their perspective and any personal sensitivities they may have which could influence how they receive what is being relayed, and equally how they respond.

Words on their own are powerful and it is important to be aware of how much certain words can affect people and, therefore, influence how they respond. We need to be conscious of the fact that if we don’t put in the effort into communicating effectively with others then it has the potential to lead to miscommunication, misunderstandings, unhealthy relationships and unnecessary conflict.

Mediation is a great tool to help challenge damaging or unhealthy communication habits. If you want to know more about how mediation could make a positive difference to a challenging situation between people in your workplace, or any other areas of conflict or dispute, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or via the Contact page.

Work Stress

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 10 Jan 2018 10:50:18 GMT

I read a fascinating book just before Christmas called The Stress Test, which was written by clinical psychologist and cognitive neuroscientist Professor Ian Robertson. The book explains his findings and theories about stress, it’s causes, and the impact stress can have on a person’s life. It tries to understand how for some people stress can make them crumble, whereas for others stress can make them more resilient. It got me thinking about how stress is often associated with communication or relationship challenges.

Stress occurs when a person feels that the demands made on them exceed their ability to cope. Stress can come from any area of life - whether it be financial pressures, family relationships, sickness, mental health problems or big life changes. For many people their biggest stress is work-related – in fact, you would be hard-pushed to find a person who didn’t know someone who had taken time off work with stress. According to the Labour Force Survey 2015/16 half a million workers in the UK suffer with work-related stress, anxiety or depression and it is estimated that 11.7 million days were lost due to stress-related absences.

Stress is a huge issue – both for those suffering with it and for organisations trying to understand the causes and how to make positive changes to improve the situation. Stress can impact on a person’s mood, sleep, and relationships. It can affect a person’s ability to function, such as being unable to make decisions or to concentrate. It can also manifest as physical symptoms such as headaches, eye tension, chest pain, or stomach problems.

In ‘The Stress Test’ Professor Ian Robertson explains the physical response to stress where your brain releases adrenaline and cortisol – which is commonly referred to as the ‘fight or flight’ response. This produces a heightened awareness of what’s going on around you and can cause someone to feel overwhelmed. For many people who suffer with stress, it can also lead to anxiety or depression.

Whether the cause of the stress is work-related or from outside factors, stress is likely to impact on a person’s performance at work. It is well-documented that stress can have a negative impact on productivity, it can lead to poor decision-making and mistakes being made. It could also cause sickness absence, a higher staff turnover and poor workplace relations. Thus, there is a also a business case for tackling stress in the workplace .

To tackle such a wide-reaching issue, there needs to be a 2-pronged approach: self-management and organisational awareness.

Self-management :
Ideally, we would all be aware of how we are feeling, why we feel that way and how to make ourselves feel better instantly. Realistically, we are very complicated beings and may not always understand how we are being affected by circumstance or what triggers certain feelings. One theory that I took from Professor Ian Robertson is that to become resilient against stress, you need 3 key ingredients:
1. Self-awareness – the ability to understand why you are feeling the way you do about a situation, yourself, or another person and to be able to regulate those feelings. It means understanding what triggers you to feel happy, angry or overwhelmed and if your response is caused just by the circumstances you are in, by external factors or by something that happened in your history.
2. Distance from situation – the ability to look objectively at a situation, so that the heightened awareness caused by stress doesn’t cause a person to feel an emotion or respond in a way that’s disproportionate to the event.
3. Belief of control – knowing that you can have some control over the situation. Some things are out of our control, but we can choose how we respond.

Organisational awareness :
It was highlighted in the Labour Force Survey 2015/16 that the main causes of work-related stress fit into two categories:
1. Workload pressure
a. Too much responsibility
b. Too much pressure
c. Tight deadlines
2. Lack of managerial support
a. Organisational changes
b. Violence at work
c. Role uncertainty

The above sub-categories are largely self-explanatory; yet there is a consistent theme in that they all involve a lack of control to change the situation and a feeling of not being supported in their role. From a mediator’s perspective it seems that having open communication between employees and employers would greatly reduce the above stressors. This includes ensuring that staff feel heard when they have concerns, enabling staff to have input in changes being made and trying to nip any miscommunication in the bud.

Just as those 3 key ingredients from Professor Ian Robertson are required for individuals to withstand stress, for organisations to deal with stress-related issues in their workplace they also need to:
• Be self-aware in order to see what they are doing well at and what needs improvement to reduce the causes of stress on their workers
• Be able to distance themselves from the situation enough to objectively determine whether the workload being put on people, the environment they work in and any changes being made are realistic and reasonable; or alternatively, whether the response from staff is disproportionate to those factors
• To believe in their ability to have some control over stress-related issues

Stress is a sensitive topic and it can manifest itself in many ways. It can lead to problems with work relationships - between colleagues, within management, and between staff and line managers. On the face of it, a breakdown in relationship or conflict may appear to have no relation to stress; however, it would be helpful for both parties to take any potential stress-related issues into consideration as a possible cause of problems when having difficulties working with, or communicating effectively with, someone at work.

ACAS has provided a simple table on the causes of work-related stress and some ideas for an organisation to tackle the issue here, http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=815 .

As a neutral third party, a mediator has the ability to act as a sounding-board for each person involved in the dispute. Through talking and reality-checking, a mediator is often able to get to the source of the concerns and can then facilitate a more productive and positive conversation.

If you know of a situation in your organisation that might benefit from mediation, or are interested in finding out more, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in touch via the Contact page .

The Good Fight

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 04 Dec 2017 16:57:08 GMT

If you follow this blog, you may have picked up that I tend to make a point of using the phrase ‘unnecessary conflict’ and that is because I believe that conflict is not always negative. If we think back through history, there are clear examples of conflict that have been destructive and damaging; yet there are also times of conflict which have instigated positive change – such as, Martin Luther King Jr and the American civil rights movement, the abolishment of slavery, and the women’s right to vote.

Conflict can raise awareness about an issue that exists but has not been highlighted. More often than not, conflict occurs when an individual feels like their values have been violated or that their needs have not been met, and there are many issues in the world that people have opinions about or maybe disagree with, but it often takes a certain trigger to prompt them into action.

If we scale down from global social issues to personal relationships, it is common for people to remain silent about something they dislike about someone’s behaviour or to make passively aggressive jokes or comments instead of confronting the issue. Invariably, this will not change someone’s behaviour - in fact, more than likely it will create defensiveness and confusion in the relationship instead.

The likelihood of unnecessary conflict becomes even greater when conflict is avoided at all costs. Whether it manifests in the form of quiet tension, disproportionate reactions to minor disagreements or maybe a person distancing themselves from other people; the issue remains unresolved as long as a person is not honest about their concerns and/or the concern is not acknowledged by the other person. The latter acknowledgement largely relies on the former acknowledgement – don’t assume the other person knows what the issue is! Though it may feel more comfortable, the kind of peace gained by conflict avoidance is often short-lived. Also, when concerns are not addressed, it may be a missed opportunity for honest truths that come from restorative conversations.

“When people talk, listen completely. Most people never listen.” ― Ernest Hemingway

Whereas, when someone decides to voice their concerns or stand up for their interests, though it may initially create a situation of conflict – where those involved neither agree nor understand the position of the other side – if those individuals are then able to move towards a situation of greater understanding, then there is likely to be positive change. In such a situation the positive impact of conflict could be a stronger relationship.

The fact is that conflict is inevitable and knowing this can better prepare a person to manage conflict more effectively. When conflict comes as a shock, a person is more likely to feel defensive and anxious. Whereas, when a person understands that conflict is part of life and that it can be used positively then hopefully they will be more likely to seek to understand different perspectives and more open for constructive change.

So, what makes conflict negative or healthy?

Attitude:

Healthy attitude – aiming for a ‘win-win’ scenario, open to constructive change, thinking long-term and willing to engage in finding a solution.
Negative attitude – aiming to ‘win’ the argument, unwilling to acknowledge responsibility or the issue and unwilling to move forward.

Communication:

Healthy communication – open, honest and respectful. Seeking to understand by listening without judgment.
Negative communication – focussing on blame, not vocalising true feelings and not listening to the other person. Verbal abuse and judgmental or negative phrasing.

The basis of conflict is when two or more groups or individuals disagree on an issue and are not able to understand the other side. With Christmas on the horizon, conflict may feel ever more present. It is natural for people to disagree and this is common in the workplace too but the key not allowing it to have a negative impact on individuals or the organisation is for those involved to have a positive attitude and to communicate in productive way.

“I think that hate is a feeling that can only exist where there is no understanding.” ― Tennessee Williams

The process of mediation encourages individuals to address their concerns and to seek to understand the concerns of the other person. It recognises that when people explore mutual interests and listen to alternative perspectives, it increases mutual understanding and therefore lowers the intensity of the conflict. The truth is that facing conflict and working through it ends the conflict much faster than ignoring it – which is true for both personal and professional relationships. Working through conflict in a positive way is more often a skill which is learned, rather than one which comes naturally but there are many methods of developing a positive culture at home or work where conflict is resolved rather than avoided.

If you are interested in finding out more about how mediation or workshops on communication or conflict resolution could help situations of conflict and enable difficult conversations to be had, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page.

No Fees, No Worries?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 01 Nov 2017 16:43:24 GMT

It created headlines when in July this year the Supreme Court ruled in R v Lord Chancellor that the fees introduced in 2013 for bringing a case at an employment tribunal were ‘unlawful’. Fees could be from £160 up to £1200. The government had said that they were brought in as part of an effort to eliminate malicious or weak cases. The Supreme Court found, however, that the fees prevented access to justice for claimants and would often render any compensation element futile. Also, it said that claimants on a low income were unable to afford the fees.

There have been many people arguing against the introduction of tribunal fees, including union representatives and employment solicitors. For many this decision is a win for justice. From 26th July 2017, no claimant is required to pay a fee to bring a case to the employment tribunal , and those that already have paid a fee have been reassured that it will be refunded in time. Whatever your opinion on tribunal fees, scrapping them is going to have an impact on both employees and employers.

The introduction of these fees had a dramatic bearing on the caseload of the employment tribunal and government figures showed a 79% drop in cases brought to an employment tribunal over 3 years. Having worked at the employment tribunal during one of its busiest times during the recession and before the fees, I found this statistic particularly interesting. Now that it is potentially free to bring a claim, claimants may not be so reticent to do so. Paul McFarlane (Chair of the Employment Lawyers Association) said, “Once fees are scrapped, it is likely there will be a significant rise in the number of claims being brought.”

So, what does this mean for employees?

You may not need to pay anything to bring a claim – though you may choose to pay for a solicitor or barrister. However, if there is a sudden increase in caseload then there is also a greater probability of lengthier delays between starting the claim process and getting to a hearing.

What could this mean for employers?

There is an increased chance that if you have a disgruntled employee or if the correct ACAS procedures have not been followed, your organisation may be brought to an employment tribunal. Since 2013 there has been a smaller chance of repercussions as the likelihood of someone bringing a claim – let alone seeing a tribunal case through to the end - was a lot lower.

3 tips on avoiding a claim being brought in future:
1. Open communication with staff and between colleagues
• Great communication is essentially the greatest tool for any organisation to avoid unnecessary conflict and the cost and stress of a case.
• It allows for concerns to be aired and dealt with before they become big issues.

2. Clear and consistent HR policies and procedures
• Many organisations tell me how difficult it can be to keep up to date with the latest changes in the legal requirements for an organisation, but it certainly pays to be as aware as possible of what is expected.
• For those organisations who do not have their own internal HR department, there are many independent HR consultants out there or business advice phonelines who can offer support in this area.

3. Be aware and proactive in maintaining standards of behaviour
• It pays to ensure that people in management are self-aware and know when to change a behaviour that is causing concern, or at least to have others in the organisation around who will keep them accountable about their potential blind spots.
• Tackle staff behaviours that are having a negative impact on the organisation before they have a knock-on effect on their colleagues or their own career.

It is worth bearing in mind that though a tribunal may provide a sense of ‘justice’, the course of bringing a claim is often stressful, financially impactful and can take an excessive amount of time and energy to prepare for. Where there is a chance that a situation may end up at the employment tribunal, both employee and employer would likely benefit more from trying to resolve a situation first.

