Towards a Conflict Competent Organization | Alternative Dispute Resolution | Conflict (Process)

P A T H W A Y S

TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

A Practitioner’s Guide to Designing Conflict Management Systems in Public Sector Organizations

Author: Peter Sterne

PATHWAYS : Towards a Conflict Competent Organization
A Practitioner’s Guide to Designing Conflict Management Systems in Public Sector Organizations
Copyright © Department of National Defence, 2004 All rights reserved

C O N T E N T S
Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii – Why I wrote Pathways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii – The Department of National Defence/Canadian Forces model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii – What to expect from Pathways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv – How to use Pathways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv – A final word . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Volume I—A Practitioner’s Guide To Designing Conflict Management Systems In Public Sector Organizations Chapter 1—Making A Case For A Conflict Management System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Setting the stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Clarifying some concepts and terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – How conflict is handled . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Rationale for a CMS based on ADR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Choosing a suitable process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – “Selling” a CMS to decision makers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 1 2 3 5 5 7

Chapter 2—Researching And Benchmarking Best Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 – Discover the wheel—No need to invent it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 – Benchmarking other organizations—Some case studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 – Canada—The federal government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 – Australia—The Australian Defence Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 – United States government organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 – International—Professional associations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 – The DND/CF experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Chapter 3—Getting Going . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The ADR Business Triad—A systems approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Make or buy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Contracting for services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Request for proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Positioning the CMS initiative within the organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The American experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The Canadian experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – A collaborative approach to system design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Alignment with corporate culture and core values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The Executive Director Conflict Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 19 20 21 22 24 26 27 27 28 29 29

C O N T E N T S

Chapter 4—Building Awareness And Commitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Getting beyond approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Alignment with union roles, responsibilities and interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 5—Testing Models And Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Moving from concept to concrete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Select case mediation program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Pilot sites… building and testing the model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Facilitated design workshops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 6—Communications Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The communications framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Key messages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Communication products and tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Frequently asked questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF CANFORGENs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – More on the DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 7—System Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Integrated conflict management systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Strategic alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Guidelines and principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The integrated CMS model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 8—Mediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Mediation in a public sector environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The process—Standards and practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The five-phase model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Roles, responsibilities and standards for the parties to a mediation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Ethical standards for mediators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Mediation tools—The DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

34 34 36 37 42 42 42 45 46 47 52 53 54 55 56 59 61 64 64 64 66 71 72 74 80 80 81 84 86 89 90

Chapter 9—Coaching For Conflict Competency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 – The conflict management spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 – Coaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 – Core competencies for coaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 – The DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Chapter 10—Workplace Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Workplace assessment as a conflict management tool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Using external consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Workplace assessment guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Starting the process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Report and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Implementation of recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The role of the CMS service provider . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 11—Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Core training programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Make or buy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Training—What and for whom? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Continuous learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF Mediator Qualification Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 12—National Rollout: Organization And Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – From project to program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – One step at a time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Getting it done . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The consultative process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Resource tensions associated with the national rollout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The structure of the program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Program governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Request for proposal: Training and interventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 13—Evaluation And Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Did we get it right? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The nuts and bolts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The four stages of evaluation: Planning, project, program and process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Steps in the evaluation process: A checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – The DND/CF experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Evaluation framework: Issues and questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Institutionalization of ADR in DND/CF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter 14—Systems Design: Trends, Innovations And The Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Where we are . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Integrated CMS models as a cost-related continuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – New approaches to training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Innovative tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

105 105 105 107 108 109 110 110 111 112 112 112 113 117 118 119 128 128 128 129 130 131 134 135 137 140 140 142 142 142 144 146 148 154 155 159 159 159 162 163 163 164 165

C O N T E N T S

Volume II—The CMS Tool Kit Tool 1—The Request for Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 2—Staffing Notice for Executive Director of Conflict Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 3—Conflict Management Project Steering Committee—Terms of Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 4—FAQs About the Conflict Management Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 5—DRC Brochure: What Is Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 6—DRC Brochure: Frequently Asked Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 7—Internal Communications: Guidelines for DRC Coordinators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 8—Harassment Prevention and Resolution Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 9—Internal Defence Alternative Dispute Resolution Practitioner’s Code of Ethics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 10—Sample Agreement to Mediate Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 11—Sample Minutes of Settlement Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 12—Annex to Minutes of Settlement: Full Settlement of Grievance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 13—Annex to Minutes of Settlement: Partial Settlement of Grievance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 14—Sample Mediation Evaluation Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 15—Model—Mediation Fact Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 16—The Skill Sets of ADR Institute Charter Mediators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 17—Sample: Speaking Notes to Course Instructors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 18—Course Outline: Mediator’s Qualification Program, Phase 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 19—Mediator Assessment Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tool 20—Sample MQP Qualification Memorandum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

168 181 182 183 187 188 189 192 194 196 197 198 199 200 201 203 207 209 212 214

Glossary of Terms and Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 Recommended References and Web Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
Pathways is A Practitioner’s Guide to Designing Conflict Management Systems (CMS) in Public Sector Organizations. It discusses the what-when-who-where-why-and-how of CMS and uses the much-lauded Department of National Defence/ Canadian Forces (DND/CF) program as a case study and model to anchor and exemplify some of the learnings. I called it Pathways because, in a way, it is both a travel log and a map. It describes a complex journey, through detours and side roads, with some unexpected stops along the way. It explores alternate routes and recognizes the many possible approaches to any destination. There were missteps, wrong turns and dead ends. The landscape changed often; temperatures and environmental conditions fluctuated unpredictably. But all along the voyage, there were people—warm and wonderful people—who offered support, inspiration and a wealth of exceptional ideas. I’d like to take a moment to thank them. First of all I wish to acknowledge the contribution of Erik Adler in helping me edit and craft this publication. His assistance, enthusiasm, insights and skills were invaluable in ensuring that Pathways could be easily read and understood, and of practical use to the reader. His dedication to excellence is reflected in this publication, and for this I extend my utmost gratitude. Pathways is, in many respects, the story of the DND/CF program and the vision of its proponents. Without the foresight and commitment of Jim Judd (DM), Monique Boudrias (ADM), Shirley Siegel (ADM), General Maurice Baril (Chief of the Defence Staff [CDS]), General Ray Henault (CDS), Lieutenant-General Romeo Dallaire (ADM), LieutenantGeneral David Kinsman (ADM), Lieutenant-General Mike Caines (ADM), Lieutenant-General Christian Couture (ADM) and Vice-Admiral Greg Jarvis, there would be no story. But there is a story, and it is an exciting one indeed! For those involved at the very early stages of the project— Lucie Morneault, Lieutenant-Commander Steve Levecque, Guy Baron, Major M.E. Timperon, Major-General Rick Linden and Karen Hebert—this was more than just exciting, interesting work. It was a mission, and they approached it with the zeal, passion and dedication that carried the initiative from an idea to reality. This was subsequently continued under the thoughtful direction of Lucie Allaire. The conceptual underpinnings and approaches reflected in Pathways owe a great deal to the influences of others in the field. Roger Fisher, author of Getting to Yes, with whom I had the privilege of working and being associated for several years, and the Conflict Management Group (CMG) of Cambridge, Massachusetts, were instrumental in shaping my understanding of the possibilities inherent in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and the different ways it could be applied. Exchanging ideas and testing innovative approaches with colleagues from the CMG team were extremely helpful. Rob Ricigliano, CMG’s former Executive Director and Senior Advisor to the Harvard Negotiation Project; Doug Stone and Sheila Heen, authors of Difficult Conversations; Joe Stanford, the former Deputy Solicitor General of Canada, my colleague, friend and mentor; and other associates from the Harvard Negotiation Project profoundly influenced the directions I subsequently pursued in CMS design. The same was true of the associates at CDR Associates in Boulder, Colorado, such as Chris Moore and Bernard Mayer, who encouraged me to think of ADR in a more systematic manner. They were more than generous in sharing new approaches to old problems. Many individuals contributed to this publication indirectly, through the influence of their work in this field and through our various interactions and collaborations. These include, among numerous others, Cathy Costantino, Christina Merchant, Frank Sander, Jennifer Lynch, Carole Houk, Mary Rowe, Cheryl Picard, Allan Stitt, Pierre Charron, Rick Weiler, Richard Moore, David Lipsky, Michael Lang, Gordon Sloan and my ERL colleagues. Thanks as well to the Canadian government for its early leadership in this domain. The Canadian Centre for Management Development (CCMD) took a lead training and professional development role and encouraged me to develop and deliver new training programs in negotiation and conflict management for senior public servants. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which participated in the CCMD training, introduced one of the earlier integrated system design initiatives and, through its association with CCMD, generated further interest in CMS among other government departments.

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

i

Aside from the above, I have been involved in numerous CMS design initiatives throughout North America and abroad— in both the public and private sectors. While each of those experiences has contributed, either directly or indirectly, to the writing of Pathways, my role in assisting the Australian Defence Force and other Australian organizations is of particular note. I would like to extend my gratitude to my Australian colleagues, Sir Lawrence Street AC KCMG QC, the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, author and preeminent ADR practitioner in Australia, and to Captain (Navy) Helen Marks, Director of ADR and Conflict Management, Australian Defence Force, both of whom are advancing new applications of ADR in that country. To all of them—and to those I may have missed—a heartfelt thank you.

Peter Sterne

ii

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

F O R E W O R D
WHY I WROTE PATHWAYS; WHAT’S IN IT FOR YOU
Over the past few years I’ve assisted both private and public sector organizations in introducing innovative conflict management systems—sometimes referred to as dispute resolution systems (DRSs)—based on alternative dispute resolution processes. These initiatives have helped to dramatically reduce the magnitude of grievances, harassment complaints, litigation costs and interpersonal disputes. The organizations have been able to shift workplace cultures from what might be described as dysfunctional to cultures that exemplify high levels of conflict competence. Given the need for a better way to deal with conflict in the workplace, there is no doubt that more and more public and private sector organizations will introduce CMSs into their organizations in the near future. However, not all CMSs are created equal and not all best practices are appropriate in all situations. I have seen some systems—implemented with high hopes and best intentions— fall well short of anticipated outcomes. Over the years my observations, analyses and experience have helped me understand why some systems work, while others fail. In Pathways I will share these learnings, in the hope they will help organizations, particularly in the public sector, develop and implement a better way to cope with conflict. I will also provide alternatives and perspectives on the system design process that should allow practitioners to create a system that suits their specific needs. DND/CF was early to recognize the potential of ADR in its broadest context and made a strong commitment to institute it within the organization. It also recognized that the ADR process, in and of itself, was not enough to guarantee success. To maximize its potential, it needed to be incorporated into a fully integrated system— one that could accommodate multiple approaches and offer numerous points of access. It had to be flexible, fair and client-centred. With the support of its leaders and the involvement of a multitude of stakeholders, DND/CF set out to build a world-class system. It entrusted this task to the Executive Director Conflict Management (EDCM) team, whose vision, innovation, dedication, commitment and hard work helped create a CMS that has been described as “the industry standard.” At the end of a comprehensive benchmarking exercise, the Australian Department of Defence concluded that “Canada is currently the world leader in implementing a fully integrated ADR program within a large Defence or government organization.” (Captain [Navy] H. Marks, Director of Alternative Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management, Australian Department of Defence) In An Evaluation of the Conflict Management Project (March 2001), Ajilon Canada described the DND/CF Conflict Management Project (CMP) as “a leading edge system design initiative, and the largest in North America … recognized as being among the very best such initiatives in the world, and as having long-term immense potential to influence significant organizational, and perhaps societal, change. The process is state of the art.” Also in 2001, I was honoured with the William M. Mercer Vision Award for an “exceptional degree of innovation in the design and implementation of a successful human resources program” (in both the public and private sectors). As EDCM, I confess that I’m very proud of this recognition, though I fully appreciate that each of the dedicated members of the team who worked so hard to make the system a success deserves a share of that recognition.

THE DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE/CANADIAN FORCES MODEL
Although the model I will describe in Pathways is a composite of several CMS design initiatives for government organizations, it is largely based on the DND/CF Conflict Management System, for which I was responsible. I’ve chosen this as a model because it is a comprehensive initiative that focuses on the prevention and resolution of workplace conflict at the earliest stage and lowest possible level through the use of ADR processes.

F O R E W A R D

iii

Still, my role as Executive Director has given me a privileged overview of how things unfolded. As the point man, I got to see how all the components fit, and when problems arose I got to call on my experience to find appropriate interventions. The DND/CF story is interesting, and since I know it so intimately, I’ve chosen it as a case study to demonstrate how key design concepts were applied in the real world. I will highlight the successes and the failures. I will provide frank observations, based on my reflections and experience. While the DND/CF experience is seminal, it is not unique. Various organizations have created their own CMS and I’ve had the opportunity to study and participate in many of them. Where appropriate I will draw from those experiences as well.

The concepts segments examine the whys and wherefores of each building block in the CMS design process. They define the goals and relevance of each step and offer up considerations and alternative approaches. The experience/application segments look at how those concepts were applied in the real world—particularly at DND/CF. Key learnings can be found in boxes that are interspersed, where appropriate. They include observations, reflections and perspectives related to specific elements in the text. In some instances the above three components are presented separately and labelled accordingly; sometimes they are interwoven. Volume 2, The CMS Tool Kit, is made up of actual documents and forms that have been used successfully in the implementation of CMSs. They have been reproduced here exactly as they were issued. Practitioners may use them verbatim or as templates for designing their own tools. References to these tools appear in appropriate spots throughout Volume 1.

WHAT TO EXPECT FROM PATHWAYS
Pathways is intended as a straightforward, practical guide to CMS design, based on the DND/CF experience. Although it is based on sound conceptual frameworks, I will not go into the esoteric or theoretical details related to system design processes. Instead, I will focus on the personal reflections of an individual who has studied it, seen it, and done it. He didn’t know it all then, doesn’t know it all now, but knows a lot more—and is happy to share some of his learning.

A FINAL WORD
Pathways is the step-by-step what-when-who-where-whyand-how of CMS design, with helpful tips, guidelines and key learnings thrown in. It is intended primarily for those practitioners who may have an interest in, or who may be tasked with, putting into place an integrated dispute resolution system in a government organization. That said, I believe that anyone interested in the design and implementation of any fully integrated system within a large organization will find this publication useful.

HOW TO USE PATHWAYS
Pathways is made up of two volumes: the first, A Practitioner’s Guide to Designing Conflict Management Systems in Public Sector Organizations; the second, The CMS Tool Kit. I’ve also included a glossary of related terminology and acronyms. Volume 1 traces the iterative steps required for instituting a CMS, from genesis to full realization. Each chapter deals with a key CMS design element and is usually broken down into three basic components: concepts experience/application key learnings

iv

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

V O L U M E
A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE TO DESIGNING CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN PUBLIC SECTOR ORGANIZATIONS

I

C H A P T E R

1

MAKING A CASE FOR A CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

While some organizations acknowledge that their system for dealing with conflict is either nonexistent or broken, they are hard-pressed to initiate a better way. Some choose to deny the need for a systematic approach to conflict resolution, hoping that if they let it slide, problems will resolve themselves. Sometimes they’re right … but not often. On the other hand, many of the world’s best-performing organizations realize that conflict is an integral part of their vibrancy. They recognize that it can foster learning and creativity and they know how to surface and deal with it constructively. These are “conflict-competent” organizations. Not only have they learned to control the financial and human costs of workplace conflict, but they have also figured out how to use this learning to create happier, healthier and more productive employees. Conflict-competent organizations don’t happen by accident. They get that way by recognizing there is no one-size-fits-all process for resolving the multitude of disagreements that may arise in the workplace. Through active leadership and education, they create conflict-competent environments where people have both the will and capacity to deal with discord at the earliest stage and lowest possible level. In those instances where discord escalates into a dispute—which is inevitable no matter how conflict-competent people may be—these organizations provide an array of appropriate resolution mechanisms that are timely, accessible, flexible and fair. But wait. Before we can explore how to create a conflictcompetent organization, we need to ensure we’re all speaking the same language. So let’s take a small step back.

SETTING THE STAGE
Let’s face it. Conflict is normal. We sometimes try to deny it; often we’ll even jump through hoops to avoid it. The truth is, conflict is not only normal, it’s inevitable. Whenever people interact closely they are bound to “bump into” each other. If they perceive that they have competing interests, which is commonly the case, conflict may arise. If individuals are feeling stressed—even if the stressors are unrelated—the conflict will escalate. Count on it. Unfortunately, in today’s frenetic and stressful workplace the number and types of conflict appear to be increasing. We see it in the interpersonal disputes, grievances, harassment complaints, human rights charges, civil litigation and workplace violence experienced by organizations far too frequently. It’s not surprising. It’s normal. And inevitable. Conflict in itself is neither bad nor good. It just is. It’s how it is handled that is the key to individual well-being and organizational health. Many conflict management processes which are based on the rights of individuals to pursue entitlements and perceived justice may not be working in the best interests of either the individual or the organization. Many are highly confrontational in nature and can easily exacerbate conflict. Some redress processes actually institutionalize procedures that can encourage conflicts to escalate.

CLARIFYING SOME CONCEPTS AND TERMS
To ensure a common understanding of the terms used in this publication, it is useful to clarify some of the terminology and concepts. Conflict is the process and condition of dissatisfaction, which is often viewed as a general state of negative feelings. It is broader than a dispute and occurs where two or more individuals perceive that they have competing interests. A dispute is the outcome of unresolved conflict. It is a manifestation or subset of conflict and requires resolution. It often occurs when people disagree on facts. The two words—conflict and dispute—are often used interchangeably; however, in Pathways I make a distinction between them. Conflict, in this context, is viewed as the

C H A P T E R 1 MAKING A CASE FOR A CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

1

broader, more macro term, incorporating in it notions of prevention and cultural and behavioural change. Dispute is used in a narrower sense, referring to those elements directly related to a clash or divergence of opinion. When discussing integrated systems, the same distinction holds true. While conflict management system and dispute resolution system are often used to describe the same thing, I tend to view CMS as having a broader, more ambitious scope, dealing with not only how we handle disputes, but also how our daily interactions affect our work culture and behaviours. As such, a DRS, which focuses primarily on resolution, is only a component of a successful CMS, albeit a very substantial one. In Pathways the term CMS includes all those elements normally related to a DRS. A CMS is a comprehensive, broad-based approach to the prevention, identification and resolution of workplace disputes. It is: Integrated: Rights- and interest-based dispute resolution activities and institutions are linked in a coherent, “whole” system, with a logical “flow” or sequencing (like a road map) with loop-back properties. Systematic: A logical and progressive series of steps or stages, each with a clearly defined set of procedures, forms the process. Institutionalized: Processes, practices and support structures are operational. They are known, understood, accepted and used. As a system it consists of a model or framework, supported by organization-wide enablers. Enablers include interestbased behaviours; training; senior management champions; buy-in from leaders at all levels; stakeholder involvement; collaborative processes; reward systems; and structures, such as resolution centres, Web sites and system governance mechanisms. A CMS responds to the exigencies of all types of conflict, for all persons in the workplace. It is transformative and results in a culture shift, founded on interest-based behaviour and the resolution of conflict at the lowest possible level. It incorporates multiple options (both rights- and interestbased) and multiple access points. Central to most high-quality CMSs is the implementation of alternative dispute resolution.

ADR is a dispute resolution process that falls outside the more traditional rights-based processes such as court adjudication. The term usually refers to interest-based, consensus-oriented approaches to fields of human interaction and includes, among others, processes such as negotiation (self-resolution), mediation (third party assistance) and arbitration (third party decision making).

KEY LEARNING

COMMON LANGUAGE IS KEY TO COMMON UNDERSTANDING
Establishing a common lexicon is essential when disparate groups of people need to work together toward a common understanding or goal. That’s why I took the time to explain the use of certain terms and concepts within the context of Pathways—to ensure we’re all reading from the same page, so to speak. Because words often mean different things to different people, it is equally important to ensure that terminology is clear to all stakeholders in an organization that is putting a CMS into place. Try to avoid the distraction of ongoing intellectual debate around the usage of the most “correct” terminology and definitions. The important thing is to have a common understanding within your own organization and to make this explicit. Review the most common usage of the various terms, determine what makes sense for your organization, decide on the definitions and publish a lexicon—in both official languages.

HOW CONFLICT IS HANDLED
Conflict has traditionally been addressed through the use of three processes. They are: Power-based; Rights-based; and Interest-based.

2

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

A power-based process sets the context within which the conflict will be handled. It is based upon the perceived strengths of disputants. This may include the power of position or rank, physical or military might, economic or financial leverage, or the ability to cause harm to the other party. The schoolyard fight, the union strike and the ultimate manifestation, war, are all power-based processes. Many hierarchical, command-and-control organizations, such as police and military organizations, rely extensively on power-based processes. This was particularly evident to me when, early in the DND/CF project, a major said to me, “Conflict? What conflict? I’m a major; he’s a lieutenant. He behaves the way I say or I charge him with disobeying an order. We have no conflict.” Although there is an increasing recognition that in today’s workplace power-based processes are less effective than in the past, they remain well suited to certain situations, such as large-scale reorganizations, corporate survival or crisis. Rights-based processes set the parameters within which the disputants may wish to exercise their rights. These can include exercising the right to submit a grievance under the terms of a collective agreement, lay a charge of harassment consistent with regulatory policy, submit a discrimination complaint through the Human Rights Commission or commence a civil litigation action through the courts. Usually some form of adjudication is involved. Government employees have these rights and the discretion to exercise them. Rights-based processes seem to be the “default” mechanisms most commonly used in government organizations. The culture is such that if there is unresolved workplace conflict and the employee does not want to ignore it, the conditioned response is to grieve. In many instances management’s viewcrudely put-is: “If you don’t like it, lump it! If you don’t want to lump it, then grieve it!” Rights-based processes tend to be costly and time-consuming, and they frequently result in outcomes that are not fully satisfying to any of the disputants. In fact, rather than resolving conflict, they often generate additional conflict. Still, there are occasions when a rights-based process is the most appropriate way to deal with a workplace issue. For example, DND/CF has determined that such situations exist when there is: a possibility that criminal behaviour has occurred; a need for a public record, and the public interest is best served by an open, transparent process;

an interest in establishing a precedent or a body of policy decisions; a threat to good order and discipline; a significant public-policy, procedural or legal issue; an issue that affects persons or organizations not party to the process; or an apparent abuse of process. Interest-based processes focus on the underlying needs (including the hopes, beliefs, values, fears and concerns) of disputants to resolve issues. Interests can take many forms, including those of substance (what is needed), well-being (needs of an individual-physical, emotional and psychological) and procedure (need for comfort with how things are done). To find mutually satisfying outcomes, interest-based processes tend to be more collaborative in nature than confrontational. Interest-based processes can include facilitation, coaching, negotiation and mediation. In the workplace context, mediation is the process most commonly associated with ADR.

RATIONALE FOR A CMS BASED ON ADR
Most conflict-competent organizations have opted for a CMS based on ADR because they see significant positive outcomes in four key areas: controlling the costs of workplace conflict satisfaction with outcomes maintaining good working relationships minimizing the likelihood of dispute recurrence

CONTROLLING THE COSTS OF WORKPLACE CONFLICT There are two major types of costs associated with workplace conflict—financial and human. There are also other significant costs, such as damaged reputation, missed opportunity and social costs. All are difficult to measure but are easily understood.
Financial cost refers to the expenses the complainant incurs in preparing a formal complaint, the defendant incurs in repudiating the complaint, and the organization uses to try to sort it out. Although these costs are often reflected in terms of the time used to do this, monetary expenditures for professional assistance, including legal fees, are included.

C H A P T E R 1 MAKING A CASE FOR A CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

3

Organizations responding to complaints such as grievances, harassment complaints, human rights violations and civil litigation actions are often locked into time-consuming and enormously expensive review processes. When factoring in the time and effort involved to process the complaint, conduct any necessary investigations, and take the required action, the costs can shoot through the roof. It is not uncommon for the cost of processing a grievance or harassment complaint in organizations such as DND/CF to approach the $40,000 range if all direct and indirect costs are considered. If litigation is involved, the real costs can skyrocket into the stratosphere. I recall, for example, mediating a high-profile case that had captured extensive media attention. It had been around for three years and had consumed several hundred thousand dollars in legal fees, yet no real progress had been made. In fact, it was the tip of the iceberg, as several related cases were about to unfold in federal court. Those proceedings would have consumed hundreds of hours of the time of senior officers, who would be obligated to testify in the court proceedings, and it was unlikely that a satisfactory resolution would result. Using mediation, the case was resolved to the satisfaction of all parties within eight weeks. Though harder to measure, the human costs of workplace conflict can be even more devastating than the financial ones. Emotional trauma on the part of disputants, and their families, friends and workplace colleagues, can be overwhelming. For some, the issues become all-consuming and, as some disputants have described, “take over their lives.” Ill will and rancour are often infectious, contaminating not only those involved in the dispute, but also those who may simply find themselves in proximity. The destruction caused by a poisoned work environment can linger for many years. Morale declines, staff turnover increases, productivity decreases.

Board (PSSRB), seldom produce outcomes that are fully satisfactory to any of the disputants. These processes result in one person being perceived as winning and the other losing. The “loser” may subsequently behave in a manner that has negative repercussions for all involved, both directly and indirectly. Often both parties lose. Anyone who has been through protracted civil litigation processes understands this. In some circumstances the court award to the “winner” is less than the legal fees. In other situations it may be difficult to collect the award or judgment. In yet other instances, winning is unsatisfactory because what has been won does not respond to what the winner really wants or needs. In most cases the parties themselves are in the best position to make a determination concerning their own interests. This leads to more satisfactory outcomes.

M A I N TA I N I N G G O O D W O R K I N G R E L AT I O N S H I P S The ability to work well together following a dispute is often dependent on the dispute resolution mechanism in place. If one individual feels he or she has “lost” as a result of a ruling or third party decision, it is likely the workplace relationship will be strained. If the “winner” gloats, the effect is to exacerbate workplace relationships or even create new tensions.
Such tensions not only affect the disputants, but also have a detrimental effect on those around them. However, if the parties have been able to negotiate a mutually satisfactory outcome using interest-based processes, it is more likely that they will be able to work together again productively.

S AT I S FAC T I O N W I T H O U T C O M E S Very few of us like to have decisions imposed on us—not even if they are good decisions!
Traditional rights-based processes, such as redress of grievance, harassment complaint investigations or any adjudication process that might be used by the Human Rights Commission or the Public Service Staff Relations

MINIMIZING THE LIKELIHOOD OF DISPUTE RECURRENCE When one party to a dispute believes that he or she is the “loser” and has not been treated fairly as a result of a rightsbased process, it is likely the dispute will recur, sometimes disguised in another issue. Parties who negotiate a satisfactory outcome themselves are more likely to respect the terms and conditions of that outcome.
Furthermore, such an agreement is more likely to be respected by all individuals—even those who have not been party to the dispute but may have formed opinions or taken sides nonetheless.

4

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

CHOOSING A SUITABLE PROCESS
In dealing with clients, I have often used the chart shown below as a tool for considering suitable dispute resolution processes and the merits of a CMS: COSTS financial & human Determine who is most POWERFUL Determine who is RIGHT Reconcile parties’ INTERESTS SATISFACTION with outcome RELATIONSHIP positive (or negative) effect RECURRENCE of dispute not likely

In such instances I ask the organization’s representatives to consider a specific case which is of concern to them and which could be handled using power-, rights- or interestbased processes. They often choose situations involving harassment, redress of grievance or civil litigation—cases that have traditionally involved the use of rights-based processes for resolution. After cases are selected I ask clients to fill in the above grid using a high (H), medium (M) or low (L) rating for each category. The strengths and weaknesses of the different approaches become evident immediately. This can be even more obvious if several participants share their ratings with each other (in such instances I sometimes use a consolidated matrix form). This exercise is fast and simple and encourages decision makers to reflect on the merits and underlying assumptions attached to their current procedures. This often prompts them to further consider interest-based processes.

“SELLING” A CMS TO DECISION MAKERS
To ensure that the appropriate effort and resources are devoted to an ADR-based CMS initiative, proponents often need to “sell” the idea to the organization’s decision makers. No problem. All they have to do is cite the above-mentioned advantages of such systems, and the indisputable logic of their proposals will overwhelm even the most ardent skeptic. Add to that a cost-benefit analysis and a well-thought-out implementation strategy, and who in their right mind would resist? Easy, right? Well, not quite.

A COMPELLING REASON Logic and reason are often not enough to prompt a decision to proceed with the design and implementation of a CMS. There are other causal factors, a combination of which usually forms a “compelling reason” for a CMS or the broad use of ADR processes. I refer to them as the Six C Factors:
Costs: These are the economic, human and social costs discussed earlier.

C H A P T E R 1 MAKING A CASE FOR A CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

5

Compliance: The obligation to comply with legislative or regulatory directives can form a compelling reason. The exigencies of Bill C-25 (human resource modernization) and the mandatory mediation requirements for civil litigation cases in Ontario are examples of this. Competition: Companies and organizations often compete to attract, recruit and retain the most talented employees— particularly those with highly specialized skills. Since conflict competence is a key factor in fostering happier, more productive employees, successful employers of choice often recognize the value of a CMS as a means of enhancing their competitiveness. Corporate culture: Corporate culture is a manifestation of the unique behavioural patterns of people in organizations. When organizations merge, reorganize, form partnerships or establish strategic alliances, they can suffer from corporate culture clashes. Planning for this, rather than reacting to it, can minimize the negative effects of such clashes. Creative urge: Some organizations have leaders who pride themselves on being innovators of human resource or other management practices. These individuals recognize the potential of a CMS and aggressively champion the cause. Crisis: Organizations periodically find themselves in crisis mode due to unresolved conflict. Symptoms may show up as: an excessive number of grievances or harassment complaints, a culture of inappropriate behaviour, litigation costs, the loss of valued employees, or negative media reports impacting on the reputation and public perception of the organization. Linking one or more of the Six C Factors to specific organizational issues can encourage decision makers to consider an ADR-based CMS as a viable solution to their problems. This was the case for the RCMP when the huge number of members’ grievances became a major catalyst for its ADR project. At the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA), it was the high cost of dealing with harassment complaints and grievances that provided the incentive. At the Human Rights Commission and Public Service Staff Relations Board, heavy caseloads prompted an increased interest in ADR as a possible solution. In the case of DND/CF, the combined factors of low morale, negative public perceptions and the need for cultural change formed a “compelling reason.”

KEY LEARNING

OPPORTUNITY OCCURS WHEN A PROBLEM ENCOUNTERS A SOLUTION
Don’t focus on the merits of the proposal; focus on the needs of the client. No matter how compelling the technical advantages of a CMS may be, you will not get adequate buy-in unless decision makers can see a direct link to their immediate needs. Successful proponents present themselves as problem solvers rather than CMS/ADR advocates. They recognize that the organization has a problem, which will eventually become the problem of individuals within the organization. They then present ADR or a system design initiative as a potential solution to this problem.

TIMING Sometimes an organization’s need for a CMS precedes the actual commitment to instituting a system by several years, despite the acknowledged merits of such a system. As a result, proponents are often frustrated by their organization’s lack of responsiveness to the logic of their proposals.
While a cost-benefit analysis and implementation strategy are important tools in any pitch for a CMS, proponents with the greatest success in getting approval for such undertakings are those who recognize when the time is ripe and act accordingly. They recognize that their organization may not be ready for such a commitment if the compelling reason for the initiative has not yet been identified. In those circumstances, any proposal, no matter how logical, will seem premature. Proponents, though prepared with a suitcaseful of cogent arguments, may need to wait until the timing is right and the compelling reason for a CMS reveals itself.

6

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

THE VALUE OF CREDIBLE, EXTERNAL SPOKESPERSONS We sometimes accord more credibility or attention to the views and perceived wisdom of individuals from outside an organization than to those within, though the insiders may have as much, or more, knowledge about the subject.
I have served as an “external expert” in a variety of government organizations in Canada, the United States, Bermuda, New Zealand and Australia. In all instances it seemed ironic to me that the organizations that had invited me to address senior officials had considerable technical internal capacity to do so themselves. Nonetheless, they considered such presentations key to program acceptance. Recognizing this, system design proponents may wish to invite an external expert to speak to senior departmental officials about ADR experiences and accomplishments in organizations similar to theirs. At such presentations I have found that decision makers are often more interested in anecdotal information and big-picture stories than in the technical aspects of systems design. Several federal government departments and agencies, including Justice, Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), CCRA and DND/CF, have brought in “outsiders” to give their views to senior officials. At DND/CF, J. Lynch, an external consultant, was asked to present a description of the RCMP ADR system to the Armed Forces Council. Her presentation was particularly effective not only because she is a well-respected subject matter expert, but also because she was seen as neutral. The views of the RCMP Commissioner concerning ADR further influenced the views of senior DND/CF officers.

What particularly concerned these senior officials was that they might be faced with perfectly legitimate questions for which they had no clear answers. Another major concern was that these preoccupations were diverting the attention of these people. While their primary responsibilities revolved around complex defence and peacekeeping obligations and the related strategic thinking that went with that, they were being distracted by relatively minor issues which should have been resolved by others at a much earlier stage and at a much lower level. The costs of such preoccupations can be easily understood, but not so easily measured. When I suggested that a CMS might help alleviate some of their concerns, they became more receptive to the notion.

KEY LEARNING

MAKE PRESENTATIONS RELEVANT TO YOUR TARGET AUDIENCE
In presenting the merits of a CMS to decision makers, the case can be far more compelling if they can see its application in relation to specific cases with which they may currently be struggling. As well, interactive presentations that cite typical cases and link conceptual elements to practical applications will inevitably have greater impact.

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
TA R G E T I N G T H E M E S S AG E At one meeting with senior DND/CF officers, I posed the question, “What keeps you up at night?” They looked at me, puzzled, so I added, “When you wake up at 4 a.m. and can’t get back to sleep (like we all do at one time or another), what is it that keeps rolling around in your mind and prevents you from going back to sleep?”
Nearly all those in attendance indicated that the issues keeping them awake were rarely technical, strategic or administrative challenges. They were usually interpersonal disputes or complaints, described in a voluminous file on their desks, that might, on a slow news day, prompt media interest. In some instances those files involved charges affecting their own offices; in others they involved litigation. In the mid- to late 1990s, DND/CF fell victim to a series of events, accusations and revelations that negatively affected both employee morale and public perception: The Federal Government Functional Review had led to wholesale cutbacks and reduced resources, creating stress and increased workloads for everyone. The events in Somalia and their aftermath—the resultant board of inquiry and the negative media attention attached to this—added to the malaise. A highly publicized scandal involving hazing in the Airborne Regiment led to its disbandment and further damaged morale and public image.