Even if a situation does not end up in the courtroom, it is likely that you will have been around, or had to deal with, conflict at some point. Whether you are personally involved in the dispute or if you have had to oversee the matter at a management level, you will be aware of the time it can take to sort – if resolution is even achieved by the end. The time spent dealing with conflict can be great and it is often time that could be better spent doing other elements of your role.

When concerns become disputes or where communication becomes difficult, it may be time to think outside the traditional process. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods such as the process of mediation can limit the time, financial cost and stress that is a natural side-effect of unresolved conflict. Mediation is, in its simplest form, a conversation between people, facilitated by a neutral third party. The process enables people to lower their guard, engage in meaningful discussions and think through ways forward that can have a lasting impact on them and their workplace.

If you feel like there is a situation which may lead to a tribunal, or if there are any employment or workplace disputes that may benefit from having a neutral third party involved, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in touch through the Contact page .

The ‘M’ Word

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Wed, 04 Oct 2017 10:52:13 GMT

When I meet new people and the conversation gets onto my profession, 8 out of 10 times their next question will be “Mediator, what’s that?” Of those that know what a mediator is, they would normally associate it with family law disputes.

Of those that do know what a ‘workplace and employment’ mediator does, many do not recognise how mediation can be used to resolve a dispute or conflict in the workplace. So here is a simplified description of what workplace and employment mediation is and is not:

What mediation is not:
• A replacement for HR processes or professionals
• A pointless exercise
• For the sole benefit of the employer (or employee)
• Dictating a solution
• To ensure employees always stay with the organisation
• Providing a short-term fix

What mediation is:
1. Completely voluntary
2. Without prejudice
3. Confidential throughout
4. Aiming for BOTH parties to find and agree a mutually beneficial solution
5. Not going to affect a person’s legal rights
6. A process in which the mediator is neutral and impartial throughout
7. Time-efficient
8. Focussed on long-term benefits

1. Mediation is voluntary – which means that participants can leave whenever they want. The more willing a person is to participate, the more likely the mediation session is a success.
2. Mediation is without prejudice – which means that whatever is discussed during mediation cannot be brought up as evidence in any future legal proceedings
3. Mediation is confidential - Whatever is discussed with the mediator is treated as confidential and will not be discussed with any other participants unless the mediator has been given express permission to do so. At the end of the session, participants will agree specifically what information discussed during the day – if any - can be discussed with others.
4. Mediation aims for a mutually beneficial solution – The aim is for a ‘win-win’ solution, so the process allows for the parties to come up with and think through ideas and solutions that both parties find acceptable and will be practicable.
5. Mediation does not affect legal rights – So there is no risk of losing entitlement to rights or of compromising a person's legal position when going through mediation.
6. The Mediator is neutral and impartial – The mediator will facilitate discussions but will not take sides. The mediator will also neither try to steer parties towards a solution that they think is best, nor will they impose their views on the parties.
7. Mediation is time-efficient – The amount of time managers spend dealing with issues and disputes between colleagues or between the employee and the organisation is often greatly underestimated. If the conflict or concern is not dealt with effectively, it will then impact on others and the atmosphere in the workplace and could even lead to a tribunal – which costs time and can take several months or years to resolve. Whereas with mediation, most matters are able to be settled after a day of mediation.
8. Mediation focusses on the long-term – Whenever ideas are presented they are realistic and to make sure that they are practicable in the short-term, and that in the long-term their effect is to reduce the likelihood of conflict arising again.

A mediator’s job is not to tell line managers, HR professionals or business owners how to do their job, nor is it to tell them where they are going wrong. Rather, mediators offer to facilitate a discussion when it becomes clear that the regular processes are not being as effective in this situation as they normally would be.

“Conflict is inevitable, but combat is optional.” — Max Lucade

When to Ask for Help:
When a conflict or dispute erupts in a workplace, the first response is often for the relevant line manager to have an informal chat with those involved. In many situations, this can be enough to diffuse any issues, especially if some workable solutions can be found that would prevent such a conflict happening again. Sometimes the solution offered is to move disputing colleagues into separate teams – which may deal with some of the side-effects of the conflict but will not necessarily deal with the issue that led to the conflict in the first place. Another solution may be to remove the employee from the organisation altogether – however, if this is done in a way that makes the employee feel more aggrieved, the organisation may be inviting further problems to their door.

Sometimes, the situation may require a different approach, or to have someone else involved, for there to be effective and long-lasting results. When it comes to conflict – though, in some cases, space and time may be essential in the short-term – if concerns are left unresolved or mismanaged, it can cause great disruption in the workplace. In the extreme, some conflicts may be left so long that the damage cannot be undone.

If management or HR professionals are trained in conflict resolution techniques, it is more probable that conflict will be nipped in the bud. In some cases, for a conflict to be resolved they may need to invite a neutral third party in to facilitate the conversation. It could be that no matter how excellent a person is at conflict resolution or how good they are at staying neutral, the very fact that they are employed by the organisation could put them on the back-foot due to the potential perception that they have a vested interest in making sure the organisation comes out on top.

Workplace mediation can be used in numerous situations from performance management issues, personality clashes, back to work transitions, to bullying or harassment claims. If there is a situation that comes to mind that you think may benefit from mediation or you want to know more about the process, please get in contact through the Contact page or by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

Frenemies at Work

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 05 Sep 2017 14:10:43 GMT

“Life is hard as it is. Too many rough roads to travel. Too many chains to untangle. But no matter how cruel the world maybe, life becomes less hard when you’ve got a good friend.” Anonymous.

Good friendships are universally accepted to be a positive addition to anyone’s life. A workplace without friendships can feel lonely and isolating, and if this situation remains the same it would likely be a major factor in someone inevitably leaving.

There are many benefits to having friends at work as it has been shown to create:
• A more positive atmosphere
• A more supportive environment
• A more productive workplace
• Greater motivation to succeed as a team

With work friendships, however, there almost needs to be a written disclaimer attached: “Before embarking on a colleague-friendship you should first consider the additional factors involved.” For starters, for the vast majority work is a necessity to survive financially and as such the work itself will take priority over most, if not all, other relationships at work. When money - someone’s livelihood - is at stake, all bets are off. It is true that sometimes a colleague might value a relationship more than their job but very few would choose it over their job security.

There is also a natural competitiveness that occurs between colleagues (and friends at times). Anyone who has a passion for their job or big ambition is likely to measure themselves against the performance of their peers. If after their judgment, their own performance is ‘found wanting’ it can create insecurity, jealousy or defensiveness. An already strong friendship or a work culture of supporting peers when they need to improve in certain areas can mitigate these kinds of feelings developing into obvious tensions.

If, on the other hand, a person judges their colleague as a poorer performer at work this can create a different kind of tension: awkwardness surrounding whether to challenge their work-friend on the areas needing improvement; or even the inner battle to distance themselves from their work-friend’s behaviour to protect their own reputation. Their loyalties are divided and their integrity tested.

Over and above the previous examples given, the situation likely to be most damaging is when a friendship goes sour. For friendships outside of the workplace, it is unlikely that they will be forced into seeing the other person every day and be expected to be cordial. When the friendship breakdown is between two or more colleagues, the effect can be exponential and it can have a massive impact on their performance, their motivation, other team members and inevitably the time that management spend either managing performance or dealing with conflict.

Some people will naturally understand the potential complexities of having work-friends and will, therefore, keep a little more distance before trusting colleagues with a deeper friendship. For others, when a friendship develops organically, they may not consider the other factors involved in having a friend who is also a colleague and so if the unexpected happens, the impact will be felt more deeply.

When a friend who is not a colleague experiences success, it is easy to celebrate with them. Whereas when they are a colleague, their success may actually highlight another’s failures and so make it more difficult to celebrate them. Furthermore, if their success involves a role change whereupon they are now in a management position over their friend, the dynamic between them at work has the potential to change significantly, maybe even cause friction between them if performance issues ever arise.

This may feel like a pessimistic view on the ability to have positive and enriching friendships with colleagues. On the contrary, the motivation behind this article is to highlight the potential for unnecessary conflict – as such, here are some principles that can be put in place to avoid such issues.

Key principles to develop and maintain healthy friendships at work:
1. Trust
• Even if it takes some time to determine a person’s trustworthiness, a friendship built on mutual trust will survive also being colleagues.
• Trust is strengthened by also implementing the 4 principles below.
2. Honesty
• A friendship where both parties can be respectfully honest will give transparency to a person’s behaviour and it leaves no room for doubting their intentions.
• When someone shows their willingness to deceive, lie or even fabricate issues it will subconsciously create doubt in a friend’s mind over the potential for that person to be dishonest with them too.
3. Integrity
• Just like the principle of honesty, when someone shows their true integrity by trying to do the right thing, it fosters trust in a relationship.
• If, on the other hand, they show their ability to behave in a way that does not show strength of character or principled, it will not serve that friendship well and will make prioritising friendship over their job even less likely.
4. Understanding
• Being aware that work is a priority means that someone will not automatically expect undivided loyalty to them over work pressures.
• Having realistic expectations about a friendship involves listening to the other person, having empathy for their situation and being gracious when they do something that you may have done differently.
5. Respect
• A friendship without mutual respect is unlikely to last long and more likely to be negatively affected by the additional factors when you are also colleagues.
• Respect in friendship is shown by taking an interest, by treating them with kindness and by demonstrating respectful behaviour towards them.
• Showing respect to colleagues involves all the above but, in addition, there needs to be an awareness of workplace pressures, valuing a person’s reputation and also coming to them directly with issues.

In every work situation that I have been in or heard about from friends and family over the years, the atmosphere at work is at its worst when work-friends have a falling out. Often, by the time it hits this point, the situation has become extremely difficult to manage – unless someone neutral is able to work through the issues.

Having friendships at work can be a very positive, productive and enriching situation for both the friends and the organisation at large. However, it can at times be a difficult situation to master, especially when those in whom you placed your trust and friendship do not reciprocate or implement the principles laid out above. When dealing with a conflict, those who feel the most hurt are those who have been betrayed or mistreated by someone they considered to be a friend or someone in a position of trust.

Nevertheless, the risks of having friends at work are outweighed by the quality of friendship that can come of having people around you for the majority of your week that you enjoy spending time with. Such friends will probably have mutual interests and passions and empathy for whatever work pressures you may be under and can be a support-system if you have issues going on outside of the workplace. Employing the 5 principles I have highlighted in your relationships – both at work and in relationships in general – is likely to improve the chances of having good and healthy working relationships and friendships, and less likely to lead to unnecessary conflict.

If you are in a situation at work where a broken friendship is having a negative impact on the organisation, please feel free to get in contact to see if there is anything mediation can do to help with the situation. Contact me through the website or by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

Owning It

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 31 Jul 2017 20:24:08 GMT

“More people would learn from their mistakes if they weren’t so busy denying them”, Harold J Smith.

Taking responsibility. It’s a respected trait when seen in other people and yet it is often under-utilised by most of the population. People would rather cover up their mistakes or blag their way out of a situation than take responsibility. Understandably, there may sometimes be a legitimate fear of the consequences of owning up to a mistake but predominantly the reason for not taking responsibility is to ‘save face’ and do some image management.

A person may even at times be in complete denial of their behaviour or character traits. This could be due to the high level of shame they feel and to admit fault would open the door to such intense emotions that they block themselves off from accepting any responsibility. Alternatively, their perception of ‘who they are’ might be so rigid that they are unable to see themselves in a different light – even if all the evidence points to their perception being inaccurate. In both these situations, the person is more likely to deflect blame onto someone else and see themselves in the role of being ‘the victim’. In the extreme, if someone displays personality traits which are akin to a narcissist, whereby they have a grandiose view of themselves, any criticism – whether based on fact or opinion – would be completely incomprehensible to them.

“The greatest of faults, I should say, is to be conscious of none.” Thomas Carlyle, Scottish philosopher.

Whatever the cause of not accepting responsibility for a situation or action, the outcome is likely to be largely negative. Newton’s third law states that for every action, there's an equal and opposite reaction. Just as it is the case with physics, it is true for human actions and behaviour. If someone makes a mistake at work, it has consequences. Equally, if someone is rude to another colleague, it has consequences – impacting relationships, disciplinary proceedings, or low morale.

Therefore, if someone does not take responsibility for a problem, it may be that an innocent bystander takes the blame instead. If a mistake remains unresolved, little problems can get bigger. Also, the likelihood of the truth not being discovered is minimal at best. If it is discovered later that the person responsible shirked any accountability for their actions then it will not reflect well on their principles and integrity. Such a discovery would almost always lead to damage to trust in any working or personal relationship.

It is a common error that people focus on the mistake itself being the biggest problem and so feel so compelled to cover it up. In reality, other people can forgive mistakes but once trust is broken following deception, it is much harder to regain that relationship. In a workplace environment trust between colleagues, or between management and staff, leads to greater productivity and a culture of healthy working relationships. Honesty is appreciated and gains respect; whereas deception loses respect and trust.

What does it mean to take responsibility? There are normally 4 key elements:
1. Take ownership
• Be accountable for whatever part your behaviour played in the situation and the outcome. Don’t make unnecessary excuses and don’t start spreading blame onto others.
2. Apologise
• Saying ‘sorry’ is a powerful tool in strengthening personal and working relationships. It does a lot to regain whatever trust is lost and makes steps to heal any damage done.
3. Make amends
• Saying ‘sorry’ does a lot but actions in addition to an apology takes things to a whole other level of mending fences.
4. Accept consequences
• Being prepared to accept the consequences of your actions may be worrying and those consequences may be considerable, depending on the extent of the damage done. However, doing this shows others your humility and allows them to see that you may still be trustworthy.

Taking responsibility does more than just show others what you are worth, it also is likely to boost your own self esteem as it gives back the power to influence the situation in a positive way.

“The willingness to accept responsibility for one’s own life is the source from which self-respect springs.” Joan Didion, author.

Not taking responsibility and not owning your behaviour leaves unresolved issues between people. It creates barriers to strong and honest relationships, and it will inevitably lead to stress from the guilt or the general uneasiness when any deception occurs. Most notable people with great success apportion some of their success to having people around them to keep them accountable and therefore constantly growing in character and the ability to be self-aware.

When working through a situation where there is conflict between people, it is far easier and far more effective when people own their mistakes or simply own how their behaviour could have affected the other person, unintentionally. Owning it is a daily process of making yourself accountable for your behaviour and in doing so, the likelihood of bringing unnecessary conflict into your work life is diminishes significantly.

Own it.

If you need any information on how mediation could help you with any workplace or employment issues, please get in touch by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page.

Making Peace vs. Keeping Peace

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 04 Jul 2017 10:14:11 GMT

When dealing with conflict, the main principle is simple – deal with the conflict . If someone is described as a ‘peacemaker’, it usually infers that they are quite passive in conflict or that they tend to brush over issues, rather than deal with them. However, this description more closely describes a ‘peacekeeper’.

Typical characteristics of someone who is a peacekeeper:
• They are likely to avoid conflict at all costs
• They are likely to put off dealing with issues – big or small
• They fear the possibility of not being liked or having difficult conversations
• They address the result of the conflict and not the cause

Of course, it is inevitable that issues being left will more than likely become bigger issues in the end, and therefore more difficult to work through, so these traits of a peacekeeper rarely keep the situation free of conflict .

Typical characteristics of someone who is a peacemaker:
• They are proactive in pursuing genuine peace
• They are prepared to have difficult conversations
• They seek reconciliation
• They have integrity and personal values about managing relationships
• They listen and seek to understand different perspectives

The net effect of being a peacemaker is that small issues either stay small or get resolved quickly, and they have honest and healthy relationships as a result. That is not to suggest that being a peacemaker also means you are free from conflict, conflict is part of life. However, it is more likely that whatever conflict occurs is short-lived and was necessary to work through issues.

“Avoiding conflict isn’t peace making. Avoiding conflict means running away from the mess while peace making means running into the middle of it. Peace making means addressing those issues that caused conflict in the first place.” Peggy Haymes, Author.

Workplaces have their fair share of tensions, frustrations, misunderstandings and assumptions between colleagues which may remain unresolved and therefore are more likely to have a negative impact on productivity and the ability to work effectively as a team. Aiming to keep the peace often comes from good intentions but it is short-sighted in its effectiveness to promote a genuinely positive and peaceful workplace environment. Sometimes a difficult conversation is needed to bring about peace and limit unnecessary conflict.

How to have difficult conversations as a peacemaker:
1. Check whether the issue will impact you, others or the workplace if not addressed.
• All difficult conversations have the potential to cause conflict so it is worth checking whether that conflict can be worked through and whether it is even necessary to bring it up as a concern.
2. Be clear on the actual issue being addressed and don’t confuse the conversation with other issues.
• It is easy to start talking about all the things that are frustrating or annoying you when addressing a concern, but this just tends to confuse the conversation and cause defensiveness, rather than productively work through an issue.
3. Focus on listening and understanding
• Going into any conversation whilst being aware that you may not have all the necessary information and that your opinion may not be the true reality of the situation, has the potential to extinguish hostility and reduce defensiveness.
4. Seek common ground
• Look for what you agree on and what your mutual interests are. When you focus on where you agree, it is easier to find reconciliation on points where you disagree.
5. Be open to taking responsibility for any part you have played in causing the concern
• Taking responsibility for yourself encourages others to take responsibility for their actions. It may not always turn out that way but taking responsibility will nevertheless be a positive thing.
6. Focus on the long-term gain and not on ‘winning’
• In any relationship, trying to win an argument will only create bigger barriers between people and will inhibit attempts to establish a peaceful environment.
7. Figure out how to be both honest and kind
• One of the traits of a peacekeeper is saying anything to keep the peace but that is short-sighted. A difficult conversation means being honest – but you can still be kind.

It is important to address concerns before they become big problems, so by having a difficult conversation promptly and using the tips above you are likely to reduce unnecessary conflict and limit any negative impact.

If there is conflict in the workplace and it has reached the point where you need a neutral third party to help work through the concerns, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmedation.co.uk or through the Contact page.

I Just Want Respect

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Fri, 02 Jun 2017 09:14:48 GMT

I have mentioned before that where there is conflict the issues may be extremely varied but generally built on common themes; such as miscommunication, feeling hurt or feeling disrespected.

Feeling disrespected
We all expect to be treated with respect, particularly in the workplace. Unfortunately, whether it be due to demanding management, abusive customers or simply feeling unappreciated by colleagues, it is commonplace to feel disrespected at work.

When someone feels that they have been disrespected it triggers a sense of injustice and damages trust in a relationship. The difficult thing about respect is that so often it is subjective, as it depends on what a person’s perception of an interaction has been . This being the case, we may only be able to accurately predict what may upset or offend a person if we study them closely over a long period of time – which is inevitably unrealistic in a workplace environment where you only get to see snapshots of someone’s personality and sensitivities. Therefore, a natural conclusion to draw is that offending someone at some point is inevitable – even if the intention was respectful.

Unfortunately, a belief that such situations are unavoidable tends to stop people from reflecting on their own behaviour or seeking to understand other people’s intentions. Even though a person may have set themselves high standards for acceptable behaviour, more often than not, they will still judge someone else’s behaviour on the face of it, without considering any contributing factors, such as; a stressful home life, job pressures or even our own perceptions. A quote that can be found in a book by the author and businessman Stephen M.R. Covey ‘The Speed of Trust: The One Thing That Changes Everything’ says it best:
“We judge ourselves by our intentions and others by their behaviour.”

Seeking to understand other people’s intentions will not only lower the risk of misunderstandings but will also train us to bear in mind another person’s perceptions of our own behaviour. The importance of having a respectful workplace environment should not be underestimated. It reduces the potential for conflict and improve morale, which then prompts less absenteeism and a lower staff turnover. It also has been shown time and again that a positive environment leads to a more productive workplace. It is a ‘win-win’ situation for everyone – which we like in mediation!

Showing respect
Although some people may even have unrealistic expectations of how other people should show respect, we are not powerless to implement behaviours that lead to a respectful workplace environment . Though a person’s perception of respect is subjective and largely reflects their own experience of what ‘respect’ is, feeling respected tends to be about feeling recognised, appreciated and being treated considerately. When you bear this in mind during interactions with others, you are almost certainly going to come across respectfully.

Here are 10 ways to demonstrate respect:
1. Listen to advice/feedback given
“One of the most sincere forms of respect is actually listening to what another has to say.” American author, Bryant H. McGill.
2. Consider personal and professional boundaries
If you are aware of a person’s sensitivities, you have the knowledge to avoid hurting or disrespecting them. It is equally prudent to acknowledge boundaries of professionalism in a workplace and the standards of behaviour that may be the most appropriate for different relationships or roles.
3. Give praise whenever appropriate
As I mentioned above, a person will often feel disrespected when they feel under-appreciated. This is a common issue amongst employees and worth tackling before it becomes a greater issue – especially when the solution is often easier.
4. Be aware of tone of voice and facial expressions
We know that during interactions with other people, what is being communicated is made up of words, tone of voice and body language. Even if the words being used are positive and polite, if our body language or tone of voice is projecting a different attitude or emotion, the words go unnoticed.
5. Be inclusive
Feeling excluded leads to defensiveness, distrust and having difficulty behaving as a team player – qualities which do not support a productive workplace. Be aware of how inclusive or exclusive you are with colleagues and staff members.
6. Treat colleagues or staff equally
In a similar vein to the issue of exclusivity, a sure way for someone to feel disrespected is perceiving any favouritism or victimisation being demonstrated by management or influential colleagues.
7. Show kindness
Small kindnesses such as listening to a colleagues issues, being gracious when mistakes are made, or offering a helping hand when someone has a problem, all contribute to an atmosphere of respect and to building a culture of mutual respect.
8. Refrain from nit-picking or insults
Unlike banter - which should be focussed on harmless humour (see my earlier post for thoughts on banter in the workplace) - nit-picking, gossip or hurtful insults is widely received as being disrespectful and will inevitably damage efforts made to develop a positive and productive workplace.
9. Be reliable
Showing that your priorities are in the right place and that you are considerate of other people’s time and commitments create a feeling of respect and dependability.
10. Refrain from micro-managing
Micro-managing demonstrates that you cannot trust someone to do what a task without your involvement. If someone has the skill and ability to do the job, micro-managing them unnecessarily will lead to feelings of defensiveness based on a lack of recognition for what they can do.

The saying ‘respect is earned’ is widely used but can be particularly unhelpful when used as a standard for how you interact with people. Though it may take time to appreciate certain qualities in a person that make you feel respect for them, if you want to have a positive influence on your social circle, have healthy relationships with people and you want to avoid unnecessary conflict, it works best to treat everyone with respect, whether you feel respect for them or not .

If you are dealing with, or are part of, a dispute in the workplace and you have any questions about how mediation might be able to resolve the conflict in a fair, respectful and mutually beneficial way, please get in touch via the Contact page or by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

He said, she said

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 01 May 2017 19:50:39 GMT

Gossip. Paradoxically, though gossip may at one time feel like a friendship-deepening, innocent thing, at another time it may feel devious and threatening. The reality is that much of the time, gossip is negative and will cause damage to relationships – for those at the heart of the issue and anyone caught up in the conversations. Just as where you find a rose, you will find thorns; when you hear gossip, you will find conflict.

Well-placed workplace banter is generally harmless, yet it is highly likely that all workplace gossip will instigate tension or conflict on some level. One distinction is that motivation behind banter is to create an environment of mutually deprecating humour. Gossip, on the other hand, is often motivated by gaining attention or showing moral distinctions between ‘them and us’. Gossip is also most likely to occur when the person or persons being discussed are not there, whereas banter is directed at the person when they are present.

Earl Wilson says, “Gossip… hearing something you like about someone you don’t.” In other words, it is enjoying hearing something about a person when the information is likely to lower other people’s opinion of them. The irony is that where one person attempts to sling mud at someone else, much of the mud ends up sticking to them. People soon learn not to trust a gossip.

The common assumption is that gossip is a predominantly female habit. However, the conclusions drawn from research over the years suggest that gossip is without gender-bias, although there may be a difference in the subject-matter. For men, gossip tends to be based around information, showing greater knowledge of a situation or about people’s achievements. Whereas, for women, gossip tends to be based upon social information about others.

In the workplace, gossip runs rife just as it does outside of work. The problem with workplace gossip is that it gets perpetuated by other people, quickly. It is often compared to the game of ‘Chinese Whispers’, where information gets added, edited or misconstrued as it is passed on. Even if the information were true – and most often gossip is assumption rather than fact – it is probably irrelevant or even completely inappropriate to share at work.