C H A P T E R 1 MAKING A CASE FOR A CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

7

A series of front-page articles in Maclean’s magazine raised issues such as poor pay, squalid housing and sexual abuse, which further blemished the Canadian Forces image. The DND/CF leadership was acutely aware of the disgruntlement and dissatisfaction that were brewing under the surface, even before many of the above incidents came to light, and began to consider ways of dealing with this. They recognized that many of the existing processes and procedures related to workplace conflict were outdated and inadequate and that there was a pressing need to find better ways of coping with underlying issues and challenges. In the March 25, 1997 Minister of National Defence Report to the Prime Minister on the Leadership and Management of the Canadian Forces, serial 8 recommended implementation of the Office of the Organizational Ombudsman to provide advice and guidance to personnel who are in need of help or who believe they have been treated improperly. As well, citing the inappropriateness, slowness and lack of transparency of the grievance system, the Minister indicated that he would establish an independent Canadian Forces Review Board. Furthermore, he proposed the creation of more effective conflict management processes to deal with conflict at the lowest possible level. The Conflict Management Project was the outcome of this recommendation. In April 1998 the Minister released two internal studies (The Care of Injured Personnel and Their Families Review and A Study of the Treatment of Service Members Released from the Canadian Forces on Medical Grounds) which would be used to develop quality-of-life policies and programs. General Baril found these studies “very disturbing, as they underline a high level of dissatisfaction and a feeling of abandonment on the part of members and their families.” Other DND surveys confirmed these concerns. The need for alternative approaches to conflict resolution was further supported by the increase in harassment complaints following the implementation of the Standards for Harassment and Racism Prevention (SHARP) program and the unacceptable length of time it was taking to resolve issues that should have been resolved at much lower levels.

As already mentioned, at an Armed Forces Council meeting (in June 1997) a consultant delivered a presentation outlining the RCMP Alternative Dispute Resolution System. RCMP Commissioner P. Murray was very enthusiastic about this system, as it provided tools to assist all managers and leaders in managing conflict at the lowest possible level. The Armed Forces Council recognized that if ADR worked at a hierarchical, command-and-control organization like the RCMP, it could also have applications in DND/CF. Seeing an opportunity to further enhance the serial 8 recommendation of the Minister’s Report to the Prime Minister, the Council subsequently directed that DND/CF would implement a system based on ADR principles and processes. In 1998, recommendations of the federal parliamentary Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs (SCONDVA) also made reference to the need for enhanced approaches to conflict resolution. The convergence of all these issues, challenges, recommendations and crises led to the establishment of the Conflict Management Project. There was no single rationale or cause and it is doubtful any single reason, including cost savings, would have generated enough interest to sustain the initiative. But together they formed a compelling reason. Authority to establish a Conflict Management Project Office, under the direction of Major-General R. Linden and with the assistance of Lieutenant-Commander S. Levecque, who played a pivotal role in the early stages of the Project, was approved in June 1998. The function of this office was to prepare the way for the Project and the staffing of the EDCM, who would have overall responsibility for the initiative. A working group composed of key stakeholders was established to help develop guiding principles for the initiative and coordinate internal activities. It is significant that the early stages of the DND/CF initiative were characterized as a “project,” to be tested and evaluated before attaining program status. This created a comfort level among decision makers in that a thorough review would be undertaken before extensive, long-term resources would be committed to the initiative.

8

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

C H A P T E R

2

RESEARCHING AND BENCHMARKING BEST PRACTICES

Benchmarking goes a step further. Using the above analogy, benchmarking is the equivalent of “kicking the tires” and making choices that will serve you best. Finding that best buy might entail talking to a few know-it-all friends, a visit to some dealerships, a few test drives, a comparison of prices and options and a look at reliability records. After narrowing the choices, you’ll still have to check with your spouse and kids and parents to ensure their needs are being addressed; after all, the car needs to serve them too. And finally, you will get down to haggling for the best deal, looking for the right option package, the best combination of aesthetics, utility and value. Even after you’ve plunked down your cash you may not be quite finished. For example, the roof rack the dealer offered may not suit your needs as well as the one at Canadian Tire; the radio has poor speakers, but you can get great ones for a song at the local audio shop; and the upholstery is ugly, but your mother-in-law has promised to crochet seat covers in your favourite colours—green and pink. That’s benchmarking… sort of. At the risk of oversimplifying, research is the process of information gathering; benchmarking involves the identification of best practices through evaluation, comparison and application of that information to your own specific needs and resources. Or, to put it even more simply: research is getting the information; benchmarking is figuring out how best to use it.

DISCOVER THE WHEEL—NO NEED TO INVENT IT
Designing a conflict management system can be daunting. Fortunately, you’re not the first to attempt this and there is much you can learn from others. Researching and benchmarking best practices can help save time and money while encouraging the adoption of innovative best practices that have already been successfully tested and proven elsewhere. Although no single source is likely to fulfill all needs, it is possible to mix and match approaches to create workable and appropriate processes to serve your organization’s specific needs.

RESEARCHING AND BENCHMARKING— W H AT ’ S T H E D I F F E R E N C E ? We’re all familiar with research; we do it every day. When we want to go to a movie we reach for a newspaper or do a Web search and check out what’s playing, where and when.
To buy a car we go through a similar process. We find out what’s out there, which models suit our needs, how much they cost and so on. If we’ve got kids and parents to cart around, chances are the Ferrari is out. On the other hand, the Rolls Royce has lots of room—but it’s beyond your budget, so scratch that too. The Honda, Toyota and Chevy all meet the basic criteria, so you try to find out a bit more about them. That’s research.

WHERE TO LOOK AND WHY The value of research and benchmarking is self-evident— there’s that “reinventing the wheel” cliché again—yet, despite the obvious advantages, program designers sometimes forget to go through these processes. And even when they do remember, the processes they employ may not be the most effective.
Sometimes people are overly restrictive about where they look. While benchmarking organizations that are similar to our own may be most useful, we may also be well served by broadening our field. Since CMS design is a relatively new field, looking in your own backyard may not reveal the very best practices being used elsewhere. Expand the search to include organizations in both the public and private sectors. Look at professional associations. Look at organizations in other countries.

C H A P T E R 2 RESEARCHING AND BENCHMARKING BEST PRACTICES

9

Another common “error” is the “all-or-nothing” approach. That’s when folks dismiss a program because it doesn’t suit all their needs. A key to successful benchmarking can be the mixing and matching of best practices.

KEY LEARNING

NOT ALL PRACTICES ARE BEST PRACTICES
Some practices look good on paper but don’t work so well in the real world. A best practice is one that has been used, has proven to be effective and has produced successful results. Establishing clear criteria—keeping your goals and client needs in mind—will help in evaluating which practices are best. Criteria may include: past successes, awards, panel reviews and interviews with users. Note: Benchmarking does not necessarily mean visiting. There is a surprising amount of readily available research and information.

The American Productivity and Quality Center reports on innovative best practices in a number of areas. While they do not focus on conflict management systems in particular, visiting their Web site may be a good starting point when first embarking on a benchmarking initiative. Many public sector organizations are members of the Center, so registration and access are free. Their Web address is: http://www.apqc.org/portal/authentication/html/loginform. jsp;jsessionid=2X00ZTBFTEQZNQFIAJICFEQ`

KEY LEARNING

RESEARCH AND BENCHMARKING ARE ONGOING PROCESSES
Research and benchmarking should not stop once a decision to proceed has been taken. Benchmarking is useful not only at the early stages of an initiative, to get a sense of what best practices might be applied to one’s own situation, but also throughout the project, to provide guidelines around specific implementation requirements such as budget or number of employees/mediators. Regular fine tuning and upgrades will keep a system relevant, vibrant and efficient.

There is also value in looking beyond specific functional areas to glean appropriate best practices. While CMS designers are clearly focused on conflict management, they are likely to find appropriate approaches in some programs that may have little to do with dispute resolution. Many best practices are important to the design of any program and these should be captured and considered. For example, the communications approach used in an ethics program may be applicable to a CMS program. The information being communicated will be different, but the approach and tools may still be valid.

BENCHMARKING OTHER ORGANIZATIONS—SOME CASE STUDIES
When designing the CMS for DND/CF, we undertook a fairly comprehensive benchmarking initiative. We looked at the federal public service in Canada, but also studied relevant approaches being used in Australia, the United States and some international associations.

KEY LEARNING

BENCHMARK POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AS WELL AS STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORKS
Organizations often benchmark ADR models and design frameworks effectively. Benchmarking processes are optimized when reviewers go into further depth concerning policies and procedures and possible applications in other organizations.

10

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

CANADA—THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
When DND/CF embarked on its benchmarking initiative, development of CMSs in the federal government was rather limited. Certainly there were no comprehensive, fully integrated systems in place consistent with the scope DND/CF was contemplating. Still, it was important to review current systems to determine if innovations could be revealed and applied. To get a sense of the various options considered and applied by other organizations, 20 case studies from the Canadian federal public service were undertaken and completed in July 1999 (Charron Human Resources Inc.). The organizations included: Canada Customs and Revenue Agency Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency Canadian Human Rights Commission Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Canadian Transport Agency Correctional Service Canada Department of Justice Canada—Dispute Resolution Services Department of Justice Canada—Office of Harassment and Conflict in the Workplace Environment Canada Fisheries and Oceans Canada Human Resources Development Canada Immigration and Refugee Board Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Indian and Northern Affairs Canada—Major Projects Branch Nova Scotia Joint Career Transition Committee/Learning Centre Plus (Health Canada)

Parks Canada Agency Public Service Commission of Canada Royal Canadian Mounted Police Veterans Affairs Canada These organizations were examined in relation to: general characteristics of the organization, including size, location, mission, employee skill mix, and nature and scope of union activity; use of interest-based and informal approaches to the resolution of conflict, including the focus of the conflict management initiative, how the system design process was conducted and what implementation approaches were taken; communications strategy and approaches; nature and scope of training; nature of the dispute resolution processes and how they were integrated, including any flow chart or diagram which would illustrate the interrelationships; and lessons learned. The lessons learned focused on the underlying assumptions relating to the CMS, such as: organizational issues, stakeholder involvement, the planning process, design characteristics, leadership, communications, awareness and training, monitoring and evaluation, and the challenges of changing the organization’s culture. In March 2001, DND/CF commissioned the consulting firm of Ajilon Canada to review its program. Ajilon identified the RCMP and CCRA as being the two Canadian government institutions with the closest parallels to the conflict management initiative of DND/CF. They were benchmarked to assess the organizational requirements and the numbers of service providers that might be required by DND/CF. What follows are some highlights from the Ajilon report’s description of these two organizations and some of the lessons DND/CF took from this report.

C H A P T E R 2 RESEARCHING AND BENCHMARKING BEST PRACTICES

11

THE RCMP In addition to the 27 regular members who already worked full-time in staff relations representing issues on behalf of members, the RCMP created roughly one new position for each 1,500 members and employees.
In 1995 the RCMP began to test the use of mediation and the implementation of their “ADR System” in three pilot sites. This included critical-mass training, implementation of a communication strategy, multiple options (including mediation, coaching and other innovative processes) and the establishment of a central office plus other offices across the country. In 1997, when the system was being rolled out RCMP-wide, the following resources were in place: A central office with six full-time employees, led by an external consultant and an internal senior manager known as the “ADR Advisor,” as well as others dedicated to training (using principally external service providers), communications and select case mediation; An active National Steering Committee with high-level membership (Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioners in charge of personnel, training, finance and some divisions, plus the three most senior elected Divisional Staff Relations Representatives); A person designated as ADR Coordinator in each of 15 divisions and funded by those divisions, of which seven were full-time new positions and the others were part-time, making a total of about 11 full-time employees (or roughly one per 1,500 regular members); Each division had its own ADR Advisory Committee composed of local stakeholders, varying from very active to relatively inactive; and 28 Divisional Staff Relations Representatives (averaging one per 650 members) that were funded nationally. In addition to the union executives and stewards who advise the public servants within the RCMP, there is a system of elected representation for the 17,000 “regular and civilian members” who are not unionized. This system is called the Division Staff Relations Program. Every two years members in each division elect Divisional Staff Relations Representatives who represent their interests to management. The representatives serve full-time in this non-uniform position during their mandates. The majority are staff sergeants (the highest noncommissioned rank) and many serve for several elected terms.

The representatives were provided with advanced interestbased training, including mediation training, and relied heavily on the process and the ADR system in working through grievance and discipline conflicts for the members they represent: Approximately 222 persons (more than 1 per cent) had received training in mediation skills, some in order to act as internal mediators and others who, though not neutral (e.g. personnel managers or Divisional Staff Relations Representatives), employed these skills daily for resolving personnel issues. Well over 10 per cent of the members received two- or three-day training in interest-based negotiation. Training costs were shared equally between the centre and the divisions, with the divisions also paying all travel and backfill costs for members and employees. Since the completion of the rollout, the central staff has been reduced to two and the number of full-time employees within the divisions has been reduced, with ADR coordinators generally serving by region (there are six) rather than by division (there are 15). This continues to evolve. In summary, the RCMP’s system involved a variety of ADR processes complementing the existing rights-based processes. The chart below illustrates these relationships:

RCMP’s System

Conflict Grievance Advisory Board Divisional ADR Coordinator

Level I Commanding Officer Level III Commissioner of RCMP

RCMP External Review Committee

Customized Inter-based Process coaching meditation training Office of ADR Advisor

Fed Court

12

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

The RCMP review was particularly useful in providing a framework around resource requirements and staffing implications. It also gave us a good sense of what could be accomplished in a “command-and-control” organization which faced many of the same challenges that DND/CF would be facing. The RCMP was probably the most appropriate Canadian organization for us to review in light of the respective cultures of each organization.

Regions that had launched their rollouts established a Regional Advisory Committee and also designated a full-time Dispute Resolution Coordinator (roughly one per 6,000-10,000 employees). In each relevant site (usually determined by geography and averaging 250-1,000 employees) a project leader was selected-some part-time and some full-time-to form a local project team to assist and advise on the rollout. A roster of qualified internal “neutrals” was created, with 33 listed at that time and more planned. Every employee was to receive a one-day Demystifying Conflict Course and 10 per cent (managers and unions) were to receive an additional three-day leaders’ course on conflict management, paid centrally, with regions paying employee travel and backfill. The CCRA review provided a perspective that was different from that of the RCMP. It allowed us to assess some of the organizational, structural and administrative requirements associated with a large, geographically dispersed and highly unionized organization in the early developmental stages of the evolution of its CMS.

CCRA The Ajilon report also reviewed CCRA and its CMS plan. This included funding to each region to create one Dispute Resolution Advisor position per 1,500 employees.
On November 1, 1999, the former Revenue Canada became CCRA. Unions represented most of its 45,000 employees, with some elected union officials working full-time and others part-time. When the department was planning its strategy for the move to agency status, it created several planning teams of managers, employees and unions. One such team, the Recourse Design Team, made recommendations which laid the foundation for the new integrated dispute resolution system. This system had been tested in 12 pilot projects and was just being rolled out across the Agency. It had the following structure (as in the RCMP, this has subsequently evolved): Centrally, the Office of Dispute Management administered and advised on the rollout, with a staff of nine, led by a director, and with persons responsible for the pilot projects, communication, evaluation and mediations. Training was developed in conjunction with the Training and Learning Directorate and was delivered by a combination of internal and external resources. There was an active National Advisory Committee with broad membership (a regional Assistant Commissioner and persons representing different levels, functions and locations). Each of the six regions established a Regional Advisory Committee, composed of employees representing different levels, functions and locations. The Office of Dispute Management’s original plan offered funding for one full-time employee per 1,500 for the launching fiscal year, which it contemplated would be used to create the position of Dispute Resolution Advisor. In practice, regions were allowed flexibility with the use of that funding and some spread the funding over several part-time positions or a combination of full-time plus part-time positions.

AUSTRALIA—THE AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE FORCE
The Australian Defence Force (ADF) had decided to establish an ADR program and before proceeding was examining different models being applied in other countries. The ADF benchmarked the DND/CF program and found it to be the most suitable of its type and the most consistent with ADF’s needs. ADF requested my assistance in designing and implementing an ADR system that would be suitable for its situation. I subsequently had the good fortune to work on this initiative with ADF officials in Australia. While I was able to contribute to the ADF initiative, I was also able to glean ideas that could enhance DND/CF’s program. ADF defined three core facilitative processes that make up its ADR program: Mediation Facilitated negotiation Workplace conferencing

C H A P T E R 2 RESEARCHING AND BENCHMARKING BEST PRACTICES

13

Mediation: ADF defines this as a process in which the parties to a dispute, with the assistance of an impartial third party (the mediator/s), identify the disputed issues, develop options, consider alternatives and try to reach an agreement. The mediator has no advisory or determinative role concerning the content of the dispute or the outcome of its resolution, but may advise on or determine the process of mediation used during the dispute resolution attempt. Facilitated negotiation: ADF defines facilitated negotiation as a process in which the parties to a dispute, who have identified the issues to be negotiated, use the assistance of an impartial third party (the facilitator) to negotiate the outcome. The facilitator has no advisory or determinative role on the content of the matters discussed or the outcome of the process, but may advise on or determine the process of facilitation. Workplace conferencing: This is defined by ADF as a meeting of people who have been affected by an incident or dispute. The conference brings together those most directly involved, along with management, colleagues and (sometimes) family and friends. The conferencing forum provides an opportunity for participants to discuss their issues and focuses on resolving disputed issues and poor communication. The use of workplace conferencing by ADF is quite innovative. Though it is not commonly used in workplace settings, ADF has used it very successfully and has demonstrated that it holds promise if applied by trained and experienced professionals.

coordinate administration and advice in support of all ADR requests; provide advice and recommendations to commanders and managers on the suitability of ADR to resolve disputes brought to their attention; provide the coordination point for ADR issues between Defence Groups, aggrieved parties, other government departments and ADR practitioners; nominate suitable ADR providers and coordinate provision of ADR services in Defence; provide active management and support for ADR practitioners; provide quality assurance of internal ADR activities; provide statistical reporting on the use of ADR in Defence; liaise with and maintain a database of ADR service providers; and in cases where it is assessed as appropriate, use ADR at the earliest possible opportunity and at the lowest practical level in the organization to prevent escalation and protraction of disputes. The Instructions also included general guidelines around ADR as follows: Wherever appropriate, ADR is to be employed before the implementation of formal methods of dispute resolution. ADR may be considered for use in certain circumstances before recourse to disciplinary action under the Australian Defence Force Discipline Act 1982 or Australian public service disciplinary procedures. ADR will be employed only after approval by command/ management and after DADRCM has conducted an assessment and deemed the dispute appropriate for ADR intervention. Command or management will normally initiate requests for ADR; however, on occasion individuals may request assistance with the resolution of a workplace conflict or dispute. Requests will be managed in consultation with the individuals, command and management.