“Gossip dies when it enters the ears of the wise.” (Unknown)

Gossip can have a big impact on the following areas if left unchecked:
1. Employee engagement and turnover – good employees are unlikely to stay in an organisation where gossip is unconstrained. Such a place does not instil a sense of security.
2. Morale issues – When people are aware of gossip going on around them, it can cause a feeling of insecurity and defensiveness; therefore, leading to trust issues between colleagues.
3. Productivity levels – Not only does office gossip take time away from working, it can damage any motivation to work as a team, which will negatively impact productivity. Gossip can also damage an employee’s self-confidence and thus create barriers to working through challenges.
4. Liability – When gossip appears malicious and goes unchecked, there may be liability issues for those in management, for not doing enough to challenge and ultimately stop the behaviour.

Gossip spreads quickly and without restraint. It is perpetuated by others adding their own opinions, assumptions and predictions. Unfortunately, as the continually-edited version of the ‘information’ spreads, the opinions, assumptions and predictions become taken as factual. Very soon it is almost impossible to persuade people that the gossip is little more than fiction. Gossip once heard and believed, is difficult to unhear or disbelieve.

For some people, gossip can have unexpectedly damaging results. Workplace gossip can be related to assumptions about changes in the workplace or it can be very personal. It is commonplace for an employee’s relationships to be gossiped about, which can have huge consequences if statements or claims from others touch a sore spot at a difficult time in the relationship. Gossip about someone’s behaviour may also negatively affect the opinion of management and therefore, would be likely to impact a person’s career prospects if the information remains unchallenged.

Gossip left unchallenged is a catalyst for conflict. Here are some ideas on how to tackle gossip in the workplace and therefore avoid unnecessary conflict:
1. Have a company policy on behaviour, including gossip.
• If the gossip is shown to be objectively unacceptable, it is easier to nip in the bud when it happens.
2. Address the perpetrator privately.
• Most people do not see their behaviour as damaging and may only correct it if they are told directly about the impact of their words and actions on the organisation.
3. Make it clear to all team members of the type of culture the organisation wants to encourage and discourage.
• When the whole team is on board with what is expected of them and why it is important, gossip is less likely to happen, or at least to be perpetuated.
4. Ensure management are modelling the behaviour they expect from staff.
• Management are not immune to being gossips themselves and if this behaviour goes without redress, it encourages others to behave likewise.
5. Train management in tackling conflict
• Management need to be given the skills and shown methods to deal with gossip, in a way that is respectful but still clear on what behaviours will not be tolerated.
6. Have open and honest communication
• Gossip flourishes when people know they aren’t getting all the information. For gossip regarding workplace change, so-called information should be challenged quickly, honestly and factually.
• Try to avoid leaving gaps in information shared that people naturally feel the need to fill with assumptions.
• Encourage feedback about changes, to avoid the inclination to gossip privately, rather than seeking to understand.
7. Encourage positive information-sharing.
• Organisations that inspire positive conversations, news and praise for good work, are likely to deter negative gossip.

“How would your life be different if…You walked away from gossip and verbal defamation? Let today be the day…You speak only the good you know of other people and encourage others to do the same.” Steve Maraboli, - (Speaker, author and behaviour scientist)

To conclude, it is natural for workplaces to have humour and well-placed banter. Gossip is also a seemingly natural behaviour for most people. Nevertheless, when gossip is left unchecked and unconstrained, conflict and disruption is inevitable.

If you are aware of a situation that could benefit from a neutral, third-party enabling the people involved to work through issues and find a way forward; or if you have any questions about how workplace mediation could make a difference to your organisation, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through our Contact page.

Victim or victor?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 03 Apr 2017 14:53:09 GMT

We have all been wronged. It is natural and, many would say, necessary to acknowledge the hurt caused, the injustice done and the anger that resulted from it. In mediation, acknowledgment goes a long way in understanding what has happened and therefore being able to move forward positively.

The difficulty comes when the person goes beyond a temporary state of self-pity to a state where being ‘the victim’ becomes part of their mentality . This is a tricky subject because as much as I think it is important for it to be discussed, I am aware that this could be a sensitive issue for people - even the term 'self-pity', though purely descriptive, can feel dismissive of whatever hurt has been suffered. I am aware also that some of the wrongs that have been endured by people have been considerably damaging and the last thing people need to hear is that their feelings aren't justified, nor that there is a specific time limit on being allowed to feel wronged. The intention behind writing this is to highlight how easy it can be to fall into the trap of long-term self-pity and the negative consequences of not breaking out of that mentality– whether the initial incident or incidents were significant or seemingly minor.

For those that have been victimised or have grown up in a culture where they have witnessed victimisation, it is a natural survival technique to limit any damage caused when the perceived 'inevitable’ happens, by expecting to be harmed by people or to assume that they will fail. The problem is that when a person gets set in the mentality of being a victim they can feel powerless and floundering in that feeling, rather than tackling issues head-on. Someone with a victim mentality may even be unable to see themselves as being able to do harm (to themselves or to others) - the assumption being that they are always the one in the right or the one being victimised.

If a person feels powerless, this will inevitably have a negative impact on their self-confidence which can lead to a person becoming defensive or extremely self-deprecating. The effect this could have on someone’s work life would be a destructive cycle : lacking in confidence, therefore unable to make productive and proactive decisions; leading to defensiveness towards colleagues and management; an inability to take responsibility for mistakes; therefore, incapacitating their own development and improvement. Most people find criticism of themselves unpleasant in the least but those who see themselves as the victim will significantly struggle to receive constructive criticism from a spouse, friend or management at work as it would feel like an attack instead of potentially beneficial feedback.

The sad irony is that those who take on the victim mentality are the least likely to be aware of this being a part of their personality. It is safe to assume that to some extent, we all have the potential to perceive ourselves as a victim. The key is to be aware of this potential, to acknowledge it if it happens and to feel empowered enough to change our mentality. Here are some of the characteristics a person with the victim mentality may possess:

Blaming everyone or everything but themselves for mistakes
Constant state of self-pity
Unable to put up essential boundaries with others
Feeling unable to trust others
Unable to be assertive
Holding onto grudges
Comparing self to others constantly
Extremely argumentative
Cuts people off without resolution (or any attempts to resolve situation)
Extremely defensive when criticised (or feeling criticised)

American writer, Richard Bach, said the following:

"If it' s never our fault, we can't take responsibility for it. If we can't take responsibility for it, we 'll always be its victim. ”

In all honesty, we can all possess some of these qualities some of the time. However, if we instead take responsibility for our actions and our outlook on life, we can positively impact our work, our home life and our relationships with others.

So how do you support or manage someone if they have a victim mentality? Here are some suggestions:

Firstly, recognise that if someone feels like they are continually being victimised by others, demanding that they just toughen up will not help matters. Belittling someone's emotions only encourages the victim mentality to become more entrenched.

Secondly, listen to them and how they feel about themselves or a situation. People need to feel heard - even if their feelings about the situation don't match your perception of reality. Only after listening can you move on to focusing on the positive.

Thirdly, encourage and praise them about their skills and abilities. People make the best decisions when they have confidence in their ability to make decisions and are acknowledged for it.

Lastly, empower them with the knowledge that they have a choice over what they do next. Think through solutions to whatever issue they are struggling with. We cannot control what others do or say but we do have control over our own actions.

The famous writer and poet William Wordsworth said:

"Life is divided into three terms - that which was, which is, and which will be. Let us learn from the past to profit by the present, and from the present to live better in the future .”

If you have been wronged in the past, it is right for you to acknowledge it and the impact it has had on you. I would encourage anyone who has been wronged to be cautious of letting that feeling of being a 'victim' become a part of your mentality in the long-term. A very clear article providing practical tips on improving self-esteem and breaking out of the victim mentality can be found using this link: http://www.positivityblog.com/how-to-break-out-of-a-victim-mentality-7-powerful-tips/

If we are self-aware enough about the potential to take on a victim mentality when we have been wronged, then the likelihood of bringing unnecessary conflict into our lives is significantly diminished.

If you or anyone you know is in need of a neutral third party to enable communication during a dispute or conflict in the workplace, please get in touch by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through the Contact page on our website.

It's Just Business

Thu, 02 Mar 2017 10:28:26 GMT

Making Difficult Business Decisions With Compassion

by Emma Jenkings - Qualified Workplace & Employment Mediator

Otto Berman, an accountant to the Mob in the 1930’s, is said to have coined the phrase “Not personal. It’s just business.” This phrase - that he apparently used whilst collecting protection money or dealing out punishments - is now used widely in the business world. Ironically, the phrase is generally employed when a decision has been made that will impact an individual or a group of people negatively – i.e. a decision that will feel very personal to them.

Business decisions need to be made and the outcome may not be one that affects employees to a great extent; however, decisions regarding promotions, pay rises, redundancy, job structure or contractual changes do. Regardless of how well-meaning the decision-maker is, the reality is that a decision that has any bearing on a person’s job will always feel personal.

A person’s employment is emotive – it affects their sense of identity, their self-esteem and their finances. Any decision made regarding their job can feel like a reflection of how much they - and their skills - are valued.

It is worth bearing in mind how a decision may affect their personal life as well as their work life. For example:

Being passed up for promotion may lead to confidence issues, and someone may have seen that promotion as being the answer to relieving financial burdens.
A change in job structure is likely to cause added stress and pressure anyway – but especially so if they are going through a time of personal instability; such as experiencing relationship issues, the illness of a loved one or changes to personal circumstances.
Redundancies may be a welcome ‘get-out’ to some people, but for many it can damage to their confidence and create anxiety about the future. For those whose income is relied upon by others, this burden could be felt even stronger.
Moving someone from one team to another may seem like a logical step to management but it can cause great anxiety - particularly if they are moving away from a team they enjoyed being with, to a team or area they either don’t know or to one that has people that they don’t get along with.

So often conflict is the result of people expecting something to happen which doesn’t, or at least not in the way they expected it to. Communication is a key factor in reducing unnecessary conflict.

For example, if an employee is led to believe that a promotion is certain and it is then given to someone else, that will feel personal and is likely to damage trust between the parties.

Similarly, if someone is told that they are doing OK in their role and then suddenly is made redundant, it will be both a shock and feel like it was unjustified.

On a different note, if a manager is unaware of personal issues going on in their staff’s personal lives but which are impacting them at work, they they may not be aware of how their decision may impact the individual . Therefore, they may make a decision that they wouldn’t have done, had they been aware of the external issues involved.

However objective people attempt to be, the reality is that human beings are emotional and do take things personally – especially when that decision has a tangible impact on them personally. As much as it would feel easier for people to 'just accept the decision', have no feelings about it and 'roll with it', human beings just aren’t built that way .

Most employers are genuinely trying to make good decisions for the benefit of both the organisation and the employees. Often, tough decisions feel like they need to be made objectively - to avoid emotion determining the outcome. And, sometimes tough business decisions have to be made where it feels impossible to please everyone.

The important thing to remember, if you want to avoid unnecessary conflict, is that just because a decision was made for the benefit of the business, does not mean the person affected by it will see it that way.

It pays to be sensitive in communicating the decision, to remember that it will feel personal and to be aware of what external factors may already be causing stress or pressure to an employee. It is also worth trying to be creative with ideas so that as much as possible there is a ‘win-win’ scenario.

Just as it is important for management to remember the human factor in decision-making, it is helpful for staff to consider the difficulty in making tough choices and that it is likely to also feel personal to those implementing such decisions.

If you are on the receiving end of the decision-making process, even if it feels personal, remember that the intention of the decision-maker could still have been honourable. We are not in control over what anyone else does, but we do have a choice over how we respond – and a good response to a difficult decision demonstrates character, integrity and protects

When decisions are being made that are likely to be particularly controversial or emotive, it can help to have a neutral third party involved to mediate the situation.

If conflict has already arisen between parties over such decisions, or any other workplace dispute, please get in contact to see how we can help by contacting emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk , or get in touch through the Contact page.

Making a Comeback

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 07 Feb 2017 12:19:22 GMT

When someone is away from the workplace for a long period – whether that be for sickness, mental health issues or even maternity leave – they may feel completely out of touch with everything. They will be aware of conversations they have missed, changes that have been made, or maybe even new members of staff that have started and settled in. It is understandable therefore that many people feel extremely anxious about coming back to the workplace , especially if they are also concerned that their capability is not the same as it was before leaving.

If the reason for a long-term absence is related to a mental health illness, disability or a physical ‘invisible illness’, there are additional concerns. It is common in this situation for the individual to worry that people – at home or work – will doubt their illness. Almost 50% of long-term absences are said to be caused by stress, depression or other mental health illnesses . Nevertheless, a lot of people who return to work feel like there is still a stigma associated if it is for these reasons. Anyone who has been absent from work will worry about what reaction they might get from other colleagues or management on their return, and a such a mild concern only intensifies if they feel like they can’t ‘prove’ their condition and/or may be disbelieved.

Mediators are often called in to help management and the employee figure out a transition after a long-term absence from work. Often if a mediator has been called, the following situation has taken place:

A staff member leaves and gets signed off work by their doctor. Then management (A) are not sure how to stay in contact with that member of staff (B) so that they can stay informed about what is going on, when they are likely to return and what needs to be in place to support them upon their return; but at the same time, they don’t want to cause B additional stress or make them feel like they are being unreasonably monitored or harassed. B wants to feel well enough to return to work but doesn’t feel ready yet and feels that every contact with A is additional pressure to return. B has started to feel like A doesn’t believe that B is as unwell as they have said, so starts to become defensive. When the time comes to talk about returning to work, B feels anxious about the idea of returning and/or doesn’t feel well enough to go back to the same work level as before. A feels the pressure from other management to get a plan together for what is going to happen with B and their role. A is also starting to wonder about the extent of B's health concerns as B has become less open about their state of health.

This situation is very common and often inevitable if expectations at the start of the absence from work have not been set about how communication is going to work between the parties, and if both are not clear with the other about what they need.

Bearing in mind how common it is for staff members to struggle with coming back to work, it is vitally important that the period of absence and the back-to-work transition be managed as sensitively and emotionally intelligently as possible. Each person may need a different level or method of support which enables them to feel empowered and encouraged . Some people may need to have lots of support while they are away and during their transition back to work, while others want as little fuss as possible. Of course, all organisations should ideally have HR procedures in place to manage long-term sickness but it is important to treat everyone on a case by case basis.

Equally as important is that the employee communicate effectively with their doctor and their line manager about their condition and how they can be supported. As it has been said many times before, ' the root of all conflict is unmet expectations' . Applying it to this situation, if both sides haven't expressed what they need, nor informed the other enough about their situation, such ambiguity can lead to misunderstandings and a breakdown of trust. Managers may simply be trying to do their job, by figuring out how to plan for different scenarios and making sure they have the right staff doing the right job. It can feel like a minefield to manage long-term sickness without causing offense or upset. Setting realistic expectations and working with each other will help to limit incorrect assumptions and diffuse any defensiveness .

Staying on the subject trust, it is imperative that everyone is clear about what information can and cannot be shared with others about an employee taking time away from work. A sure way to break down trust between management and employee is for a manager to share something that their employee shared with them in confidence, or simply did not give express permission for them to share.

Sometimes the source of mental health issues – particularly stress – is related to work or treatment by colleagues. If the underlying reasons aren’t addressed, then the issues are not going to go away. It is important for the staff member to be as honest as possible about what’s going on and for their line manager to be aware of any potential problems with workload or other colleagues . ‘Knowledge is power’, and in these circumstances that power can be used to nip problems in the bud, or to at least deal with them and not just their secondary effect.

So, if you want to avoid unnecessary conflict and misunderstandings, put the effort into starting the process well. Be honest with your expectations and what you need from each other. If you are in management, make sure you do your research before starting the process so that you know what HR processes and procedures need to be followed, and also what support your staff member will need from you. If you are the staff member, it is helpful to be as honest as possible with your line manager and HR so that they can support you with all the information they need to make such decisions. Often, if a member of staff is able to work through their anxiety about returning and are supported well by their management, a return to work transition is often more successful than anticipated.

However, if things have already gone beyond being able to have a reasonable conversation, please get in contact to talk about how mediation might be able to facilitate finding a way forward. One benefit to the role of the mediator being completely neutral, is that parties can talk in confidence to the mediator and, in doing so, the mediator can get to the root of the issue and help parties see their mutual interests. You can contact me by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through my Contact page.

The Power of Praise

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 02 Jan 2017 00:00:00 GMT

Most people get taught from an early age the importance of saying ‘thank you’. Therefore, we should have subconsciously noticed over time that the direct effect of saying ‘thank you’ is that people are more likely to do something kind/well/helpful again. Yet, even knowing the positive impact that praise and appreciation has on humankind in general, in a workplace environment the words ‘thank you’ and 'You did well at...." are forgotten too often.

Reviews, appraisals and team meetings are the tools most often used to provide feedback on performance. These can be very constructive and very effective at showing appreciation for a job well done. Unfortunately, more often meetings relaying feedback tend to focus more on those elements which need improvement whereas those elements which were good are given a brief ‘tick-box’ style mention.

Now, I am not suggesting that only positive feedback should be given. I am equally not advocating disingenuous praise. However, given that many studies have shown that giving praise and showing appreciation to employees and colleagues improve optimism, sleep quality and stress levels; it is worth bearing in mind the knock-on effect of not showing appreciation when it is warranted .

The statistics from the Health and Safety Executive show that in the Labour Force Survey for 2015/16:

Stress accounted for 37% of all work related ill health cases and 45% of all working days lost due to ill health.
The total number of working days lost due to this condition in 2015/16 was 11.7 million .
The main work factors cited by respondents as causing work related stress, depression or anxiety (LFS) were workload pressures, including tight deadlines and too much responsibility as well as a lack of managerial support.

When people do not feel suitably appreciated for the work and effort that they put into their job, it will have an impact on their motivation and their relationship with their colleagues and management. The most likely consequence is a growing resentment about how they are being treated. (Note that being under-appreciated can cause as strong a reaction as being proactively mistreated.) Just as those who feel appreciated thrive and are motivated to achieve success again; those who feel under-appreciated are likely to withdraw from work and reluctant to put in any more than the minimum required effort.

Mediators often find that when there is a dispute between management and an employee or where two colleagues are butting heads, the root cause is attributable to feeling under-appreciated and therefore insecure about their reputation and position at work. If you want to avoid both unnecessary conflict and reduce the likelihood of work-related stress, then focus on how to motivate those around you with praise and appreciation.

Giving genuine, appropriate praise and appreciation is almost counter-cultural – particularly in an especially competitive working environment. Like any new habit you want to develop, it takes practice to give well-received gratitude and appreciation.

Here are a few pointers that should help you know what to focus on and what should be avoided:

Be appropriate
- Know your audience! Some people don’t react well to hugs, kisses or flowers. Respect their boundaries and be mindful of anything you need to be sensitive about. (i.e. if they have had a previous bad experience of an over-familiar colleague, a bear hug may not be appropriate!) For most people, just saying what you appreciate face-to-face or sending a nicely worded email is enough.
- What is the method of showing appreciation in your workplace - through words, public praise, monetary rewards or career advancement? If the performance was significant and you respond by giving them a disproportionate ‘reward’ then they are unlikely to feel like they have been appropriately acknowledged for their effort. Ensure the show of appreciation is proportionate to the behaviour.
Be specific
- Too often, staff become disenfranchised by only receiving general or ambiguous feedback. They get used to hearing phrases such as, “Just carry on with what you’re doing”, “You are doing well”, “I don’t have a problem with what you are doing” and “I will let you know if I am not happy”.
- However, if you really want your feedback to have a positive impact on staff morale and performance, highlight specifically the things that were good – “The way you communicated your point was very effective”, “I am really pleased with how you are working with your team”, “I notice how well you handled [previous situation], what do you think should be done…?”. It gives something for them build on and motivates them to continue improving.
Be sincere
- Just as I mentioned above (and in a previous post on giving feedback) with any formal or informal feedback process it is essential that what is being said is genuine, comes across as sincere and does not feel like a ‘tick-box’ exercise. Words without any true feeling behind them cannot compare to looking someone in the eye and sincerely telling them that they did well in a certain area and you appreciate their work and effort.
Be fair
- Unless you are a team of one or two, whatever you do for one person will be noticed and noted by everyone else. Make sure that you are neither playing favourites nor ignoring certain people. A true sign of a person having integrity is when they compliment, praise or thank someone that they personally don’t get on with.
Be responsible
- This post may seem to be directed towards those in a management position, however, if you are interacting with people and you want that relationship to remain (or become) positive, showing gratitude and appreciation plays a key role in that being possible; and this applies to work relationships, family relationships and friendships.
  - Management have a responsibility to promote and model positive behaviour to their staff, including showing praise and recognising a job done well.
  - However, knowing that showing praise and appreciation is recognised to boost morale, reduce stress levels and motivate staff, it is in everyone’s benefit that such behaviours become part of company culture.
- If you are feeling under-appreciated at work, you have the choice to either continue to feel this way or you can communicate this to your line manager. Unless you highlight how you feel, it is unlikely that things will change. Never expect anyone to be a mind-reader.
  - However, if you do broach this subject, check that you have a realistic expectation of whether praise is due and that you are offering the same kind of praise and appreciation that you are seeking. The response you get when you ask for more appreciation is more likely to be positive if you aren’t asking for something that you don’t even do.

So, whatever your opinion on New Year’s resolutions, I encourage you to acknowledge the power of praise and the positive impact it could have on your working life. It may be the best habit you have ever started.

If you need to speak to someone about any employment disputes or workplace conflict, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmedation.co.uk or through the Contact page.

Banter Without The Backlash

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 GMT

Everyone wants to enjoy work as much as they can but it’s a delicate balance to enjoy some gentle banter with colleagues but also knowing where the line is where words or actions become offensive. We hear all the time about how ‘politically correct’ our society has become and how easily everyone gets offended – which is sometimes the case.

People are at work for a large percentage of their lives so of course they want to enjoy their time there as much as possible. Banter is a great way for a lot of people to have a good time at work. It tends to keep the morale high and the atmosphere light-hearted. (Remember, the cost in time and money that comes from tension and conflict.)

If someone does get it wrong though, the consequences can be very damaging. The last thing any organisation wants is to have an accusation of bullying in the workplace. If there is a culture of such behaviour going unchallenged, at some point it will become an issue that you are forced to deal with. It is also worth noting that if one person feels this way, the likelihood of others sharing the same feelings is high. Disgruntled employees do not make for productive employees. Prevention is much better than having to unlearn behaviours and change the workplace culture entirely.

There is a distinction between banter and ‘bullying’, and I would add in additional grey area that I call ‘unintentional offense’. Here is how I would make the distinctions:

Banter = a playful and friendly reciprocated exchange for the purposes of humour and bonding.
Bullying = using superior knowledge or positioning to influence or intimidate someone in a way that is deliberate, targeted or malicious.
Unintentional offense = causing offense or hurt through ignorance, bad judgment or carelessness.

Bullying is extremely damaging to both the person and the workplace environment, especially when the intention is clearly malicious. It damages trust in relationships between management and staff if the issue is not dealt with swiftly and can cause great stress and anxiety to the recipient. ACAS revealed in 2015 that according to research by the charity Family Lives, more than nine out of ten people who were bullied at work felt that their organisation did not deal with bullying adequately, and more than a third said that the bullying had gone on for more than a year.

Often if there is ‘unintentional hurt’, the behaviour is challenged promptly and the true intentions are clarified, the damage can be minimal. If, on the other hand, the person refuses to consider someone else’s feelings and carries on that behaviour regardless of the effect it is having on the other person, that could be a form of bullying.

Equally, ignorance is often seen as a weak defence these days as there are so many resources made available for information and training to both employees and management to educate people on what is appropriate. Some ignorance is genuinely innocent. Sometimes the ignorance is wilful. There is a standard of behaviour in all workplaces which applies to both management and employees, and there is an expectation that a ‘reasonable person’ should be able to judge what may ‘reasonably’ constitute bullying/causing offense.

Sometimes, it is simply a case of bad judgment. When it is a one-off mistake or a joke taken too far, more than likely once the person has been made aware of the impact of their words or actions, they will take steps to (hopefully) apologise or at least to make sure they do not make the same error twice.

So, what should you do to prevent harmless banter turning into harmful behaviours or possibly bullying?