ADF INSTRUCTIONS In initiating the program, Defence Instructions (General)— outlining the use and management of ADR in Defence—were issued and signed by the Secretary of Defence and the Chief of the Defence Force. This was very effective in communicating ADR policy throughout ADF. The document specified that all ADR interventions would be centrally administered for ADF through the Office of the Director of Alternative Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management (DADRCM).
The Instructions described the DADRCM mandate to: develop and manage the ADR and conflict management program in consultation with stakeholders; develop and maintain Defence policy, guidance, standards and protocols on the use of ADR mechanisms; advise on and coordinate ADR awareness, conflict and dispute management training and education for Defence;

14

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

The ADF CMS generally uses a four-step approach: 1. Assessment 2. Intake 3. Managing the intervention 4. Reporting Assessment: The commander or manager determines that an issue may be suitable for ADR and refers it to DADRCM, who conducts a preliminary assessment to determine whether ADR is suitable. If it is suitable, an ADR practitioner is appointed to conduct the intake process. Intake: The ADR practitioner interviews parties and provides advice on the feasibility of ADR in addressing the dispute. Factors, including impact on command and control, discipline arrangements and the goodwill of the parties, are given consideration in the formal intake process. Managing the intervention: The designated ADR practitioner, in consultation with the parties and DADRCM, arranges the time and confirms the venue for the ADR process. Further guidance on the sequence of events in an ADR intervention and the role of the various participants is subsequently provided at the outset of the process. Reporting: Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the ADR practitioner will normally provide a brief report on the process to the DADRCM Operations Manager, who distributes it to the parties’ commander or manager. This report describes whether a process took place and whether an agreement was reached. Any other information is subject to the agreement of the parties. How the ADF deals with confidentiality issues: Confidentiality is key to the ADF program, but the approach may vary according to the process employed or the circumstances of the case. Parties agree on the scope of confidentiality and sign a separate Confidentiality Agreement prior to an intervention. They also sign an ADR Consent Form. (This differs from the DND/CF approach, which uses a single Agreement to Mediation Form that incorporates confidentiality issues.)

Information disclosed to a mediator or ADR practitioner by the parties cannot be disclosed unless specifically agreed to by all parties. At the conclusion of the intervention, the mediator gives back to the parties all records, reports and documents that were received. The mediator also destroys any notes taken during the process. In ADF, where there is a clear breach of confidentiality this is brought to the attention of the appropriate authorities and may result in disciplinary, administrative or performance management action. The Defence Instructions document includes an annex devoted specifically to confidentiality and privacy. It covers: the significance of confidentiality in relation to the ADR process what is confidential the obligations of the ADR practitioner the obligations of the parties how statistical data will be used what information is provided to command or management the Privacy Act exceptions to confidentiality and privacy—notifiable incidents exceptions to privacy breach of confidentiality The Defence Instructions issued by ADF also include four annexes, which go into further detail in each of the following areas: Confidentiality and privacy (as described above) Training and registration for internal mediators Ethics Feedback, evaluation and complaints

C H A P T E R 2 RESEARCHING AND BENCHMARKING BEST PRACTICES

15

KEY LEARNING

ADR program development and implementation garnering support for ADR: essential buy-in and program marketing creating a comprehensive ADR training program obtaining neutral services constructing pilot projects supporting users of ADR obtaining resources and developing contracts ethical considerations evaluating ADR programs resources in dispute resolution law and standards bibliography ADR on the Web: links and resources

PUBLISH AND BROADLY DISTRIBUTE, UNDER THE SIGNATURE OF THE MOST SENIOR OFFICIAL IN THE ORGANIZATION, THE PROTOCOLS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SYSTEM
It is important to ensure, at the outset, that the protocols associated with ADR are clear to all parties and well understood, particularly in organizations that are large and complex in structure. Publishing and distributing this broadly, in a manner such as that used by ADF, is important. The issuance and broad circulation of a document such as the ADF’s Instructions, outlining the use and management of ADR, may be considered a best practice and should be considered by any organization establishing an ADR system.

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS
US FEDERAL INTERAGENCY ADR WORKING GROUP Without a doubt, one of the most useful sources of benchmarking and research information in the United States was the Interagency Alternative Dispute Resolution Working Group. The Working Group was established to coordinate, promote and facilitate the effective use of dispute resolution processes within federal agencies as mandated by the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 and the White House Presidential Memorandum. Its Web site (www.usdoj.gov/adr/index.html) and related links proved to be, and still remain, a wealth of information for ADR practitioners.
The Federal ADR Program Manager’s Resource Manual (available on the Internet at www.usdoj.gov/adr/manual) is a very useful guide to systems design that you may wish to examine. It provides considerable detail on: developing a collaborative design approach designing an ADR program

US AIR FORCE DND/CF examined several federal programs including those in the US Army, Navy and Air Force. The US Air Force program initiative (www.adr.af.mil) was particularly useful. For example, the US Air Force ADR Program Best Practices: Mediating Civilian Workplace Disputes Report (which has been updated—www.adr.af.mil/compendium) is described in detail under the following headings:
US Air Force ADR Program Purpose Organization Getting the Parties to the Table: Who is Responsible for What? Role of the Air Force Mediator Mediation Intake Guidance Agreement to Mediate Settlement Agreement Guidance Mediation Reporting Requirements ADR Statistics Mediation Resources

16

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Attachments Sample Mediation Case Management Worksheet Sample Mediation Memorandum and Mediation Agreement Sample Settlement Agreement Cover Sheet Sample Settlement Agreement ADR Usage Annual Report Form Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 A review of the scope and depth of the US Air Force program was very useful to DND/CF, and the published material served as a model for what would eventually be the Operations Manual of the DND/CF CMS.

for the overly simple math I’ve employed here, we’re still talking huge financial savings. Direct financial advantages can be measured; however, collateral advantages—reaped through quicker resolution of issues, reduced emotional angst among parties, improved morale and productivity—though harder to tabulate, may be even more significant. The guiding principles of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Centers were: Collapse time frames Ensure quality customer service Increase resolution rates Maximize resources The Alternative Dispute Resolution Centers used the following ADR methods: Mediation Conciliation Facilitation Peer review To deliver mediation services in San Diego, a mediator pool/roster was established from a wide range of Navy and Marine Corps personnel in the southwest region. Mediators (60 trainees) received extensive training and were evaluated and certified to provide part-time services. It is interesting to note that when DND/CF tested this part-time/additional duty model, it had major problems in getting mediators released from their “real” jobs to conduct mediations and to be involved in the number of mediations that would enable them to develop high levels of competence. As a result, DND/CF ultimately elected to focus on a full-time mediator approach. When the San Diego Center piloted its project in 1998, 39 of the 50 cases referred to ADR were resolved (78 per cent resolution rate). The US Navy model was of particular interest to DND/CF, as it showed the importance of measuring outcomes and evaluating programs throughout their implementation. The mediator certification/qualification process was also very useful and demonstrated the importance and feasibility of assessing potential mediators to a suitable standard. We were able to take this and build upon it for our own specific applications.

US NAVY The US Navy Region Southwest Dispute Resolution Center’s program in San Diego was described as a model for the US Navy. This program was developed and subsequently reviewed in 1999, with the assistance of C. Houk, Navy ADR Counsel.
ADR policy was established by SECNAV Instruction 5800 Dec 1996, stating that: ADR techniques shall be used to the maximum extent practicable; every conflict and issue in controversy is a potential candidate for ADR; and the goal is to resolve disputes at the earliest stage feasible, by the fastest and least expensive method possible and at the lowest possible organizational level. It was interesting to note that the average time to process a single civilian Equal Employment Opportunity complaint was 749 days, with an average cost of $40,000 (US funds). In the Navy civilian workforce of 186,596 in 1998, there were 2,046 Equal Employment Opportunity formal complaints. That’s $81,840,000! Alternative Dispute Resolution Centers, using mostly mediation, were effective in quickly resolving workplace disputes. Time frames were collapsed from intake to resolution within 60 days, with a resolution rate of 75 per cent for cases mediated. An admittedly oversimplified extrapolation from the above figures suggests an overall saving of $56,469,600! Or nearly 70 per cent! Even if we build in a significant margin of error

C H A P T E R 2 RESEARCHING AND BENCHMARKING BEST PRACTICES

17

US GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE: “BENCHMARKING OTHER BENCHMARKS” … P U B L I C A N D P R I VAT E S E C TO R S As well as benchmarking specific organizations, we reviewed the benchmarking reports that had already been conducted by other organizations. For example, the US General Accounting Office, in 1997, published Alternative Dispute Resolution—Employers’ Experiences with ADR in the Workplace, where the following organizations were benchmarked:
US Air Force US Department of Agriculture US Department of State US Postal Service Brown and Root, Inc. Hughes Electronics Corp. Polaroid Corp. Rockwell International Corp. TRW Inc. Walter Reed Army Medical Center Seattle Interagency ADR Consortium Although it was useful to review systems in private sector organizations, for DND/CF purposes public sector organizations provided the most relevant models for examination.

The American Bar Association—Section of Dispute Resolution (www.abanet.org/dispute) The Arbitration and Mediation Institute of Canada, which is now the ADR Institute of Canada (www.adrcanada.ca) The US Government Interagency ADR Working Group (www.usdoj.gov/adr) CRInfo (www.crinfo.org) adding further links to information sources

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
The lessons learned were reflected in the design of the DND/CF CMS, particularly in relation to involving stakeholders and designing guiding principles early in the process. As well, models or flow charts were outlined for most of the organizations, which served to provide a “picture” of those organizations. This tool was subsequently used at DND/CF and was received very well. The benchmarking process was not restricted to the early phase of the project at DND/CF. It was an ongoing process. This was based on the premise that the DND/CF initiative was iterative in nature and learning from best practices would be a continuous process.

INTERNATIONAL—PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
RESEARCHING PROFESSIONAL A S S O C I AT I O N S F O R G U I D E L I N E S A N D S TA N DA R D S As well as reviewing a number of organizations’ systems design initiatives, we conducted background research on work that had been published by various ADR professional associations. The following organizations were of particular assistance:
Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution (SPIDR), which is now the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) (www.acresolution.org)

18

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

C H A P T E R

3

GETTING GOING

how they interrelate to form a cycle. For example, training creates an understanding of the advantages of ADR, which often prompts participants to request an intervention. The conduct of several successful interventions may lead to a system design initiative that would enable the organization to develop an internal capacity to resolve disputes. The system design initiative may, in turn, lead to further training to enhance employee skills and aptitudes to prevent conflict or resolve it themselves. And so the cycle continues. This interrelationship may be even more pronounced when elements are directly linked. I have, for example, used training as an intervention. In one instance I was asked to intervene when the land claims negotiations between an Aboriginal group and the federal government broke down. They wouldn’t even talk to each other. While the Aboriginal group, as advised by their legal counsel, had no interest in pursuing the negotiation any further, they did agree to participate in a “training workshop.” I presented the workshop to the Aboriginal group, their lawyers and the federal negotiators. My goal was to get them communicating constructively and to explore several interest-based and collaborative processes they might use to approach their own negotiations. By the end of the workshop, participants had reopened their land claim negotiations. They adopted a process that, over the next several months, led to a satisfactory settlement. In this case the training was really a group intervention. The interrelationship may be depicted as a triangle, which I call the ADR Business Triad:

THE ADR BUSINESS “TRIAD”— A SYSTEMS APPROACH
The use of ADR processes as a means of addressing conflicts has grown significantly, due in large part to court-connected initiatives (introduced over the past few years in provinces such as Ontario) that require mediation for most civil litigation cases. As a result, the majority of private sector ADR practitioners are lawyers, who provide intervention (mediation) services, often dealing with civil litigation and family law cases. Some practitioners, however, focus on workplace ADR. Though their practices may include actual interventions, some are also extensively involved in training activities. These professionals often provide conflict management, negotiation or mediation courses for those organizations wishing to enhance ADR skills. A very small, specialized group of practitioners are involved in the field of ADR systems design, which focuses on the institutionalization of ADR policies, procedures and behaviours in the organization. Interest- and rights-based processes are integrated to form a comprehensive system. This is similar to an organization development function, where change in organizational culture may be an important factor. Individuals establishing a conflict management program should have an appreciation and understanding of these three elements—interventions, training and system design—and

ADR Business Triad
System Design

Training

Interventions/ Mediation

C H A P T E R 3 GETTING GOING

19

MAKE OR BUY?
As noted above, there is currently a dearth of qualified ADR/CMS design specialists, so it is rare to find this capacity within an organization. This begs the question: What work will be done by individuals employed within the organization? What work will be done by contracted external service providers? In other words, should we “make it” ourselves or “buy it” from external providers? Organizations must address this key question early in the project. Examining the pros and cons of the three basic options will help determine what and how much. Internal Provision of Services: This involves the use of existing individuals or the hiring of individuals who become employees of the organization. OPTION Internal provision of services ADVANTAGES

External Provision of Services: This involves contracting with external individuals or organizations to provide the bulk of services necessary to meet program requirements. Combination of Internal and External Provision of Services: This combination of make-and-buy approaches involves a small internal resource base of knowledgeable individuals, complemented by external assistance as required. The primary advantages and disadvantages of each of these options are summarized in the table below; however, some organizations may wish to add factors that reflect their own, specific needs.

DISADVANTAGES Is expensive—particularly in the short term. Is prone to “ownership” battles. Confidentiality, neutrality and impartiality may be (or appear to be) compromised. Required knowledge, skills and experience may not be available. Provides less flexibility for the department.

Permits organization to build internal capacity and resolve issues from within. Sends message of “importance” of the initiative. Is more likely to provide an understanding of unique corporate culture and to convey this perception to users. Helps promote long-term behavioural change. Provides greater control.

External provision of services

Is more cost-effective, especially in the short run. Provides greater flexibility to the organization. Provides a choice of experts with required skills, knowledge and experience. Provides enhanced confidentiality, neutrality and impartiality (or at least the perception thereof). Avoids “empire building” or ownership battles. Allows several external providers to work simultaneously on project components.

May be seen as an “outsider.” Provides less opportunity to build internal capacity, which may lead to greater long-term costs. Diminishes likelihood of promoting long-term behavioural change. Contracting process may be long and onerous. Coordination can be problematic. Contracting delays may compromise timely access to expertise.

Combination of internal and external provision of services

Provides greatest flexibility in system design process. Accommodates acquisition and retention of internal capacity, while still allowing access to necessary expertise.

20

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

An organization’s culture, needs and goals will be key to determining which option is best for them. For example, the internal provision-of-services option may be most practical when highly specialized organizations have difficulty finding qualified “outsiders” who can understand their needs, or the organization’s culture is such that there would be resistance to having someone from the outside come in to do the work. The make-or-buy decision will ultimately be a function of the nature and extent of the work to be conducted and the internal human and financial resources of the organization. Most organizations elect the combination approach.

conflict resolution theory, principles and methods as they apply to the various conflict resolution mechanisms typically part of conflict management systems? best practices in conflict management systems design? Skills: Can the consultant: advise on and/or manage organizational change? conduct a needs assessment? design and conduct adult training? design and conduct assessment and evaluation of program implementation? facilitate groups and build consensus? design a conflict management system or lead the design process? work collaboratively? assess the decision-making centres in an organization and gain the support and co-operation of the key decision makers? design and implement communication strategies within organizations? understand the organization’s culture and work appropriately in that context? identify and incorporate reinforcement mechanisms into the change process? relate to diverse groups of persons? identify interest-based, rights-based and power-based processes that are in place at the time of the system design and integrate these into a CMS appropriately? demonstrate strong interpersonal and communication skills?

CONTRACTING FOR SERVICES
Most organizations will contract out for at least some system design services. That said, the field of CMS design is relatively new and highly specialized. There are numerous approaches that can be taken—some more effective than others. Professional standards in this field can be quite flexible—even vague—and professionals offering services vary significantly in terms of approach, experience and capability. Furthermore, many very competent professionals, while knowledgeable and capable, may have a style that is incompatible with the organization’s culture.

KEY COMPETENCIES OF CMS DESIGNERS The Association for Conflict Resolution has identified and published what many consider the key competencies required of CMS design consultants. These relate to knowledge and skills, which are important in the process. The following checklist will assist in assessing consultants under consideration: CHECKLIST Knowledge:
Does the consultant possess knowledge of: laws and regulations that have an impact on conflict management and on organizational functioning in areas related to conflict management? the dynamics of organizational change? the design and practice of workplace training, including adult learning theory?

THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE CMS DESIGN PROJECT To ensure the organization is well served, it is important to define, in detail, exactly what qualities and expertise are required and what deliverables are expected. In a public sector environment, a request for proposal (RFP) that conforms to PWGSC guidelines, coupled with an appropriate evaluation tool, is essential.