Firstly, if you are in management then it is important to be watchful of what is going on in the workplace. Be aware of people’s situations and their different sensitivities and be open to people coming to you with their concerns. If something is brought to you, don’t be dismissive – even if it seems like a small issue to you! Get to the bottom of why it has bothered them and make sure you take the appropriate steps to ensure all your staff feel comfortable and safe at work. If someone is behaving inappropriately and you do not address it, it is likely to come across to others that you condone the behaviour – or don’t think it is important enough to do something about it.

Secondly, if there is a lot of banter in your workplace, be self-aware AND ‘others-aware’. A lot of schools these days promote the principle that each child has rights which should be respected. But they also maintain that in asserting their own rights, the child must not disrespect another child’s rights. For example, a child has the right to enjoy reading a book but this does not mean they can take that book from another child who already had it. This simple principle is easily applied to the workplace:

You and others around you have the right to make the best of spending your/their day in the workplace by having a laugh and gentle banter. However, neither you nor anyone else have the right to stop someone else from enjoying their day in the workplace, by making them feel uncomfortable or victimised.

Make sure that you are not crossing the line and hurting someone by your words or actions. Not only does such a situation damage relationships and impact morale in the workplace, but it could also have legal and employment ramifications for the organisation and for yourself.

Finally, if you feel hurt or offended by something that has been said or done by a colleague or someone in management, it needs to be addressed. Start by checking first that your perception of what happened is in line with what actually happened and that you weren’t unduly influenced by any pre-existing circumstances, stress or emotions.

One of the things I come across a lot as a mediator is how common it is for people to misunderstand each other. It is very easy to say, “Everyone has different experiences and perceptions.” It is much more difficult for people to apply that to their situation and recognise that different perceptions may lead to miscommunication and therefore unnecessary defensiveness at times. To reiterate what I have said previously, most people most of the time have good intentions! If you perceive that someone is saying something with the intention of causing injury, recognise that this might not be the case. If you perceive that something you said is ‘harmless’, recognise that this might not be the case for the person on the receiving end.

Once, you have determined that the issue is not entirely ‘yours’, decide how comfortable you are to address the issue with the ‘perpetrator’. What is your relationship like with them? How are they likely to react? Do you need to seek advice from someone else first? If you feel unable to speak to them directly, you should talk to your line manager or someone from your HR department.

The damage caused by banter gone wrong, unintentional hurt and even bullying can be limited if it is nipped in the bud quickly and without hostility. If your response is to escalate the situation, it muddies the waters, thereby making it difficult to see what went wrong and who needs to do what to make restitution. Alternatively, if what was said or done has hurt or offended you and your response is to say nothing, please don’t think the feeling will go away by itself. Instead, it will most likely lead to a build-up of resentment, a breakdown in your relationship with other colleagues and a whole heap of defensiveness. Furthermore, reckless or hurtful behaviour that is unchallenged will continue and that helps no one.

So, please enjoy your job, your colleagues and your workplace. If everyone is happy with what is happening, have a laugh and a joke - just don’t let it lead to causing hurt to someone. If you see someone crossing the line, don’t leave behaviour unchallenged – particularly if you are in management!

One of the common reasons people use mediation is because communication between people has gone awry. Unless it is a situation where one party feels afraid of the other, mediation can help figure out what went wrong and what needs to happen to make things better in the future. If you would like to know more please email emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in touch via the Contact page.

10 Strategies For Working With Difficult People

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 01 Nov 2016 00:00:00 GMT

Everyone can think of a ‘difficult’ person that they work with. We all have our own quirks that irritate other people. However, some people behave in a way that REALLY irritates or frustrates other people at work. Do the following traits make you think of anyone?

Constantly complaining or being negative
Being lazy or uncooperative
Undermining or criticising other people
Being consciously incompetent
Refusing to listen to good advice
Behaving inappropriately

Let’s look at the possible worst case scenario if difficult behaviours are not challenged:

Constant complaints/negativity :

Colleagues/management stop listening to or wanting to be around them.
Individual seen as disruptive to work productivity and not a team player.

Being lazy/uncooperative :

Colleagues grow resentful towards them and lose respect.
Difficult to see potential for growth.
Laziness is often a BIG issue in the workplace – conflict is likely!

Undermining/critical of people :

Colleagues avoid them, stop listening to their opinion and become defensive around them – conflict is highly likely!
Colleagues/management become less forgiving of any mistake they make.
Less likely to be reflective about own deficits

Conscious Incompetency/Behaving inappropriately :

Management avoid giving responsibilities.
Colleagues grow resentful and avoid being linked to their behaviour.
Organisation will resent wasted time and money spent in the hope of improvement.

Refusal to listen :

People grow resentful and frustrated and stop trying to improve issues/offering advice.
Individual will become ignorant/arrogant and therefore eventually more incompetent.

The truth is that having someone in the workplace that causes issues is disruptive and only gets worse if left. So what do you do? I would say you need to have a strategy. Why do you need a strategy? Because when you are working in an environment with someone who is negative, lazy, critical or incompetent it is almost guaranteed to create tension and eventually conflict if the situation is not managed effectively. And just to be clear, I am referring to management AND staff. So much of the conflict mediators see is avoidable.

Here are 10 strategies that should help:

Find out WHY they behave in that way.
- Ask how they are doing – there may be stuff they are dealing with that is affecting their behaviour.
- Avoid accusations; try to clarify what has happened and their perspective on the situation. (‘What’ and ‘how’ questions are less confronting that ‘why did you…’ questions.)
- Don’t automatically dismiss their opinions. If they are trying to get things right and have a history of being able to make good judgement calls, it may be worth hearing them out, even if their delivery is not your preference. Do they have a point?
Show appreciation for achievements! You need to separate the person from their actions. People are not’ all-bad’ nor ‘all-good’! If they do something good it should be acknowledged and appreciated.
- Be specific – it builds trust and respect.
- Note what contribution this person makes. It is understandable to get frustrated with those who complain a lot as they are often the ones who contribute the least and have the biggest issues! Yet, if they contribute well, bear that in mind.
Don’t ignore the behaviour! The behaviour will not just go away and will continue to impact the workplace and the person’s career potential if it is not addressed. Everyone has ‘stuff’ they need to work on and it should not get to the point of conflict or a disciplinary before it is dealt with.
- If the person is on your staff, have a conversation and follow Point 1. Those who want to do the right thing will want to understand what they can do to improve a situation. Give them a chance to correct it.
- If they are a colleague, seek advice from a trusted colleague privately – on the basis that such advice is confidential and that you are seeking genuine advice and not just taking part in office gossip. The first is productive, the other is destructive.
Find out what they care about.
- What are their interests? How can you connect with them? Most people thrive on human connection so finding mutual interests may help to diffuse negativity.
Be positive!
- Focus on moving forward! Don’t assume failure – believe that there is potential for change and improvement. Some people are an exception to this rule but in general MOST people MOST of the time have GOOD intentions. How can you find a way to make it work?
- If they use a lot of negative language, it is helpful to use language in response that is neutral or positive – without being dismissive about their concerns. Reframe negative comments into being forward-thinking.
Make them aware of the potential consequences of their actions.
- One rule in our family is that our children are not allowed to exclude others, HOWEVER, I do not want my child to be treated badly and think they must just accept it. We have suggested that when someone is being unkind our child can give them the option to play nice or they will find someone else to play with who is being kind. (Our child has no problems saying this!)
  - The reality is that even as adults, the same rules apply. If you don’t play nice, people don’t want to be around you and that less than ideal where a certain amount of teamwork/customer service/employee relations is required. Some people need someone to join the dots between their behaviour and the result?
  - What drives them? Is their behaviour stopping them from achieving their goals? See Point 4 a) – Seeing that their behaviour may stop them from achieving a goal may motivate a change.
Be clear on what the issue is! Remember the issue is NOT the person. Separate the person from the behaviour/issue.
- Make sure the issue is not actually YOUR issue and not theirs! Some people have habits which are irritating but it is not actually having an impact on anything but our sensitivity to it. If the issue is YOURS, recognise that and move on.
- Check whether the ‘difficult one’ is not actually YOU! (Remember that those who notice the errors in others the most are normally the ones who have many issues of their own they should be dealing with first!) Make sure you are being kind and reasonable. We are all difficult in some way – bear that in mind when judging others.
Be tolerant of differences!
- This sounds obvious and yet most people find it very difficult to work with others who have a different approach to them. Be aware of your natural inclination to want things done as you would have done it and be open to being pleasantly surprised.
Be clear on bullying, harassment and discrimination! Such attitudes or behaviours are unacceptable and need to be addressed.
- Banter = all sides being OK with the joking. Bullying = knowing someone is upset about what’s being said to them and wilfully carrying on. Paramhansa Yogananda said “Some people try to be tall by cutting off the heads of others”. Banter is only funny if you aren’t causing damage.
- This is not about trying to make everything ‘politically correct’ – this is about human decency and being a team player. It will pay dividends in the end.
Be aware of any psychological health issues . Anything that is related to a psychological issue should be dealt with appropriately and sensitively.
- I am not saying that bad behaviours should be accepted, rather that the reason behind them should be considered when dealing with the issue.

**PLEASE NOTE: There is a difference between those who want to get things right and those who want things done their way (without providing justification or contribution to the process)**

If their behaviour issue is minor, their intentions are good, they contribute and they are trying to stand up for their principles, is the issue worth a mention? Sometimes so-called ‘difficult people’ are the ones who get things done and refuse to go with the flow if it means losing their integrity. We need such people in this world. If, on the other hand they just want to get their own way, their behaviour is hard to justify. In ‘Transaction Analysis’ terms, this person is being the child which is less than ideal in a workplace situation (or any situation which requires effective communication!).

So, if you must deal with a difficult person daily, take note of the above strategies. If YOU are the ‘difficult one’, be aware of what difficult behaviours might put others off you and try to manage those tendencies. Difficult behaviour is much easier to forgive if the intention is good.

Sometimes, you need a neutral third party to facilitate such a conversation – particularly things have already gone sour. If you have any questions or queries about how a mediator could resolve this, please get in contact through my Contact page or by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

How Saying Sorry Saves Your Credibility

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Sat, 01 Oct 2016 00:00:00 GMT

One of the key principles we have tried to instil in our children is the importance of saying sorry when you have done something wrong or hurt someone. However, we also recognise the importance of apologising to them when we have made a mistake or hurt their feelings because we want them to know what behaviour is OK and what behaviour is unacceptable - whoever that person is. Saying ‘sorry’ happens a lot with children because they are learning and making mistakes and figuring out how to have good relationships with other children and adults. Yet when it comes to relationships between adults, the word ‘sorry’ happens a LOT less! It is interesting to me that for a lot of adults the idea of saying ‘sorry’ implies weakness – especially in the workplace!

The fact is that when it comes to work, there can be added complications to admitting fault as there may be real liability issues that should be considered. However, MOST of the time saying sorry at work will not have any employment or legal implications.

There is a risk that saying sorry might have a negative outcome, although more often than not it’s not the apology that’s the problem, it is how the apology was done . For example, some people feel the need to apologise for everything, whether it is needed or not. In this situation the intention is probably very good but unfortunately it tends to dilute the power of the apology when it is really needed as people are used to hearing it too much. Similarly, some people over-apologise for small mistakes and have such a disproportionate reaction that it can cause doubt over whether an apology is genuine or whether it was just for show.

It also can do more damage than good to apologise when it isn’t a genuine ‘sorry’ – particularly if you are not a good actor as people can tell when it’s a real apology! And please, please don’t use any sarcasm in your apology. That’s a great way to kill trust in a relationship. For example, if you have crossed the line during normal workplace banter and ended up offending someone, that person is likely to be more than usually sensitive to what you say so to apologise sarcastically or to make it into a joke will definitely not help the situation!

Another habit we can fall into is thinking that once we have apologised we are then absolved of any wrongdoing and so expect instant forgiveness – which in reality is very rare when it comes to big mistakes. This is even less likely if there is a history of broken trust in a relationship. (The context and history of your relationship is important to bear in mind!)

I think the main reason apologies go wrong is that the person apologising is doing so to make themselves feel better, rather than remembering that an apology is also about the other person . In my opinion, for an apology to be received well it needs three main elements:

Remorse
Acknowledgment
Restitution

Remorse

When someone gives a genuine apology the remorse and regret is clear. When someone is remorseful they tend not to give a list of excuses as to why, though they are sorry, it is in fact everything/everyone’s fault that they did what they did. When you want someone to know you are sorry, reasons are only helpful if it is to let them know the intention was not bad. Other than that, excuses make it look like you are not taking responsibility for your actions and the damage caused by them.

Also note, even if it takes a while to feel remorseful about your actions, the longer you leave an apology, the more time is allowed for resentment to build with the other person. Apologise without delay .

Acknowledgement

When giving an apology it needs to be clear that you know what you are apologising for and that you are aware of the impact of your actions. Say that during a meeting you publicly challenge your manager about the accuracy about the facts that they are presenting, rather than going to them privately at the end. You realise afterwards that you crossed the mark and embarrassed them unnecessarily. The inappropriate response would be to ignore what happened as the assumption would then be that you didn’t see anything wrong in what you did. The appropriate response would be to apologise privately to your manager for challenging them publicly, acknowledging that it may have looked disrespectful and it should have happened like that. Taking responsibility shows good judgment of a situation and that, although mistakes happen, you recognise the error and what should have happened.

As mentioned above, you should also not expect instant forgiveness – especially when you have made a big mistake. Some people may need to vent and explain fully why they were hurt even after you have apologised. That doesn’t necessarily mean they do not except your apology. More often than not, they just need to be able to say how your actions affected them and after they have been allowed to do so, they will be more able to accept your apology and move on.

Restitution

An apology is much easier to accept if the person seems like they want to make up for their actions and, even more so, if that person wants to ensure it doesn’t happen again. If you make a mistake with a client, what would you do? You would know that saying ‘sorry’ would help but that you might need to do more to keep them as a client. The same goes for any relationship – including with colleagues. If you embarrass a colleague, the way to make up would be to make sure you publicly support them at the next appropriate opportunity. If you are late to work a few times, you should make an effort to be early. The extra effort makes it clear that you understood what went wrong and you are being proactive about stopping it from happening again. Saying “I won’t let it happen again” is great but it is even better if you can say specifically what you will do to prevent a recurrence.

And finally! Move on. Don’t keep apologising after the matter has been concluded. Move on, follow through on your promise and try not to repeat your mistake again . Apologising itself can be quite an awkward conversation for the people involved, it’s best not to dwell on it but leave it in the past once the issue has been dealt with.

In my opinion, apologising does not make you look weak. In fact, saying ‘sorry’ and making a plan to improve the situation puts you in a position of power and respect. To ignore a mistake at work – particularly if you are in management – makes you look insecure, rather than untouchable. Show your integrity and courage by admitting when you made a mistake, and putting it right .

Confucious, a well-known Chinese teacher and philosopher said, “To know what is right and not to do it is the worse cowardice.”

Apologies definitely build trust in relationships and it amazes me the change that can occur during a mediation session when one or both parties finally apologise. Suddenly the parties are able to think through ideas for finding a way forward when they were previously unable to. I would highly recommend reading ‘The Speed of Trust’ by Stephen M.R. Covey to fully understand the power of having trust in different relationships – both at work and at home. His summary of the Chapter ‘Right Wrongs’ seems quite fitting to sum up my main points on saying ‘sorry’:

“Make things right when you’re wrong. Apologize quickly. Make restitution where possible… Demonstrate personal humility. Don’t cover things up. Don’t let pride get in the way of doing the right thing.”

How do people see you at work? Do you admit fault when needed or do you ignore it or try to cover it up? What impact do you think these behaviours have on your reputation at work? If you have made an error at work and it has got to the point where you need a third party to help bring resolution, please get in contact by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or through my Contact page.

The Benefits Of Giving The Benefit Of The Doubt

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Thu, 01 Sep 2016 00:00:00 GMT

During mediations one thing that can instantly change how someone views the other party is when one side finally understands the other person’s true intentions and the real reasons behind their behaviour. More often than not, simply knowing that someone did not intend to cause harm will significantly change the atmosphere in the room. So often our perceptions are not actually based on a full understanding of the reality of the situation.

Here are some examples:

You see someone behaving in an unreasonable, angry way. What do you think of them? Maybe that they are an unreasonable, angry person.
You make a big error in a meeting. What do you think of yourself? Maybe that you are not good enough at your job.
You suffer from social anxiety and someone doesn’t greet you for a few days in a row. What do you think is the reason? Maybe that they don’t like you or that you have offended them.

What if…

The person who behaved unreasonably is actually grieving the loss of a loved one, or marital issues or has anger issues that they are working on but just had a bad day? (Most angry people are actually hurt people)
Your mistake led to you learning and improving your performance at work? Or, to improving your company’s procedures to avoid such an error in future?
That other person had no idea at all that they hadn’t said “hello” to you? Or, THEY were worried that you don’t like them or that they have offended you so they didn’t want to instigate a conversation?

It is only after having had in depth conversations with other colleagues that I began to understand just how much people are coping with behind the scenes and no wonder it sometimes spills over into their reactions. It is only through challenging my own automatic responses to the mistakes I make that I realise how often I stand in my own way. And it is only through understanding our automatic responses that we realise how often they may colour our perception of the actions of others. So often, people are simply oblivious to how they come across!

All of us have been hurt by others or made mistakes that we instantly regretted. The question is, what do you do next?

So many miscommunications occur simply because one or both people assumed the negative of the other when actually MOST people MOST of the time have good intentions . The key is knowing what your ‘default negative position’ is. My default is to think that people are behaving towards me in a certain way because of something I did wrong. Being aware of this, however, means that when I go to my default negative position I can give myself a reality check. Normally by telling myself to remember that “It’s not always about ME!”. What is your default?

We can develop bad habits without realising it by doing things such as:

Focusing on the bad and discounting the good (about ourselves, others or situations).
Fortune-telling – Predicting how a person or situation will always/never be.
Emotional reasoning – When we feel upset we automatically blame our feelings on other people’s behaviours.
Having a ‘should’ mindset – Whereby we create set of criteria that people ‘should’ meet and if they don’t, we see them as a disappointment or not having our best interests in mind.

The truth is that when we have been burned in the past or we make mistakes that make us think worse of other people or ourselves we have a choice to make: a) assume the negative, or b) give people the benefit of the doubt.

If you choose to assume the negative at work here are some likely consequences:

It will be difficult for you to work well in a team – You are likely to be more critical of others and more likely to misinterpret what they do and say.
You will experience more conflict – Just so that we are clear, awkward tension which may at first seem harmless, can cause just as much damage to productivity and relationships as open hostility.
People will not trust you – People sense when someone is uncomfortable or distrusting of them and that will make them defensive and uncomfortable around you.
Assuming the negative means you are likely to limit the possibilities open to you, such as:
- Relationships that may have become great but for the fact that you didn’t trust them/thought they didn’t really like you/didn’t see the point in investing in another person.
- Self-development – Having a negative mindset is likely to mean you cannot see the potential you have to improve or that others have to help you.

You will not be disappointed – because if you look for the negative, you will always find it.

If, on the other hand, you choose to give people the benefit of the doubt here are some likely consequences:

You are more likely to work well with others - people are drawn to positive people.
You are less likely to be defensive with others and more likely to seek to understand the reason behind someone’s actions, which reduces their need to feel defensive or aggressive and therefore, less conflict.
People will trust you more. Trust reaps more trust. Most people need to see that someone has faith in them for them to trust in return.
By looking for the positives you are more likely to grab hold of opportunities before they slip away.
You may SOMETIMES be disappointed.

There are so many good reasons for having a positive mindset. Yet, it is true that you may SOMETIMES be disappointed . The reality is that we still have to make wise judgments about situations and other people. Sometimes people do have bad intentions. Sometimes you will make a mistake that has big consequences. Sometimes bad things will just happen and it was nobody’s fault. On balance, I think you still end up better off by giving people the opportunity to do good, rather than waiting for them/yourself to fail. (Even those that have a bad pattern of behaviour in the past will not always do, or intend to do, bad things in future.)

What is your default negative response? Do you have any bad habits that have affected your perception of others or situations? What are you going to do about it?

REMEMBER... MOST people MOST of the time have good intentions .

If you are involved in a dispute at work that needs help from a mediator to resolve, please get in touch through my Contact page or via email: emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk

Don't Stop Talking! Feedback - How And Why It Should Be Done.

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 GMT

“Time for your review meeting!” *Insert GROAN here*

Feedback questionnaires, ‘one-to-one’ meetings, review meetings, etc. Wherever I have worked the feedback process has been universally considered either a waste of time or something to be feared – by staff and management!

To my mind having a workplace culture that does reviews but uses them solely to discipline or where it has become a ‘tick-box’ exercise wholly undermines the true purpose of feedback. Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to the whole organisation if feedback became recognisable as a positive interaction which brings about required changes and growth to all levels of the organisation, and is used to celebrate positive action?

I believe feedback has become seen as a negative experience for 2 main reasons:

The perception that it is pointles s – Often this is unfortunately based on real experience where nothing comes of the feedback given or where the feedback itself is too general to actually apply/measure.
Anxiety about giving/receiving feedback – Many people in management find the whole process stressful and particularly don’t like giving bad news. Most staff members will worry about any mistakes they have made and how it may be addressed.

So let’s deal with reason 1:

I have far too often heard managers say to staff members, “Let’s get your review out of the way” or “Sorry we have to do this, it’s company policy”. Which unfortunately substantiates the perception that the process is just about ticking boxes!

Feedback is EXTREMELY important . Feedback creates accountability; it can nip small issues in the bud before they become big issues; and it also encourages working together – all of which reduces the probability of unnecessary conflict arising. When feedback from staff is taken on board and applied, it promotes trust between management and staff as it shows that people’s views are being heard. NOTE: I am obviously not advocating that ALL feedback from staff should be actioned, but that it should at least be noted and considered.

If feedback is discouraged by either not having any form of review process or regular accountability check-ups with colleagues, then when issues do need to be addressed it can produce a more emotional response than when it is used regularly and effectively, and therefore recognised by everyone in the organisation that feedback is an essential part of the organisation’s development. Essentially, it all feels less ‘personal’.

Reason 2 – Anxiety about the feedback itself.

Management and employees often become anxious about giving negative feedback, particularly when they are unsure of what response they will get. The recipient of feedback may be anxious about getting negative feedback because of insecurities, knowledge of mistakes or because of a previous painful experience of receiving overly harsh criticism. Accountability between colleagues is a great idea as it should encourage team work and self-development, however it is very tricky to find the balance between being considered helpful on the one hand and being patronising on the other.

How do you give feedback then? I need to credit Scott Halford, who has written a great article on how to tackle giving feedback, which can be found here www.entrepreneur.com/article/219437 . I have taken his 5 steps for giving productive feedback and added my thoughts:

Create safety - Be aware of the type of relationship you have with the other person who is receiving the feedback. Will constructive criticisms be taken in the way they were intended?
Be positive – If all the recipient hears is blanket criticism then they will become defensive and discouraged, not productive! Encourage improvement.
Be specific - Focus on specific ways to improve or on things that were done well, rather than giving generalised comments which allow expectations to become ambiguous. (See my previous post on the importance of managing expectations)
Be immediate – Feedback works best when it is not left for long periods but is regular and consistent. Doing this means you are more likely to manage small issues before they become big problems. It doesn’t even need a formal meeting. If you get to a place where feedback is just part of daily working life, and there is sufficient safety in the relationship, it actually should be more time-efficient.
Be tough, not mean - Straight-talking is great, however PLEASE NOTE: straight-talking does not rule out being kind and respectful!

Many organisations have introduced the concept of ‘Transactional Analysis’ – which describes interactions in the state of the parent, child or adult. (It is well worth reading up on this concept in greater detail.) Here it is very simply:

If you interact with others as the ‘parent’, you are likely to come across as judgmental and critical. This will likely make the other person become defensive decreasing their ability to listen effectively.
If on the other hand you are interacting in the state of the ‘child’, you are likely to come across as flighty or sulkily. This will make it hard for the other person to treat you like a mature adult and with respect.
If your aim is to work well with people, the state which is the most thoughtful and measured is the ‘adult ego’. Aim to have interactions where you are both acting like the ‘adult’!

And finally, be aware of the reasoning for giving the feedback . If you are giving it, you need to be self-aware regarding your motives: are you trying to feel superior, demoralise or are you trying to appease a third party? Alternatively, are you acting under a sense of responsibility to guide, mentor or support someone else? If you have a bad history with the recipient of the feedback or you are aware of any previous situation that would make them defensive, you may want to ensure that they know that your motives are not to condemn but to encourage. Be the adult, not the parent.