C H A P T E R 3 GETTING GOING

21

KEY LEARNING

PLAN FOR THE CONTRACTING OF SERVICES AND STANDING OFFERS WELL IN ADVANCE
Organizations designing conflict management systems will need to avail themselves of consulting services for certain components of the design and training process. Build this requirement into the design process. It often takes several months to complete a comprehensive competitive contracting process in accordance with the Department of Public Works and Government Services guidelines. This being the case, it is useful to create a comprehensive contract with the option of drawing upon certain components as required. The creation of standing offers is particularly useful. It takes time but is well worth it.

Design of pilot projects: Contractors should outline their philosophy and approach to designing new, integrated programs and to modifying existing projects as required. Contractors must also specify how needs assessment would be done and describe who would be involved in pilot project design. Communications and publicity: Contractors must demonstrate the capability to develop a national level communications plan that includes activities and methods for implementing the project. The contractor should also be able to assist stakeholders in developing their own specific communications plans. Select case mediations: Contractors must describe their approach to conducting select case mediations and demonstrate a clear understanding of their role and importance. Implementation plan for the CMS design: The proposal should specify timings, resource requirements, methods of implementation and follow-up activities for the rollout of the system, including a transition plan for handover to the organization. Contractors must also demonstrate an understanding of change management and CMS design principles. Training and education plan: Contractors need to indicate how training would be conducted and managed, in accordance with the organization’s training standards, for the pre-implementation phase and pilot projects. The RFP need not include requirements for direct delivery of training programs; however, it should identify target populations and the training required to address their needs. Transition plan: Contractors must provide a detailed transition plan to enable the organization to assume responsibility for management of the project. This plan should include timelines, methodology, communications and proposals for transition or follow-up assistance as required. To address attrition concerns, the plan must accommodate renewal of conflict management skills and knowledge. Best practices: As part of the proposal, contractors must include a plan for gathering and analyzing relevant best practices. Administration and professional conduct: Contractors must demonstrate their professionalism and administrative capabilities (e.g. reliability, timeliness, company competence). Project evaluation: Contractors must demonstrate how they plan to evaluate the success of the CMS. This plan should include: when the plan would be developed, a general description of objectives to be measured, and the framework to be used.

Over the years I have received numerous inquiries, from agencies contemplating the contracting process, as to what should and should not be included in an RFP. There is no simple answer, as each organization has its own, unique needs. The following RFP description highlights, in some detail, the key elements that need to be considered. It reflects the thinking, concepts and requirements that went into the writing of the RFP used by DND/CF in the fall of 1998 and is consistent with the requirements most public sector organizations undertaking a system design process may want to consider. The completed DND/CF document shows how these notions were articulated and appears in its entirety in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 1.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
S TAT E M E N T O F W O R K The contractor is expected to articulate the proposed approach (including timelines, resources and concepts) to the following areas of work. These are rated requirements.
Overall approach: Contractors must demonstrate an understanding of the work objectives, the intended end product and the role of the system designer (including a willingness to work in a co-operative, collaborative manner with stakeholders). Also required is a demonstrated understanding of current approaches necessary to facilitate an effective and efficient CMS.

22

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

DELIVERABLES The above statement of work suggests some key deliverables expected of the successful bidding contractor. While they are addressed within the above elements, it is important to reframe them explicitly as deliverables. For example, the deliverables that might be extracted from the paragraph related to “implementation plan for the CMS design” could be reframed as a “deliverable” to read…
Implementation plan: A detailed plan for the organizationwide implementation of the CMS should address timelines, resources, objectives and coordination with key stakeholders. It must also cover proposals for inclusion and support of existing and future pilot projects and related initiatives. As well, it ought to clearly show the business and cost impacts of various options. This type of reframing should be done for all relevant elements outlined above, including: training plan, communications plan, best practices review report, evaluation plan, and select case mediation plan. Examples of other deliverables might include: Project management plan: Contractors must submit an initial detailed project management plan and regular updates that tie all project activities together and permit monitoring of key milestones and critical activities. Reports: Contractors must submit regular written status reports, at a minimum every month. Other reports are also required periodically in the form of briefing notes, oral presentations or ad hoc narratives. Meetings between contractors and the organization’s coordinator would be arranged on a mutually agreeable basis, as necessary. Resource inventory: The contractor must submit an inventory of resources (materiel and human), used in conflict management system design and training in negotiation, mediation and conflict management.

Capability to work in both official languages at a level equal to a Public Service Commission rating of CCC; Experience in working with and implementing conflict management-oriented programs in large, complex organizations; Knowledge and experience with conflict management techniques and concepts; Professional and personal qualifications that satisfy the range of job requirements and activities implicit in this project; Excellence in presentation and communication skills, including the capability to address large audiences and groups of very senior managers; Experience in training analysis, design, development, implementation, standards and evaluation and a knowledge of sources of conflict management training across the country and internationally; Capability to provide hands-on and detailed administrative support to the project, including managing a project management office in partnership with departmental staff and financial and project management; Availability for travel; Excellent interpersonal and group skills, including discussion leader, facilitation skills and consensus decision making; Understanding of concepts inherent to cultural transformation and organizational learning that would be applicable in assisting with such change in the organization; Clear, long-term vision that will assist in formulating both a transition plan and a method to institutionalize the CMS within the organization; and Inclusion of at least three senior-level references, of which at least two must be from the public sector.

M A N DATO RY R E Q U I R E M E N T S It is the bidder’s responsibility to provide sufficient information to demonstrate that all mandatory conditions, as described below, are met:
High level of knowledge of the organization, its structure, culture and mandate; Familiarity with problems and pressures currently facing the Department;

E VA L UAT I O N C R I T E R I A All valid RFPs will be evaluated on a scale of 100, based on the contractor’s ability to demonstrate an effective, viable approach that reflects the requirements outlined in the statement of work.
Proposals must include a chart demonstrating the breakdown of activities and how much time and money will be dedicated to each.

C H A P T E R 3 GETTING GOING

23

PRICE The RFP indicates that the contract, if awarded, would be awarded at $X to the bidder with the highest number of points out of 100.
The bidder must determine the number of person days required to do the job. The submission should identify proposed milestone payments.

POSITIONING THE CMS INITIATIVE WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION
Because the establishment of CMSs is a new area for many public sector organizations, there is often uncertainty as to where it should be located in the organization, at what level, what titles might be used, how the duties can be described and how the position should be staffed.

E VA L UAT I O N Once it is determined that all mandatory requirements of the RFP are met, the proposals must be assessed and scored. An evaluation grid that attributes weighted point values to specific criteria articulated in the statement of work requirements is a valuable tool.
The template I developed is applicable in many situations and can be modified to suit the organization’s specific needs. A copy of the Scoring of Contractor Approach to Statement of Work Requirements was included as Annex A in the DND/CF RFP, which can be found in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 1.

S TA F F I N G T H E P O S I T I O N Finding the right person to design, lead and develop a CMS initiative is key to its success. Aside from the competencies normally required of executive leaders, this individual should also have significant knowledge and experience related to the:
design, implementation and coordination of a conflict resolution system; delivery of training and development; application of conflict resolution, interest-based negotiation, mediation and arbitration processes; coordination of broad conflict management policy issues and the communication programs associated with those issues; and financial, materiel and human resources management. The ability to build consensus among disparate groups and individuals is also key.

KEY LEARNING

ESTABLISH CLEAR RFP REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA; PLAN FOR THE PROCESS TO TAKE LONGER THAN YOU INITIALLY EXPECT
It is important to be very clear with potential contractors concerning the nature of the work, the deliverables and how the proposals will be evaluated. An objective selection team, made up of at least three individuals, should review and rate proposals. Check with PWGSC contracting authorities for advice throughout the process. Note that although the contracting process can be complicated and time-consuming, it can also be very useful in helping you reflect upon project needs in an objective, systematic and disciplined manner.

A TERM OR A PERMANENT POSITION? Different leadership and managerial attributes are often required at different phases of major undertakings of this type. The skills required to “sell,” design, initiate and test a CMS can be different from those required to maintain the program once it has been established. Recognizing this, it can be advantageous to view the establishment of a CMS in two phases: the project phase and the program phase.
The first phase can take two to four years to complete, depending on the size, complexity, culture, etc. of the organization. Consequently, the individual chosen to lead this phase need not be hired on a “permanent” or “indeterminate” basis. Indeed, there may be significant benefits to making this a term position.

24

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

With the incumbent as a “term,” the potential cynicism (inherent in any new venture of this type) around perceived “ownership” or “empire-building” can be diffused. Since there is no concern over “vested interest,” the acceptance of the individual as someone committed to the development of a viable and appropriate program is strengthened.

KEY LEARNING

REPORTING RESPONSIBILITY SHOULD BE AT A SENIOR LEVEL
Ensure a high enough reporting level, particularly during the developmental phase of the initiative. This will not only facilitate the operational exigencies related to the task, but also will also bolster credibility and confidence in both the leader and the initiative.

KEY LEARNING

SYSTEM DESIGN MAY REQUIRE DIFFERENT SKILLS FROM ONGOING OPERATIONS
The person(s) tasked to develop or design the dispute resolution system is not necessarily the best person(s) to manage the program once it is in place. Build in flexibility to transition from the developmental function to the operational requirements. Using a term employee or contracting with an external system designer for the developmental phase may accomplish this.

T H E R E P O RT I N G R E L AT I O N S H I P … ARM’S-LENGTH? WELL, SORT OF… The credibility of a CMS is based upon the perceived objectivity and neutrality of the unit responsible for the provision of services. No unit or individual can be 100 percent neutral or impartial. The source of funding, or the direct reporting relationship, may have a subtle underlying influence.
The greatest degree of neutrality will usually come with an ADR organization external to the department and this option should be given serious consideration. The advantages and disadvantages are similar to those that come into play when evaluating the make-or-buy decision outlined earlier in this chapter.

T H E R E P O RT I N G R E L AT I O N S H I P — AT W H AT L E V E L ? It is important to establish a reporting relationship at the highest possible level within the organization. However, while reporting to a DM might be ideal, it may not be feasible. A reporting relationship at the ADM-equivalent level is usually more than adequate.
There are several reasons for establishing this reporting relationship at a high level: It demonstrates to others in the organization that senior management recognizes the importance of the initiative and supports it. It keeps the initiative from getting “lost” among competing priorities. It ensures the appropriate decision-making authority is in place to deal with specific issues and cases in a timely manner. Some federal departments exploring ADR possibilities have had to struggle to gain acceptance among stakeholders and employees, partially as result of not having the responsible official at a senior enough level.

KEY LEARNING

PERCEPTION OF INDEPENDENCE, IMPARTIALITY AND NEUTRALITY OF THE SERVICE PROVIDER IS CRITICAL
The perception of independence and neutrality on the part of the conflict management office is important to build trust among users. Situating the office in an “arm’s-length” relationship with the organization and practising behaviours that support the impartiality and neutrality of the office can enhance this. When DND/CF initially established its project, there was no suitable arm’s-length external agency or organization to provide the necessary ongoing services. This situation is changing and system designers should give serious consideration to these options.

C H A P T E R 3 GETTING GOING

25

Choosing an internal approach to establishing a CMS may result in a perception that neutrality, confidentiality and impartiality are subject to compromise. Having the project leader report directly to the organization’s senior management may further encourage this perception. It is therefore important to establish an arm’s-length relationship between the program and the organization. This may not be possible structurally, but operationally there are some things that can be done. For example, at DND/CF the Conflict Management Office was permitted to avoid involvement in some of the corporate or broad human resources (HR) activities in which other operational units were expected to participate. Its offices were intentionally located away from the DND/CF headquarters offices. As well, the Office was upfront in explaining its reporting relationship and mode of operation to clients wishing to avail themselves of ADR services. The progressive views of the ADMs, and their recognition that it was in both DND/CF’s and the employees’/members’ best interests to allow the Conflict Management Office to operate with some independence and in as impartial a manner as possible, resulted in a level of trust toward the Office which was critical to its success.

ADR’s roots stem from alternative approaches to the adjudicative, rights-based approaches used by courts, tribunals and review boards. These rights-based approaches have traditionally been the domain of legal professionals. This has been the case in issues relating to workplace, commercial and procurement s leading to litigation and related court action. It is worth having a look at the impetus behind the advancement of ADR in government organizations in the United States and Canada to see how these roots have influenced ADR “ownership” in public sector organizations.

THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE
In the United States the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 required every executive agency to: designate a senior official as the dispute resolution specialist of the agency; provide for training on a regular basis; adopt an official ADR policy; and review each of its standard contract agreements to encourage the use of ADR. In 1998 the US Congress passed the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, which required every district court in the country to devise and implement its own ADR program and to require that litigants in all civil cases consider the use of an ADR process. On May 1, 1998, President Clinton sent a memorandum to the heads of executive departments and agencies. In it he stated that, as part of an effort to make the federal government operate more efficiently and effectively and to encourage the consensual resolution of disputes (including the prevention and avoidance of disputes), each federal agency must promote greater use of: mediation, arbitration, early neutral evaluation, agency ombuds and other alternative dispute resolution techniques; and negotiated rulemaking. The President further directed that an Alternative Dispute Resolution Working Group, consisting of the Cabinet departments and, as determined by the Attorney General, agencies with a significant interest in dispute resolution, be convened and designated as the interagency committee to facilitate and encourage agency use of ADR.

WHO ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADR FUNCTION? WHO “OWNS”IT? Organizations considering an ADR program are challenged with determining where responsibility for the program should be placed within the organization. Who “owns” it?
Far too often the answer to this question is based on how the initiative evolved—its history. The divergence of views around this is often found between the legal services function and the human resources function.

KEY LEARNING

EVERYONE IN THE ORGANIZATION “OWNS” THE SYSTEM
A good CMS should not be perceived as being “owned” by any single organizational unit. Everyone in the organization owns it. While it can be situated with the human resources or legal services unit for administrative purposes, a good CMS is “organic” in nature and is recognized as being there for everyone in the organization, including the unions, employees and managers and, in the case of DND/CF, the military contingent as well. Its ultimate manifestation is reflected in the behaviours of all employees.

26

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

The working group was composed of representatives of the heads of all participating agencies. It met as a whole or in subgroups of agencies with an interest in particular issues or subject areas, such as disputes involving personnel, procurement and claims. The Attorney General convened the group and designated a representative to convene and facilitate meetings of the subgroups. The Director of the Office of Management and Budget periodically advised the President on the group’s activities. The working group facilitated and provided coordination for agencies in such areas as: development of programs that employed ADR; training of agency personnel to recognize when and how to use ADR; development of procedures that permitted agencies to obtain the services of neutrals quickly; and record keeping to ascertain the benefits of ADR. Federal executive agencies in the US currently dedicate over 400 full-time positions and $40 million each year to ADR. All agencies have a senior official designated as their dispute resolution specialist, typically at the senior executive service level or higher. When the US Department of Justice ADR program began in 1996, the Department was using ADR in about 500 cases per year. By 2002 it was using ADR in 3,000 cases a year. The Associate Attorney General, in April 2002, stated, “This program is helping transform the culture of the Department.” Given the leadership role the Attorney General’s Office and the US Department of Justice have played in advancing the use of ADR in the US, a sense of ADR “ownership” by legal practitioners in US government agencies is prevalent.

directives issued by it, every deputy head in the core public administration must, in consultation with the bargaining agents representing employees in the portion of the core public administration for which he or she is deputy head, establish an informal conflict management system and inform the employees in that portion of its availability.” In this context “informal management system” refers to a systematic approach to the prevention, management and resolution of conflict through the use of ADR and other interest-based, collaborative processes in lieu of power- or rights-based processes. Individual departments and agencies, recognizing the potential value of ADR in addressing workplace disputes such as grievances, harassment complaints and human rights complaints, initiated their own processes. The RCMP, Food Inspection Agency, CCRA and Parks Canada initiated ADR programs around workplace issues. As a result, human resources practitioners tended to assume ownership of the ADR function.

A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO SYSTEM DESIGN
As noted above, a successful CMS responds to the needs of all the organization’s members and is seen as belonging to everyone in that organization. The easiest and most effective way to achieve this is to seek out the input, advice and involvement of key stakeholders. Creating a conflict management project steering/advisory group, with representatives from all key sectors of the organization, is an effective way to facilitate this. Bringing in legal and human resources practitioners, management, union representatives, etc. will ensure that a broad range of voices and opinions are heard and that the needs of each group are considered. Furthermore, their involvement and input will promote a sense of ownership and will prompt them to encourage support from the groups they represent. While the makeup of such a steering group may be different from one organization to the next (depending on structure and culture), the value of such a group should not be underestimated.

THE CANADIAN EXPERIENCE
In Canada there is no ADR Act or similarly empowered interagency working group to advance ADR usage among government agencies. The Department of Justice has periodically played a coordinating role, although not nearly to the same extent as its US counterpart. The Public Service Modernization Act (Bill C-25) does, however, refer to conflict management (paragraph 207). It states, “Subject to any policies established by the employer or any

C H A P T E R 3 GETTING GOING

27

KEY LEARNING

ALIGNMENT WITH CORPORATE CULTURE AND CORE VALUES
In order for a CMS to be accepted and integrated into the day-to-day operations of an organization, the initiative must be aligned with key principles governing the corporate culture and values of the organization. Furthermore, processes and leadership style must be congruent with the organization’s norms and behaviours. It is therefore important to determine what those elements are. This may be done, in part, by examining the mandate, mission, vision and ethical standards of the organization. These are usually published in the seminal documents and key communications produced by the organization and can be found in policy documents, regulations, annual reports, Web sites, etc. These statements reflect, either directly or indirectly, the cultural and ethical behaviours that drive the organization. While each organization will have articulated its own principles, those in a public sector environment will also adhere to principles emanating from central agencies and from the goals of the federal government. These can be found in Treasury Board regulations, legislation, the annual Speech from the Throne, and so on. Though these principles and those of the individual departments may not be identical, they are almost always complementary. For example, DND/CF has developed its own statement of ethics. It is compatible with and complementary to the Treasury Board policy on ethics in the Public Service, while simultaneously reflecting the unique characteristics that define the Department. This type of alignment is key to the success of any program. Similarly, when designing a CMS it is important to align its principles and processes with the broader values, ethics and behaviours of the organization.

HAVE MEANINGFUL STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION AND, IN PARTICULAR, UNION INVOLVEMENT
It is important to have a structured forum to consult with stakeholders and develop consensus around how the project should proceed. Broad and meaningful union representation is particularly important; one should give serious consideration to proceeding without this input. It is critical that all stakeholders be clear about their role, particularly in relation to whether the body is advisory or has a broader decision-making authority.

Having the steering group identify and articulate its mandate, roles and responsibilities will not only help to establish a common ground among members, but will also promote a collaborative approach.

KEY LEARNING

TRAIN STEERING/ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN EARLY PHASE OF PROJECT
It is useful to have a workshop or training session with all the members of any project steering/advisory committee early in its mandate. This creates a common understanding among diverse committee members regarding their roles and mandates. It also permits members to interact with each other constructively, as a team, and to form positive interpersonal relationships before proceeding with the task at hand. This is especially important when union and management officials are represented. One of the first workshop tasks is to help prepare a set of guiding principles for the conflict management system. This is one of the most important elements in the system design process. It is essential to get it right because it determines the future direction of the entire initiative.

KEY LEARNING

PROGRAM VALUES AND PRINCIPLES SHOULD SUPPORT CORPORATE CORE VALUES AND ETHICS
There are broad corporate values, norms and behaviours which should be not only supported by conflict management programs and principles, but also reinforced and enhanced by such initiatives. It is important to ensure that the respective policies and procedures are aligned.

28

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
THE COMPLEXITY OF THE CHALLENGE To say that DND/CF is a complex organization is a gross understatement. The Program was to serve, directly and indirectly, approximately 176,000 individuals. To develop and institutionalize a fully integrated dispute resolution system covering all 58,000 Regular Force army, air force and navy members; 30,000 Primary Reserve members; 70,000 cadets and rangers; and 18,000 civilians, across Canada and in operations abroad, was, to say the least, daunting. To the best knowledge of the broad base of ADR practitioners with whom I consulted, nothing of this scope, ambition or complexity had previously been attempted, or has since been attempted, in North America or abroad. Adding to this were the following factors:
The legislation and terms and conditions governing employment in DND/CF were different for military members and civilians. In many instances civilians worked under the direct supervision of military personnel and vice versa. The legal frameworks for military and civilian personnel were different. The Code of Service Discipline in the National Defence Act is at the heart of Canadian military justice. The military law and justice system, including institutions such as the Office of the Judge Advocate General (JAG), the Military Police and the Military Police Complaints Commission, all added a unique dimension. Policies around grievances, harassment complaints and the various redress processes were different for military and civilian personnel. There were unique characteristics and cultures among the army, air force and navy, not to mention civilian groups. Twelve different unions represented civilian interests, with the Union of National Defence Employees (UNDE) being by far the largest. There was skepticism as to whether ADR could (or should) work in a military command-and-control organization of this type and whether it would undermine or diminish the authority of the chain of command. The geographic dispersion of DND/CF members within Canada and around the world further complicated matters. New organizations such as the Canadian Forces Grievance Board and the Office of the Ombudsman, with mandates under development, were being established at the same time.

THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
In the spring of 1998 DND began staffing action for Executive Director Conflict Management at the EX-3 level with a competition notice that described the required duties and experience. The notice appears in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 2. At the outset DND built in the expectation and capacity to “pass the torch” from the “developmental official” to the “operational official.” EDCM was established as a three-year civilian term position. At the end of the three years, requirements were to be reviewed with the expectation that any permanent office would likely be headed at the director general level. The rationale for this was that the program development function required a more senior official to originate, test and “sell” what might be perceived as somewhat unconventional, innovative approaches for a hierarchical organization like DND. It would also serve to generate project and subsequent program acceptance. Once the initiative was developed and fully operational as a program, a director general, at an EX-2 level, would be most appropriate. EDCM, as an organizational unit within DND/CF, was allowed a unique degree of independence and operational flexibility. Structurally, it was not an “arm’s-length” organization during the development phase of the Project, but operationally it was as close to being one as possible.

GETTING GOING It is interesting to note that DND/CF, made up primarily of military personnel, elected to use a civilian employee to head up the Conflict Management Project. This may have been a function of ADR being a new field with few experienced practitioners.
One may legitimately have expected resistance or suspicion on the part of some military personnel. This was not my experience. Two factors helped mitigate this potential problem. The task of getting the project going was, in the early stages, assigned to a major-general who had high credibility among his peers. When I assumed my responsibilities as the EDCM, he and I jointly made the key presentations and briefings to senior officers. His advice and guidance were important in ensuring that a neophyte in the military world did not make critical errors in judgment about “how things worked” in a military setting.

C H A P T E R 3 GETTING GOING

29

In the longer term, after personal credibility was established, being a civilian in a military environment had some substantial advantages, particularly when it came to perceived neutrality as a result of not being within the military chain of command. Periodic tensions are inherent in any organization composed of a predominately military presence supported by civilians. Naturally, the question arose as to where in the organization the Program should be located. DND/CF chose to attach the ADR function to the human resources organizational units. For a workplace ADR system, this is a reasonable “location” and works well. There is at the same time a very close working relationship with the Legal Services and Judge Advocate General’s Offices to ensure that the appropriate legal interests are accommodated. DND/CF has two Assistant Deputy Ministers responsible for the human resources function: ADM(HR-Mil) (for military requirements) and ADM(HR-Civ) (for civilian requirements). EDCM reported to both ADMs jointly. This dual reporting responsibility provided some comfort to both the military and civilian components of the organization and, at the same time, reflected the integrated nature of the initiative. Both ADMs were involved in staffing the EDCM position, establishing objectives and priorities, and annual performance evaluation review. One might expect that this dual reporting relationship would be a source of problems, particularly for a new program. The exact opposite was the case. The initiative was, and continues to be, strengthened by this relationship. While it required somewhat more coordination among the parties, the ability to access directly both the military and civilian arms at a senior level when an issue arose was critical. As well, the support of two senior officials around the senior management table was very important, particularly in the early stages of the project. DND/CF has attempted to institutionalize an “organic” program-one that is broadly based, reflects the interests of all stakeholders and is impartial in its orientation and mode of operation. For that reason, all stakeholders were involved in its development, implementation and ongoing modification. Dispute Resolution Centres (DRCs) were established across the country with broad representation from Regular and Reserve Force military members (army, air force and navy) and civilian employees. As well, their reporting relationships were established within their respective chains of command.

S TA K E H O L D E R I N V O LV E M E N T In response to the early interest in ADR on the part of the Armed Forces Council in February 1998, a meeting of internal stakeholders and interested parties was organized to discuss ADR applications, including guiding principles for the conduct of interventions and training standards. All environmental commands and human resources staff units were represented. An expanded Conflict Management Working Group became the nucleus of the Conflict Management Project Steering Committee. THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE EDCM held the view that stakeholder buy-in was critical to ensuring broad-based “ownership” of the system and an inclusive, collaborative approach would be the best way to proceed. More importantly, creating the best possible program could be achieved only through advice and input from all stakeholders. For this reason the Steering Committee was made up of approximately 25 members, with representation from the key unions (including UNDE, the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada [PIPS] and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers [IBEW]), all environmental commands, Office of the Ombudsman, DND/CF Ethics Office, Legal Services, Judge Advocate General, Employee Relations, Chief Review Services, Canadian Forces Grievance Board, pilot site representatives and any other offices having a direct interest.
At one of its earliest meetings, a consultant presented a oneday ADR design workshop to the Committee, to familiarize its members with ADR principles and processes. This was key to establishing a common vocabulary, a common understanding of ADR and a common commitment to the task at hand. The Steering Committee created a document outlining its terms of reference. Included were sections describing its purpose, mandate, reporting relationships, responsibilities, duration and membership requirements. This document is reproduced in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 3. The Steering Committee had its first meeting in January 1999 and remained active until the project was ready to be rolled out as a national program. Its last meeting was held in November 2000, just before going to the Defence Management Committee for program approval. One of the Steering Committee’s key outputs was an agreement on the Guiding Principles to the Conduct of Dispute Resolution Processes. This was a seminal document that helped define the initiative and its goals.

30

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Since the principles articulated in the document are not unique to DND/CF, I have inserted a copy of it below: GUIDING PRINCIPLES TO THE CONDUCT OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESSES IN DND/CF 1. Conflict management can be universally accessed by all DND/CF and Non Public Funds (NPF) employees and members. 2. Conflict management must occur at the earliest possible stage in the dispute and must include the appropriate authorities with the appropriate competencies. Every attempt possible should be made to resolve disputes using interest-based processes in low- to high-cost sequence. For example, a supervisor should recommend that a disputant use self-help methods before implementing a mediation process. 3. The use of conflict management does not take away the right to use any other form of conflict management at a later date. Members and employees and their supervisors must be aware that by using interest-based dispute resolution processes, they do not give up the right to use more formal processes as necessary. 4. Conflict management will conform to accepted diversity principles and practices. This principle will ensure that current and future mandated and legislated diversityrelated issues are not compromised. 5. The chain of command is obligated to facilitate and provide awareness and training and to promote the use of conflict management. This principle will help empower the chain of command in the use of dispute resolution techniques as well as foster the institutionalization of those processes. 6. All parties must have access to trusted and capable assistance. By providing parties with this support, the use of conflict management will be encouraged. 7. The process is confidential within the constraints of existing and future legislation and policy. 8. Access and provision of expert capability: This principle is to support the chain of command by ensuring that it has access to the expertise of practitioners in the field of conflict management. This expertise may be found within DND/CF or externally. It is intended that practitioners will be guided by a code of ethics. 9. Conflict management skills and commensurate obligations are required at all levels. This principle will promote the institutionalization of interest-based processes.

KEY LEARNING

GUIDING PRINCIPLES ARE ESSENTIAL EARLY IN THE PROGRAM
Clear guiding principles act as a filter and reference point that will help keep the project on track. Establishing these guidelines early will also help with planning and implementation throughout the project. When you’re in the thick of things and can see only the trees, the document can help bring the forest back into perspective.

ALIGNMENT WITH CORE VALUES AND DEFENCE ETHICS FRAMEWORK The Steering Committee made it clear that any conflict management initiative, irrespective of form, would have to be consistent with, and support, the values and ethical standards which were core to the organization.
A fundamental element distinguishing the Canadian Forces from all other organizations in the public sector is the notion of “unlimited liability.” This phrase refers to the fact that CF members are obliged to respond to lawful orders, even if those orders compromise their safety. This simple notion has huge implications on the ethos and values of the organization and its members. It can be found in the subtext of many CF policies and also has a tremendous impact on how the organization functions. For example, the special importance of discipline and authority inherent in the military chain of command is directly related to the organization’s ability to address the exigencies related to unlimited liability. The concepts of honour and ethical behaviour are naturally elevated when life-and-death decisions are elemental to the organization’s mission. These principles and obligations, among others, are reflected in the Statement of Defence Ethics—both explicitly and in the subtext. It reads as follows: Principles Respect the dignity of all persons Serve Canada before self Obey and support lawful authority

V C H A P T E R 3 GETTING GOING

31

Obligations Integrity—We give precedence to ethical principles and obligations in our decisions and actions. We respect all ethical obligations deriving from applicable laws and regulations. We do not condone unethical conduct. Loyalty—We fulfill our commitments in a manner that best serves Canada, DND and the CF. Courage—We face challenges, whether physical or moral, with determination and strength of character. Honesty—We are truthful in our decisions and actions. We use resources appropriately, and in the best interests of the Defence mission. Fairness—We are just and equitable in our decisions and actions. Responsibility—We perform our tasks with competence, diligence and dedication. We are accountable for and accept the consequences of our decisions and actions. We place the welfare of others ahead of our personal interests. These are the pillars of ethical behaviour at DND/CF. They apply equally to dealings around conflict management initiatives in general and the mediation process in particular. The system design process at DND/CF took into account the implications of these principles and obligations before making assumptions around ADR applications. Representatives from the ethics program served on the Steering Committee to provide guidance and advice. Since mediation would play an important role in any DND/CF ADR program, mediators would also require a code of ethical standards to govern their behaviour. These would include issues around impartiality and confidentiality. It was important to ensure that no inconsistencies existed and that the articulated ethical principles and obligations supported each other.

matters in the same way that had served it so well in the past? Would it take into account the unique nature of the CF as reflected in the CF Ethos Statement below: The Canadian Forces is a military organization dedicated to the service of Canada and the defence of Canadians. It is a volunteer institution with a proud history, built through the sacrifices of the hundreds of thousands of Canadian men and women who have served their country in uniform for more than a century. It possesses a unique readiness and capacity to serve Canada, in peace and in war, at home and abroad. The men and women who make up the Forces come from all parts of our country. Their strength is drawn from our two official languages and the many different ethnic and cultural communities in Canada. They understand and respect the same values which their fellow Canadians hold dear—fairness, integrity and respect for the rule of law. They also know that the profession of arms places special reliance on duty, honour, loyalty, discipline, courage, dedication and teamwork, without which no military organization can be effective. The men and women of the Canadian Forces are committed to fulfilling, to the very best of their abilities, their mission as defined by the Government of Canada. They share a commitment to integrity and excellence in everything they do as members of the Forces. They know that the unique demands of the military profession can only be met through leadership and conduct based on respect for people. Members of the Canadian Forces are accountable to their superiors up the chain of command that leads ultimately to the Minister and the Government of Canada. Like all who serve their country, their vocation as servicemen and women obliges them to act in a way that meets the highest expectations and standards of Canadians. The men and women of the Canadian Forces constitute a proud and distinctive community within the Canadian family. They go forth to do their duty for Canada, prepared if necessary to make the ultimate sacrifice, because they are confident in the values of Canadians and the purposes for which their service is rendered.

ALIGNMENT WITH THE CANADIAN FORCES ETHOS In consulting with the environmental commands, it was evident that any initiative of this type would be intensively “scrutinized” within the context of the CF ethos.
A key concern for many was how this initiative would affect the effective functioning of the chain of command. Would it undermine the ability of the chain of command to deal with

32

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

SERVICE—HONOUR—COMMITMENT We serve Canada and Canadians on the land, at sea and in the air
We take pride in our unique contribution to our country and its people We are committed to the peace and security of our nation and its allies We honour the sacrifice of those who have gone before us We are dedicated to those who will follow EDCM approached the CF ethos and chain-of-command issue by presenting the initiative as the offering of some new tools, which seem to work exceptionally well under certain circumstances and which could be used by the chain at its own discretion. Whether or not it would be used was the choice of the individual member and very much a “try it, see how it works” scenario. The high success rate of mediations and other ADR interventions led to rapid acceptance of the Project. The chain of command embraced it, because it was both effective and within their control. This was very important at the time, as new organizations, such as the Ombudsman’s Office and the Canadian Forces Grievance Board, were being established outside the domain of the chain to deal with workplace disputes.

KEY LEARNING

PRESENTING ADR AS “JUST ANOTHER TOOL” CAN MINIMIZE CONCERNS ABOUT THE INITIATIVE
The introduction of a conflict management initiative is often seen as something new and can be perceived as a threat to traditional roles and modes of operation. These anxieties can be mitigated by pointing out that the implementation of ADR is: discretionary—individuals can still choose other approaches; merely a new tool for resolving disputes that can be added to the already existing toolbox; and effective in many circumstances and worth a try. Characterizing ADR in this way can lead to more rapid acceptance by reducing the discomfort that normally accompanies change.

C H A P T E R 3 GETTING GOING

33

C H A P T E R

4

INCREASED AWARENESS LEADS TO INCREASED COMMITMENT In Chapter one I spoke of the need for proponents of a CMS based on ADR to “sell” the idea to decision makers. I chose that word because it is, in a strict sense, accurate; but I confess I’m a bit uncomfortable with the connotations that might be associated with it.
Far too often we correlate the word “sell” with notions of manipulation, disingenuousness and self-interest. I do not mean to suggest any of that. Proponents of ADR are not Machiavellian salesmen making fantastic claims about the curative powers of a bogus product. They are, for the most part, committed individuals who have a significant understanding of the processes employed in ADR. Their experience and knowledge have shown them that it works. They want to share this valuable tool with others because they believe it will benefit them and the organization as a whole. As noted earlier, there is significant objective evidence to demonstrate that ADR does work and that a CMS based on its precepts can contribute significantly to improving conditions in the workplace. As such, making others aware of what ADR is and how it works can be the most effective “selling” tool available to proponents. Raising awareness is therefore key to gaining acceptance. As that awareness spreads, grows and deepens, so will buy-in. The more familiar people become with the concepts, practices and successes associated with ADR, the more committed they will become to embedding it in the organization’s culture.

BUILDING AWARENESS AND COMMITMENT

GETTING BEYOND APPROVAL
Approval for a CMS project is an important first step. It indicates that decision makers are convinced the idea makes good sense and that they feel an initial investment is warranted. Implicit is the notion that they are adequately aware of what a CMS is and what benefits it may afford the organization. Now comes the tough part—moving from approval to commitment and from concept to concrete. The two transformations are interrelated and both demand the input and involvement of key stakeholders—not just from senior management, but also from all levels of the organization.

SENIOR LEVEL COMMITMENT It is fair to assume that decision makers are aware of ADR and its advantages, but the depth of that awareness should not be overestimated. Senior level managers will sometimes approve an initiative even when they do not fully understand how it works. Though they may have a cursory knowledge of what ADR entails, their decision to go ahead and try it is often based on a combination of other factors: reports of its success in other organizations; advice from trusted and respected sources who have a more intimate understanding; and, of course, a “compelling reason,” to name just a few.
While approval is obviously key to getting the project off the ground, it should not be confused with commitment, which is essential to the long-term success of any major initiative. It is therefore important to build on the initial support of senior managers by demonstrating the value of ADR.

BRIEFINGS Targeted briefings can be an excellent way to generate an enhanced awareness and understanding of the initiative and to gain support for the project and related resource requirements. Briefing the organization’s senior managers in the very early stages of the project is key. The nature and focus of that briefing will vary according to the specific interests and concerns of the audience and the unique circumstances of the organization at the time.

KEY LEARNING

COMMUNICATE FACE-TO-FACE
Face-to-face briefings were the most effective communication devices used to generate interest in and disseminate key messages about the DND/CF Conflict Management Project.

34

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Later in this chapter I will outline the briefing presented to the DND/CF senior management team in the early stages of that project. Those wishing to design their own presentations may find it a useful model. While senior managers are a key target audience, there are also other stakeholders and communities of interest that should be targeted early in the project development process. They include union representatives, HR practitioners, folks involved in other dispute resolution processes, legal advisors and front-line managers, among others.

The design of a conflict management workshop will vary according to the specific needs of the organization, the workshop participants and the time allotted. That said, there are some key components that should be considered:

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES Review key CMP elements, policies and processes.
Enhance awareness and understanding of ADR applications to the organization’s workplace issues. Establish a common “vocabulary” around ADR and the CMP. Enhance the knowledge, skills and behaviours relating to conflict management, interest-based negotiations and mediation. Develop a common understanding of procedures associated with moving the CMP forward.

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT WORKSHOPS Briefings can provide a general overview of the key elements related to the conflict management project; however, they are by definition brief-and by extension somewhat limited in scope and effectiveness.
Augmenting those briefings with tailored, one- or two-day workshops can help deepen awareness and commitment. Giving participants an opportunity to gain a good understanding of what ADR is all about and determine whether they are comfortable with it can help them form opinions as to the value and viability of the project. In most instances the knowledge and comfort gained by participants through such workshops will strengthen their support for the project. KEY LEARNING

WORKSHOP TOPICS The organization’s CMP, including: mandate; components; the dispute resolution system; project update; and action plan
ADR, including: features; nature of workplace conflict; different resolution approaches; ADR continuum; ADR tools; and potential benefits Interest-based negotiation, including: defining success; the seven key elements; getting to “yes”; preparation strategies; communicating to influence; and negotiation guidelines Mediation, including: an overview; when effective; mediator roles; six phases of mediation; dealing with difficult situations; and applications within the organization’s setting Going forward, including: next steps

PROJECT COORDINATORS CAN LEARN AS MUCH FROM WORKSHOPS AS THE PARTICIPANTS, BUT THE LESSONS MAY BE DIFFERENT
Though remote, there is always a possibility that workshop participants, after having gained a deeper understanding of the project, will decide they are uncomfortable with or have strong negative views of the project or its processes. Analyzing their responses will permit system designers to take corrective action. In some cases, the project’s viability may need to be revisited. On the surface such a result might be deemed a failure; however, if it leads to a better, more appropriate approach, there is a significant net gain. In those rare circumstances where no viable fix exists, it may be better to save energy and resources by terminating the project, rather than “flogging a dead horse.”

W O R K S H O P A P P R OAC H S H O U L D E M P L OY: Highly experiential and interactive activities
Cases relevant to the organization’s reality Frank and open discussions

C H A P T E R 4 BUILDING AWARENESS AND COMMITMENT

35

WORKSHOPS FOR OTHER INTERESTED PA RT I E S A N D S TA K E H O L D E R S Workshops similar to the one described above should also be presented to other key stakeholders and communities of interest. Naturally, focus and content should be adjusted to suit the needs of the organization and the participants, but most components will likely remain.

It is not merely a matter of seeking their buy-in. Their experience and interest make them excellent contributors to the CMS design team. The questions and concerns they raise will provide key insights and highlight issues that need to be addressed. Their understanding of their membership and their communication networks throughout the organization will also be key. While buy-in and commitment may not be the primary reason for enlisting union involvement, these are likely to be by-products of their collaboration. As they learn more about the project, they will recognize the advantages this option may afford them. If given the opportunity to contribute fully and participate in the moulding of the program, they will probably assume a significant degree of ownership and will be become strong proponents of the initiative.

KEY LEARNING

WORKSHOPS WORK, BUT USE THEM JUDICIOUSLY
Short workshops involving key stakeholders work better than traditional communications processes in getting the message out and understood. However… Workshops can be very demanding on both presenters and participants. For this reason they should be carefully targeted at the early stages of the CMP. Where possible, key stakeholders—such as members of the CMP steering committee and union leaders— whose early input and support are critical should definitely participate in a workshop. For second-tier stakeholders and communities of interest, like frontline managers and some HR practitioners, briefings may have to suffice until a training program can be developed and rolled out.

KEY LEARNING

UNION INTERESTS NEED TO BE UNDERSTOOD AND WELL SERVED… A GOOD WORKING RELATIONSHIP IS PARAMOUNT; DON’T TAKE IT FOR GRANTED—WORK AT IT CONTINUOUSLY
Any organization considering a conflict management system should understand the key role unions will play and ensure that they are involved in a comprehensive and meaningful manner from the outset. Their views should be heard and understood. They will be “champions” for the initiative if they are fully involved in a transparent and collaborative process and see that it can add real value to their members. Cultivate a good working relationship so that problems can be surfaced as soon as possible, discussed frankly and resolved to the satisfaction of all parties.

ALIGNMENT WITH UNION ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND INTERESTS
One of the core elements of a well-designed CMS is the notion of inclusion (it is there for all employees within an organization) and accessibility. In most large organizations, and particularly those in the public sector, the majority of employees are union-affiliated. Unions usually act as bargaining agents in contract negotiations and have a vested interest in ensuring that terms and conditions governing the workplace are respected. When workplace conflicts occur, unions are often called upon to represent their members in the resolution of those disputes. It is therefore critical to involve union representatives in the introduction, development and implementation of the CMP at a very early stage. Without their involvement, proceeding with an organization-wide CMS would be very difficult, if not pointless.

36

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
A month after assuming my responsibilities as EDCM in August 1998, Major-General Rick Linden and I briefed the Armed Forces Council. The Armed Forces Council is the most senior CF committee. Its mandate is “to advise the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) in considering broad military matters related to operations, command, control and administration of the CF and to assist the CDS in reaching decisions.” It is chaired by the CDS and includes the following members: Chief of the Defence Staff Vice Chief of the Defence Staff Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources—Military) Canadian Forces Chief Warrant Officer Chief of the Maritime Staff (CAS) Chief of the Land Staff (CLS) Chief of the Air Staff (CAS) Chief Reserves and Cadets Judge Advocate General—ex officio The briefing was used to enhance awareness and understanding of the initiative and to gain support for the Project and related resource requirements. What follows is a description of the key subject areas covered in the briefing and the topics covered in each: The project mandate: design and implementation of an integrated CMS for DND/CF, including the establishment of a framework and standards for the conduct of dispute resolution interventions establishment of DND/CF standards for training and education related to conflict management and ADR review of new/existing initiatives to ensure consistency, avoid duplication and create enhancements where appropriate The CMP components: diagnostic/situational analysis system design (integration of new and existing dispute resolution initiatives in a CMS)

training (ADR training to provide conflict resolution skills) implementation What the conflict management initiative is not: not a new program not outside the chain of command not “imposed from above” What the CMS is: a process that involves a wide array of dispute resolution approaches (on a continuum) a process that provides operational skills in negotiation and mediation a process that promotes behavioural change A CMS design: designed by users transparent integrated known and understood multi-option/multi-access Features of a CMS for DND/CF: authority in the chain of command should be reinforced users at all levels should be provided with a process to resolve issues at the lowest possible level system should allow for the timely resolution of complaints system should be accessible system should be cost-effective system should be able to effect change Some ways conflict is handled: power-based processes rights-based processes interest-based processes The ADR continuum (different ADR “tools”): prevention negotiation mediation arbitration

C H A P T E R 4 BUILDING AWARENESS AND COMMITMENT

37

P R O J E C T U P DAT E Action plan (establishing the EDCM organization):
contracting requirements diagnostic requirements potential pilot sites for Dispute Resolution Centres training programs “championing” the initiative training the management team Organizational structure (proposed): the EDCM and Project Director positions Systems Design and Implementation Manager Training and Organization Manager System Integration Manager Communication, Consultation and Liaison Coordinator support staff positions Resources: The financial and human resources required over three years, while the Project was in its “piloting” phases, were estimated at $1.5 million and eight persons per year. The Armed Forces Council gave its full support to the proposed plan of action and to a two-day training/workshop for the senior DND/CF officials on the Defence Management Committee. The Defence Management Committee is the primary source of direction and advice on policy and strategic defence issues. It meets regularly to consider all management matters affecting the strategic direction of defence and to enable the DM and CDS to reach or coordinate decisions and advice to the Minister. It is made up of the most senior DND/CF civilian and military officials.

The decision of the Defence Management Committee to participate in an off-site two-day conflict management workshop was one of the early defining moments for the CMP. The value of the message that was sent by DND/CF’s senior leadership through their participation in this workshop cannot be measured, but it was enormous! Not only did the senior management team champion the initiative, but all its members (including the CDS; the heads of the army, air force and navy; and the Assistant Deputy Ministers—both military and civilian) elected to spend two days of their time exploring the nature of workplace conflict within DND/CF, how ADR can help and how the CMP might be structured. This participation demonstrated, by example, the importance of the initiative to the senior officials of DND/CF and did a great deal to dispel the possibility of the project’s being seen as just another “flavour of the month.” The workshop was important in demonstrating that the CMP was a priority for DND/CF. An often-heard comment was: “If it’s important enough for them to spend two full days on this, then it’s got to be important for us too.”

KEY LEARNING

HAVING A “CHAMPION” AT THE MOST SENIOR LEVEL IS CRITICAL
It is clear that a project champion, at the most senior level, is key to the acceptance or “buy-in” of individuals in any organization. The CMP was fortunate to have the CDS, the DM and their management team as champions. To be truly effective, championing an initiative of this type goes well beyond verbal or written declarations of support. It includes action. The participation of the Defence Management Committee in the two-day workshop was the kind of action to which DND/CF employees and members relate and respond. Successful system designers will seek a similar level of support from the organizations with which they are working.

THE DEFENCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP— NOVEMBER 1998 Cynicism is a common reaction to any new program. It can be even more pronounced if an organization has been under stress or has introduced several new initiatives within a relatively short period of time, as was the case with DND/CF. So it was not unreasonable to anticipate some reservations or cynicism. As it turned out, I believe this was minimal, and that which did emerge was in fact helpful and constructive and resulted in a stronger program.

38

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Not only was the workshop a measure of the level of support within the organization, it provided senior officials with the opportunity to test their initial impressions of the Project against a fuller understanding of what it entailed. It gave them a chance to further form their own opinions regarding the viability of the Project, what ADR was all about and whether or not they were comfortable with this. The workshop leaders were: Peter Sterne—Executive Director Conflict Management, DND/CF Robert Ricigliano—Executive Director, Conflict Management Group (CMG), Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Senior Advisor to the Harvard Negotiation Project at Harvard Law School Joseph Stanford—Chairman, Board of Directors—Conflict Management Group (CMG) Canada, former Deputy Solicitor General of Canada, and former Canadian Ambassador to Israel and concurrently Canadian High Commissioner to Cyprus. The Conflict Management Group of Cambridge was contracted to assist EDCM because of its reputation as a world-leading organization in the field of conflict management. Its association with the Harvard Negotiation Project at Harvard University was also appealing to participants. As well, the organization had done extensive work around the world, including many of the countries where the CF workshop participants had previously served in operational or peacekeeping settings.

WORKSHOP OUTCOME Participants considered the workshop extremely useful, and the viability of the CMP was confirmed. The CDS, in his concluding remarks, stated that many of the concepts covered were issues of leadership as much as conflict management and pointed out that these were closely interrelated. He indicated that these were core competencies to the CF and that all members should have the appropriate training.
With their enhanced understanding of ADR in general, and mediation in particular, participants were invited, upon their return to the office, to provide EDCM with specific cases with which they were dealing that might be suitable for mediation. These would be tested to see if mediation would really work in a hierarchical command-and-control organization such as DND/CF. This became the genesis of our Select Case Mediation Program, which is described in the next chapter.

WORKSHOPS FOR OTHER INTERESTED PA RT I E S A N D S TA K E H O L D E R S As well as providing awareness training as described above, EDCM embarked upon a series of training sessions for key interested parties. The objective of these one- or two-day sessions was to familiarize individuals with the CMP and to enhance their understanding of ADR and its role in relation to their current responsibilities.
Training and detailed briefing sessions were provided within the first year to a wide range of groups such as: union executives DND Legal Services

KEY LEARNING

JAG Employee Relations Office

HAVE A WORKSHOP WITH MANAGEMENT TEAM (INCLUDING SENIOR UNION REPRESENTATION) EARLY IN THE PROCESS
Having a workshop with the management team has an element of risk, but if done properly it can be invaluable. At the same time, system designers may wish to think about it in a strategic fashion. This involves ensuring that the organization’s influencers are in attendance; that there is a clear “value-added” perception on the part of participants; and, most important, that the right people, with a high level of credibility, are leading the workshop.

Harassment Advisors HR Regional Service Centres Canadian Forces Grievance Board Base Commanding Officers National Defence College Military Police Complaints Commission

C H A P T E R 4 BUILDING AWARENESS AND COMMITMENT

39

BRIEFINGS In the first year of the Project, approximately 100 briefings and presentations were given to internal DND/CF groups. U N I O N I N V O LV E M E N T I N T H E C M P DND has several unions which represent its employees. These include:
Union of National Defence Employees The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada the Federal Government Dockyards Trades and Labour Council (East) the Federal Government Dockyards Trades and Labour Council (West) the Federal Government Dockyards Chargehands Association International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 2228 Canadian Merchant Service Guild Association of Public Service Financial Administrators Canadian Military Colleges Faculty Association The largest union is UNDE, which, along with the other unions, took a very active role in development and implementation of the Project. At the very outset it was determined that the Project would cover all members of DND/CF. To accomplish this, union interests would be paramount, and unless they were well served by the initiative there would be little point in proceeding. In many ways the undertaking took the form of a partnership with the unions. As a result, they assumed a significant degree of ownership of the Project and in many respects viewed it as “theirs.” EDCM considered its relationship with the unions a priority and focused on forging a strong, collaborative working relationship. This relationship was established through a variety of initiatives. Immediately following the establishment of EDCM, I opened communication channels with the unions and held

bilateral meetings with their senior officials to determine how and to what degree they would want to participate in the development and implementation of the Project. Unions were involved in all the key planning activities. This included: membership on the CMP Steering Committee membership on the Pilot Site Advisory Committees participation in the national and regional pilot project design process (and all of the facilitated design workshops [FDWs]) input through the DND/CF Union Management Consultation Committee training programs provided by EDCM to union executive committees, and union members as requested participation of union representatives in the design and provision of training modules covering the union’s interests for DND ADR practitioners participation in the design of, and involvement in, the Select Case Mediation Program ongoing consultation In many respects the success of the program for the civilian population was a function of the support and progressive thinking of DND’s union organizations. We did not take this support for granted. At the beginning of the Project some unions had valid questions and concerns, which included: Will ADR affect the integrity of the collective agreements? What does this do to our traditional roles and responsibilities? Does it affect our power to remedy injustices? Is this some kind of management ploy? It was acknowledged as a guiding principle, at the outset of the Project, that anything relating to or directly affecting collective agreements would not be undertaken without the direct involvement and concurrence of the union(s). This precept was built into the ADR and mediator training programs.

40

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

In relation to any perceived potential threat to traditional roles, most unions focused on their core mandate, which they defined as “adding value to their members.” They saw ADR as another instrument they could use, at their discretion, to “add value.” The working relationships with the unions were generally very good; however, there were instances that tested this relationship. In one case, for example, UNDE elected to withdraw its support until certain perceived deficiencies were corrected. These included issues around training, mediator qualification and mediation practices. Fortunately we had good communication processes in place, which enabled EDCM to hear and understand the concerns and take corrective action. A few months later UNDE reaffirmed its support.

That support continues to be strong to this day. In 2003, UNDE became the first Public Service union to agree to participate in a Treasury Board-sponsored initiative called the Joint Learning Program. This pilot project involves the partnering of labour and management in the co-development and co-delivery of a comprehensive ADR/interest-based negotiation training program. The collaborative efforts that are part of this program are not only serving to improve the CMS within DND/CF, but are also forging better labour/management relationships through co-operation and common interest.

C H A P T E R 4 BUILDING AWARENESS AND COMMITMENT

41

C H A P T E R

5

turn, will give decision makers and stakeholders the chance to see actual results. At the same time, system designers and ADR practitioners can assess how their approaches might be modified to address any problems that might arise.

TESTING MODELS AND PROCESSES

KEY LEARNING

TEST PROCESSES IN REAL—LIFE ENVIRONMENTS
Create opportunities to test processes in real-life situations. Use services and tools you intend to embed in the CMS to see if they are appropriate and effective. Ensure processes are clear and understood, but not too rigid. Leave things open enough to permit adjustments “on the fly.”

MOVING FROM CONCEPT TO CONCRETE
As decision makers and other key stakeholders learn more about ADR and its potential benefits, their support will usually increase. That said, their understanding of and faith in the theories and practices related to ADR may still not be enough to ensure real commitment. These are pragmatic people, who have a responsibility to ensure that the limited resources they control are being expended in an efficient and effective way. While they may accept that the concepts related to a CMS based on ADR are sound, they will want assurances that these concepts and practices are applicable within their own environment. Before fully committing to an initiative, they will want to see concrete results—proof their investment is worthwhile. This desire for hard evidence is reasonable—and beneficial— not just for decision makers and stakeholders, but for hardcore believers, system designers and practitioners as well. Since each organization has its own, unique culture, it stands to reason that what works in other places may not work here—wherever here happens to be. It is, therefore, important to build a program in iterative stages, starting small and building on successes, while mitigating failures. By creating opportunities to test models and processes in real-life situations, it will be possible to determine how well some approaches work within a specific context. This, in

When designing and testing a CMS based on ADR, there are two initiatives that can provide excellent feedback: Introducing a select case mediation program can be invaluable for testing and evaluating the effectiveness and appropriateness of mediation interventions within your organization. Establishing pilot sites in diverse geographic and/or functional locations can help test operational and administrative processes. Both these limited-scale pilot projects can provide exceptional learning opportunities. The result is a CMS design that best reflects the specific needs and culture of the organization. They can help mitigate risk while contributing to knowledge, confidence and buy-in among stakeholders.

SELECT CASE MEDIATION PROGRAM
W H AT A N D W H Y Select case mediations are a sampling of representative disputes which are mediated by experienced mediators to determine the applicability of mediation in specific situations and environments.
They are particularly useful in environments where, because of an organization’s corporate culture, the viability and/or effectiveness of mediation may be in doubt. For example, how well would mediation work in a command-and-control

42

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

YOU WON’T KNOW IF MEDIATION OR OTHER INTERVENTIONS WILL WORK UNTIL YOU TEST THEM
Assumptions around the suitability of mediation in different situations should be tested. This should involve as broad a range as possible of different types of mediation situations. Be careful not to fall into the trap of conducting several select mediations of an identical type and drawing broader conclusions from this.

Type of dispute: Is the case already being addressed through another process? How far advanced is it? Is it between two people or are many people involved? Type of case: Consider the nature of the dispute. For example—Is it related to harassment, discipline, performance or some other issue? Are these issues typical of the types of disputes that arise within the organization? Geography: Does location or environment have an impact on the dispute or its resolution? Learning opportunities: Do the dynamics of the case afford CMS designers and/or stakeholders a chance to test an unknown? Are there training, coaching or mentoring opportunities? Each organization will have its own special concerns and issues of importance and these will guide the selection of cases.

organization like DND/CF? A select case mediation program can help CMS designers and stakeholders explore: the viability of mediation in specific settings situations where it would be most useful and work best instances where it may be inappropriate learnings from the different mediations that could be used in the training of mediators

KEY LEARNING

SHARE LEARNINGS FROM SELECT CASES WITH COLLEAGUES
A select case mediation program is useful not only to establish the viability of mediation, but also for the learning that occurs from the process. It is important to capture this learning and to share it with other mediators in the organization. In the system design process, ensure that mediators capture the lessons that have emerged from their experiences, reflect upon them and share them with peers.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR THE SELECT C A S E M E D I AT I O N P R O G R A M Cases chosen for the select case mediation program should include a wide range of factors and variables that are representative of the organization—its culture, make-up and needs. Try to ensure a good balance of cases affecting individuals and issues that are typical of the organization and reflect elements that may have an impact on conflict. Aspects that should be considered include:
Functional groups: Take into account the differences in classification, focus, rank and community of individuals. Examples include labour, management, civilian, military, and professional communities such as scientists or teachers. In some organizations large functional groups may have a focus or responsibility that sets them apart from the rest of the organization in some way. Diversity: This includes gender, ethnicity, religious or racial affiliation and culture.

CASES Each case has its own dynamics, just as each of the parties involved in the case has a unique personality. When selecting cases, some of the special characteristics that may come into play during the course of the mediation may not be apparent in related files or other data.

C H A P T E R 5 TESTING MODELS AND PROCESSES

43

KEY LEARNING

BE PREPARED FOR ANYTHING!
A good mediator will be flexible enough to be able to respond to the unexpected.

S E L E C T C A S E S — M A R K E T I N G A N D B U Y- I N Aside from helping to determine the applicability of mediation to different circumstances, select case mediations can also affect buy-in from senior officials and key stakeholders, like unions, by demonstrating the value of the processes employed.
There is, however, a risk. It’s true that a series of successful mediations can provide decision makers and stakeholders with evidence that their investment is worthwhile, but what if the mediations are not successful? It is therefore important to stress, at the start, that a select case mediation program is not intended to “confirm” the validity of the original CMS proposals; it is, rather, a means of assessing how, when and where the proposed processes can best be applied. Couching the program this way ensures its success, since the goal is not necessarily the resolution of the selected cases but, instead, the learning that comes out of the process. While successful resolution of cases cannot be guaranteed, learning from the process is inevitable. That said, because we know that ADR and mediation do work, there is a reasonable expectation that the program will meet with success in resolving many of the test cases. Highlighting those successes can certainly contribute to greater buy-in and support from stakeholders.

Some surprising circumstances can arise during mediations. During the Select Case Mediation Program at DND/CF, mediators had to cope with a variety of unexpected situations. Here are some rather bizarre and unconventional examples: A senior military officer ordered the participation of disputants; he even ordered that a successful outcome emerge. One party stacked the process by inviting several additional support persons to accompany him, without informing the other party or mediator beforehand. One party brought along the family dog (to which the other party was allergic). An unplanned “sit-in” protest by disputants was held in my office. One party brought a hidden tape recorder. In one instance, muffins and sticky buns were thrown with wild abandon. An agreement was concluded by cellphone, while crossing the Halifax harbour bridge (not recommended). In lieu of an apology, thousands of dollars in additional damages formed part of the settlement. The entire mediation was conducted by telephone. During a mediation where the parties really disliked each other, the power went out for an extended period of time. The mediation room had no windows. One of the parties arrived in a very intoxicated state. A good mediator expects the unexpected! And finds ways to accommodate it!

KEY LEARNING

SELECT CASE MEDIATION STRATEGY IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO BUY-IN AND PROGRAM ACCEPTANCE
A well-planned select case mediation program should include, as a strategic objective, the enhanced support and buy-in of senior officials and stakeholders. In systems design, this is as important as testing the suitability of mediation under different circumstances.

44

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

PILOT SITES … BUILDING AND TESTING THE MODEL
Since accessibility is a primary ingredient of a good CMS, it stands to reason that most organizations will want to have service delivery capacity where employees are located. Some of the larger, decentralized organizations will want to establish dispute resolution centres at various key locations within the organization. These DRCs will provide key ADR services at the local level and will cater to the specific needs in that environment. The type and nature of the services provided by the DRC may vary from one organization to another and even from one location to another within the same organization. Size, facilities and practices may vary as well. It is therefore important to determine what services and practices are best suited to the specific environments.

KEY LEARNING

CONSIDER THE USE OF PILOT SITES BEFORE IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAM ORGANIZATION-WIDE
Test elements of the initiative through the use of pilot sites and experimentation before attempting to implement the program in its entirety. It will not only result in a better-designed system, but will also add a comfort level for decision makers who will be reluctant to commit resources until there is evidence of success.

A N I T E R AT I V E A P P R OAC H Many initiatives fail because they have not been adequately tested before full implementation. In some instances the testing and implementation happen concurrently—also not the best approach.
The enormous cost of committing to a full-scale implementation that may be plagued with problems is a valid concern, but it’s not the only disadvantage to the approach. There is also the matter of how difficult it is to change direction once a juggernaut has been launched—like trying to turn a battleship around in a narrow canal. And then there’s the frustration factor that is likely to affect everyone with an interest in the initiative—from stakeholder to practitioner to client. Even if problems are easily fixed, some folks will already be soured and will be unwilling or unable to overcome their negative views of the project. Starting with several pilot sites will not only save money and frustration, but will also allow for testing and adjustments in a variety of environments while the size and scope of the project are still quite manageable. An iterative process will also allow individuals to get used to the changes a CMS based on ADR will bring to the workplace. This acclimatization will reduce the amount of anxiety normally associated with any major change. Establishing pilot sites where structures and processes can be tried out, evaluated and adjusted will help to ensure that the transition to a full-scale, comprehensive program is smooth.

SELECTION OF PILOT SITES It is important to establish criteria for the selection of pilot sites. These criteria may vary according to the size, structure and needs of an organization, but some fundamental principles will likely be common.
Factors that should be considered when establishing criteria include: proximity to a large number of employees proximity to other units within the organization that deal with disputes and with whom collaboration may be required proximity to key stakeholders, so on-the-spot discussions can take place when concerns arise shared characteristics with other sites that may not be included in the pilot project, which permits extrapolation from test data that will likely apply to areas where no testing has occurred an understanding of and support for related initiatives already existing within the environment and providing a foundation upon which to build accessibility to the coordinating office, so advice and support can be easily accessed

C H A P T E R 5 TESTING MODELS AND PROCESSES

45

KEY LEARNING

KEY LEARNING

ENSURE THAT SITES UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE INVOLVED IN THE SELECTION PROCESS
Select the pilot sites by how representative they are and their usefulness in testing different approaches. Do not have senior officials at the “centre” make decisions unilaterally, without input from those sites.

IT IS USEFUL TO INITIATE PILOT SITES SIMULTANEOUSLY; IF POSSIBLE, CONDUCT FDWS WITHIN CLOSE TIME FRAMES OF EACH OTHER
Presenting FDWs in a compressed time frame can create challenges with respect to organization and delivery; however, the advantage of doing so is significant, as it can create an organization-wide momentum around the initiative and can promote joint learning and sharing of information among the various site participants.

Before establishing a pilot site, brief local stakeholders— especially the pilot site’s senior officer—so they know what to expect and can plan accordingly. Ensure you have the necessary facilities and administrative support in place.

FACILITATED DESIGN WORKSHOPS
At the beginning of the project, FDWs should be presented at each pilot site. These three-day sessions strive to: obtain the suggestions, views and perspectives of stakeholders in the design and implementation of the most suitable conflict management system for the organization; develop consensus around the most appropriate system and solidify commitment for its implementation and use; understand stakeholder perspectives around the most prevalent forms of workplace conflict and where attention should be directed; enhance the awareness and understanding of stakeholders in relation to project objectives and options; and enhance understanding of the circumstances under which the application of various ADR tools is best suited.

PA RT I C I PAT I O N As much as possible, FDW participants should be a crosssection of those working in proximity to the pilot site and should include individuals from representative functional and cultural groups—management, labour, key professional communities and union representatives. All stakeholders, which can be defined as anyone having a direct interest or who could be directly affected (and also anyone you cannot afford to surprise!), should be represented.

KEY LEARNING

INVOLVE ALL KEY STAKEHOLDERS IN PILOT SITE FDWS
Ensure key stakeholders (especially unions) are a part of any FDW and that all stakeholders have an equal voice. Manage expectations associated with participation in an FDW, particularly around the issue of “recommending” roles versus “decisionmaking” roles.

46

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

THE FDW COMPONENTS A neutral, independent facilitator, with extensive experience in ADR processes, should lead the FDW. Using the same facilitator for all FDWs at all pilot sites can be advantageous as it assures a common and consistent message.
Most FDW participants will have little or no understanding of ADR, let alone conflict management systems. For this reason, the first part of the FDW (one and a half to two days) should focus on training and education—ensuring a common and adequate understanding of the principles and associated language. Topics covered would include: Setting the stage the project’s mandate, components and status features of the organization’s CMS—its capacities, limitations and potential benefits workshop guidelines and objectives Concepts conflict—traditional and non-traditional views, dispute management, costs of poorly managed conflict and response options defaulting to collaboration approaches to resolving disputes—power-, rights- and interest-based; the sequenced approach; and the dispute resolution stairway ADR tools and approaches prevention negotiation, mediation and arbitration

approaches—facilitative and evaluative narrow and broad problem definition mediation design issues Systems design general principles—typical stages of systems design, the generic CMS and the effective CMS where emphasis should be Having established among participants a common understanding of ADR and CMS principles, the second part of the FDW can be tackled. This segment (one to one and a half days) will focus on the gathering of information, opinions and ideas in order to design a suitable CMS for the organization. The components of this segment of the FDW should include: Designing the organization’s system situation assessment determination of attitudes and behaviours requiring change development of basic guiding principles underlying the organization’s system design of the organization’s system… what it looks like establishing consensus implementation going forward

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
third party binding rights-based approaches, third party non-binding interest-based approaches and peer review panels Negotiation communication interests—interest-based negotiations, relationships and BATNA options, commitments and legitimacy Mediation benefits and suitability mediator orientation

T H E S E L E C T C A S E M E D I AT I O N P R O G R A M In the early stages of the Conflict Management Project, there was some uncertainty about the viability of mediation in a command-and-control organization such as DND/CF. The organization adopted a Select Case Mediation Program as a means of testing the effectiveness of mediation in cases that might typically crop up in the organization.

C H A P T E R 5 TESTING MODELS AND PROCESSES

47

When selecting cases, a concerted effort was made to find a broad range of situations that would meet as many of the identified criteria as possible. Those criteria included: military and civilian cases, including – military disputants only – civilian disputants only – military and civilian disputants gender balancing, including – female only – male only – male and female type of dispute, including – cases where a rights-based initiative had already begun – cases which were well advanced – cases which were in their very early stages – individual, small-group and large-group situations geographic locations, including – all provinces and territories across Canada – all Bases – operational settings environmental commands, including – land staff, air staff and maritime staff – support agencies – reserves and cadets learning opportunities – testing an unknown – coaching or mentoring through co-mediation The following types of cases were mediated: harassment charges grievances (military and civilian) discipline issues litigation/claims against the Crown performance evaluations

racism issues collective agreement issues workplace reintegration large-group conflict EDCM completed approximately 40 such cases within the first year. The Select Case Mediation Manager, Guy Baron, and I conducted most of these early mediations. More than 80 per cent of them were successfully resolved and resulted in outcomes that were satisfactory to all the parties involved. These success rates applied equally to all types and forms of mediations undertaken. Apart from the cases chosen for the regular Select Case Mediation Program, there were certain highly sensitive cases that had been identified at a very senior level. These cases came to the fore when, at the conclusion of the Conflict Management Workshop presented to Defence Management Committee members at the beginning of the Conflict Management Project, I had invited participants to nominate, for resolution by mediation, some “typical” cases that were currently occupying their time. A dozen or so cases were brought forward over the next several months, though none of them could be viewed as “typical.” For the most part, they were exceptionally challenging cases, many of which had been around for years and would likely be around for a number more. Some had already involved hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and costs. They were complex and time-consuming and were taking a heavy toll on workplace morale. It was evident to me that there was a risk to the CMP by undertaking these challenging and unique cases. If mediation efforts failed to bring about a reasonable number of successful outcomes, then senior decision makers at DND/CF might question the legitimacy of the whole project. On the other hand, if success emerged around these cases, support for the overall project would be greatly enhanced. It was a high-risk, high-payoff situation. I elected to proceed with the cases nominated by the CDS or DM. Though these cases would be known as select cases, they were not considered a part of the regular Select Case Mediation Program. I handled them personally, with the clear understanding on the part of the senior officials concerned that if there was a low success rate, this should be considered in the context of the nature of the undertaking and should not jeopardize the Project.

48

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

I do not pretend to have been a fully neutral, impartial mediator in those cases. I had a vested interest in helping the parties involved successfully resolve their disputes. Success in these mediations would add credibility to the overall project for which I was responsible. I decided that the only way I could proceed was to be open and transparent. I raised my interest with all parties involved. I also pointed out that I was, in the final analysis, a DND employee. At the same time, I conveyed the fact that I had a considerable amount of arm’s-length autonomy and could act impartially. Parties had the opportunity to select or reject who would mediate their cases. Their decisions were based upon the credibility of, and trust in, the mediator. In most cases I was retained as mediator. All the mediated cases, except one, were successfully resolved. One of the most useful outcomes of the select case initiative was not only the determination of the applicability of mediation to different circumstances, but also the effect it had on achieving buy-in from senior officials and other stakeholders, such as the unions. Throughout the remainder of the Project, their support was unflagging.

Camp Borden in southern Ontario was also a logical candidate. It was one of the largest training Bases, had a largely transient population and, as a training Base, posed unique challenges. Some other conflict management initiatives had been introduced there a few years earlier and it was believed there was an opportunity to build on these. Among the initiatives was a Conflict Management Centre, which had been established on the Base to deal with harassment and other related workplace conflict. It was successfully using ADR practices to address workplace issues, and so it was a natural choice to use and build upon the work that had been done there previously. To determine the remaining pilot sites, each of the three environmental commands was asked to designate a Base. The Maritime Staff designated the Maritime Forces Atlantic (MARLANT) organization in Halifax as a pilot site. MARLANT was a logical choice because it already had in place a very successful conflict management initiative which applied certain ADR processes to the resolution of harassment complaints. This had been fashioned after the Royal Australian Navy’s “Good Working Relationships” program. As a pilot site for the DND/CF Conflict Management Project, MARLANT could build upon its current Good Working Relationships program. The Land Staff designated the Edmonton Base as its choice. This was an army Base and highly operational. As well, the Base Commanding Officer was strongly supportive of ADR applications. The Air Staff designated 17 Wing in Winnipeg, where some ADR capacity existed and there was support for the initiative. There was also interest on the part of several other Bases, including Esquimalt and Valcartier. These would be added a short time later as the success of the program became evident. A three-day FDW was presented at each of the five pilot sites. They were held in 1999 within a