If you are the recipient to feedback, be aware of the built-in human response to defend yourself when feeling attacked. Be aware of it and then try to objectively listen to the feedback you are being given. In most cases, it is NOT an attack. Be prepared to understand what you are being told without getting defensive or trying to excuse yourself. Remember that feedback is a way of information gathering – a way to improve your performance at work. How you respond to feedback also demonstrates your maturity as a person and your willingness to listen respectfully to other people, even if you disagree with what is being said. Be the adult, not the child.

An organisation is at its best when all parts are accountable to each other and share a common goal. Don’t undermine the importance of feedback by making it a tick-box exercise. The organisations that continue to succeed are those which adapt and change as they need to. For this to happen, both management and employees need to be able to hear constructive criticism, learn from mistakes and listen to new ideas for making their own performance - and their performance as an organisation - better.

Feedback is also a great way of recognising when someone or a team has performed well. When good actions go unnoticed, there is little motivation to improve, or even maintain, performance at work. Give credit where it is due.

To summarise this post in just a few words: be quick to recognise achievements and gracious when challenging mistakes. Don’t stop talking!

The ideas I have shared in this post should be realistic to apply in most situations. Sometimes relationships have gotten off track too far and a third-party intervention through mediation may be necessary in order to find a way forward. If you would like to contact me about any workplace and employment issues that require mediation, please email me at emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

What Do You Expect?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 GMT

One of the best things I did with my husband before we got engaged was to talk through as many of the big issues as we could. We talked through our views on how household chores should be split, if we wanted children - and if so, how many. We talked about past relationships, religion and handling money. These conversations were not remotely romantic, however, I am certain talking it through has saved us from many otherwise avoidable arguments. Although life and people are unpredictable, by having talked through these things first, we both knew to a certain extent what we were getting ourselves into and when it came to the big things our expectations of each other matched reality.

Why did it make a difference? Because in the words of Dr. Blaine Lee, “Almost all conflict is a result of violated expectations” . Where one person has an expectation that is either unrealistic or simply unrealised, and nothing is done to manage or explain their expectations, it will lead to conflict. Whether the relationship is romantic, a friendship or a working relationship, where there are unspoken expectations between people that don’t match, it will lead to unproductive arguments and being repeatedly disappointed by the other person. If you feel like you are banging your head against a brick wall with a certain person or subject, figure out what your expectations are and what theirs might be. Where’s the disconnect?

Using the example of a workplace situation where a manager asks a staff member to complete a task ‘quickly’: If the manager’s real expectation was that ‘quickly’ meant a 2-day completion time but the employee’s thought ‘quickly’ meant maybe a couple of weeks, there is going to be a clash of expectations. What is missing? Clarity – on both sides.

Now using a relatively minor situation, some people prefer guests to take their shoes off in their home, whereas for others this is not an issue either way. The typically instinctive way to avoid conflict in this situation is to clarify: as the host you would ask people to take their shoes off; or if you were the guest you would ask the what the host would prefer. I know it seems like an insignificant example but the point is that if you don’t clarify – whether the issue is minor or important - then you are solely relying on the assumption that the other person’s expectations are the same as yours, or at least that you are able guess correctly what their expectations are. Sometimes, it is not worth the risk.

So, what is the key to managing expectations so that they don’t lead to conflict? Clarity.

If things are not clear, people assume they know what was intended or expected. In my experience of conflict, it is clear that when people make assumptions about the other person’s intentions they are often incorrect. As have mentioned before, don’t assume – CHECK!

Be aware of your own preconceived ideas about people and situations. What will help in particular is not listening to, or participating in, gossip. Here is my personal observation on the cycle of gossip:

Gossip starts as opinion mixed with fact and then as it is talked about more and more, that concoction of opinion-fact-speculation begins to seem ‘true’. The cycle continues: uncertainty over what to believe or who to trust; then defensiveness and assuming the negative; then further breakdown in communication; which leads to frustration/hostility/resentment = CONFLICT.

Take note of whether your expectations are influenced by opinion – others or your own - rather than reality.

Be aware of other people’s expectations – whether they are realistic or not, their expectations of you or a situation will dictate how they respond to you/the situation. If you are in management, it is important for you to understand what your staff expect from you and the organisation. David Brennan from GPM International warns that if you “fail to match or exceed employees’ expectations”, they will be resentful, ungrateful or complain. If the majority of the feedback you receive from your employees is negative, find out what their expectations of the organisation are. If you are able to have open and respectful communication between you and your staff and your expectations are mutually realistic , there is less room for misunderstandings and negative feelings.

If in doubt, be gracious . Personally, I try to operate on the principle that if I have not asked someone to do something, I cannot be upset that they didn’t do it as my expectations (or preferences) were not made clear – unless of course their behaviour is objectively unreasonable. I try to operate on the principle that most people do not intend to offend or hurt so if I am unsure about someone’s motives, I can clarify – if I assume the negative, I am highly more likely to take things the wrong way. I try to operate on the principle that my expectations of others may sometimes be unrealistic and that their expectations of me may also be unrealistic – so, if in doubt be kind, gracious and appreciative anyway.

To conclude: clarify, check, understand and be gracious . Managing expectations will not stop conflict but it will certainly help to avoid bringing unnecessary conflict to your door.

If there are any workplace or employment situations that might be helped by my services as a Mediator, please get in touch through my Contact page or by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk .

What's It Worth?

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Tue, 31 May 2016 00:00:00 GMT

Conflict is inevitable. We work and live with people who have had different upbringings, communication styles, irritating habits, and past histories which can create tension, anger or full-on arguments.

As I said in my previous post, I would never advocate conflict avoidance – conflict should be worked through thoroughly and without delay. The key is knowing whether the issue itself even needs to be spoken about. If you want your environment to be positive and your relationships to be strong you don’t want to create ‘unnecessary’ conflict. IS IT WORTH IT?

It shows true integrity when you are able to spot whether the issue causing tension is actually YOUR problem and not the other person’s. However, we are often too close to the situation and too full of emotion to be able to discern whether this is the case or not. You can do this by going through a mental checklist before speaking up:

What is the real reason behind the conflict? Generally speaking, it isn’t about the facts of what took place but how what happened made you or them feel. Issues between people often stem from feeling hurt, disrespected, misunderstood or wronged. Why has the situation bothered you to this extent?
Are you sure of the intention behind your actions or their actions? If you answer this question with ‘yes’, then think again. You probably don’t know. So, don’t assume – CHECK!
What are the possible outcomes of bringing the issue up? Are they beneficial long-term? Is it an issue of justice or integrity? Will it do your relationship more damage if you keep silent?
Are you challenging a behaviour that you are guilty of too? No one enjoys being corrected by a hypocrite!
Is there something you can do or a behaviour you need to change that would improve the situation? You should be open to them needing to challenge you.

SO if you decide the issue is worth it…how should you bring up your concerns in a way that doesn’t make the situation worse? Some tips:

Bear in mind any topics that you need to be sensitive about, and be sensitive about them.
Approach privately first – don’t embarrass or shame in public. Do not talk to everyone else about this before you talk to the person involved. This only spreads conflict and could damage their relationship with the other person.
Stick to the main point and don’t bring up everything you take issue with unless it is completely necessary to moving on and resolving the conflict.
Don’t get stuck on your different memories of the events – as Friedrich Nietzsche says, “There are no facts, only interpretations.” Recognise this and talk about your PERCEPTION of what happened and how that affected you. Yes, just as you would tell a child, “Use your feeling words!”
Talk straight – keep it simple. We all know people who are brutally honest – the brutal part will not endear you to anyone. It is possible to be straight and honest AND respectful.
Try to think of a way forward that is beneficial to both of you. For people to move forward after a dispute or conflict, there needs to be a basis of trust first. Jim Meehan, a psychologist and poet found in his career that this can happen if they say two things to each other: “I mean you no harm” and “I seek your greatest good”. Obviously you don’t have to use these exact phrases but somehow you need to communicate that your intention is good and you have their interests in mind and not just your own.

Every situation is different so this post should not be used as a step-by-step rule book. These are just points you should think through before – or even if – you have the conversation, if you really care about the end result. Whatever happens during the conversation, try to end well and be open to talking about it again if it is required.

Life should be enjoyable, positive and fun. Don’t let unresolved conflict drag you down, so nip it in the bud quickly and effectively. If the issue is NOT worth it, work it out internally and move on. Don’t create unnecessary conflict – life is full enough of real problems for you to create more!

If there are any workplace or employment disputes that you need some assistance with resolving please contact me through the Contact page or by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk

How To Back Down From A Fight!

emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk (Emma Jenkings) — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 00:00:00 GMT

At the outset I should make it clear that there is no upside to NOT dealing with issues . My focus as a mediator is to bring about 'conflict resolution' - this is not a post on 'conflict avoidance'!

Conflict resolution aims to enable people to keep their integrity during a dispute when something is important to them but it also aims to stop them from getting stuck in conflict, under the mistaken belief that backing down is the same as 'giving in'. Time does not ‘heal all wounds’ - at best it may help calm emotions in the SHORT TERM, at worst it reinforces weak points in a relationship.

So, how do you back down from a fight without avoiding the issue?

Firstly, you separate the person from the issue . If you concentrate on the person being the ‘problem’ – you may as well forget the idea of resolving the dispute. People do not respond well to someone telling them they are not good enough (even those who postulate about knowing they ‘are not perfect’). It is valuable to bear in mind that the fight is rarely worth more than the relationship. Even in a work scenario where you may not be particularly concerned about the relationship with the other person; having an inability to get along with people is unlikely to reflect well on you as an employee or manager. Also, the average person spends one third of their whole life at work. Surely, it is better to do what you can to enjoy your time there. Focus on the problem, not the person.

Secondly, when you start from the position that they are ‘wrong’ and you are ‘right’, you raise the defences. As someone who has grown up enjoying debate and winning people over to my way of thinking, I find it totally frustrating if I cannot persuade someone to agree with me. In a class debate this way of thinking is par for the course. In relational disputes, the aim should not be to convince someone else that you are right. If you instead allow for the possibility that there are two sides and that there may be more the story than you realised, you become open to really listening to what the other person is saying.

So… listen – don’t start planning your response while they are talking. Really listen. When someone feels heard they are able to reciprocate. Time and again you will discover that the real issue is not what the argument appeared to be about – more often than not it is about issues of respect, insecurity, trust and feeling hurt. Take the time to explain yourself. You are responsible for effectively communicating what you see as the issue . Assuming anything - such as ‘they knew why I was upset’ - is not an excuse. Communicate.

Stop trying to be tactical . It is seriously petty and inhibits any attempt at resolving things. It amplifies whatever trust issues already exist between you, and let’s face it, people know when someone is not being genuine. Save the tactics for business decisions – it doesn’t work for conflict resolution. Instead, admit when you have been wrong/miscommunicated/need to step up to the mark. Humility creates hugely positive ripple effects – particularly in the area of trust. Without trust, there is little to build on.

Keep the hope alive! It sounds cheesy (and it is) but if there is no hope of even the possibility of resolution, people have no motivation to try. Focus on the points that you both agree on and keep suggesting different options that may help to resolve the issues where there is still difference of opinion. Remember that some solutions may be long-term but once you have determined to do something, you are halfway there – it begins in the mind. At points you may need to agree to disagree, which is fine! The important thing to remember is that you have at least tried to understand the other person’s concerns. Key point: if you do ‘agree to disagree’, you are effectively agreeing to ‘drop’ that issue. Therefore, you should not bring it up again, to them or other people.

When you have found a mutually agreeable solution, be determined to follow through with what you have agreed to and remember that you are not responsible for anyone’s actions but your own. If the other person does not keep to their side of the agreement, you are responsible for how you bring the issue up. Use the above methods because – sociopaths aside - they are highly effective.

If all else fails, bring in a neutral third party. As a Qualified Workplace and Employment Mediator, I highly recommend the use of a mediator to intercede when you are unable to communicate objectively. Mediators are neutral, confidential, and extremely successful at getting to the root of a dispute. So don’t get stuck in conflict and don’t avoid issues – deal with them.

If you need to help with any workplace or employment disputes or conflict, please get in contact via the Contact Page or by emailing emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk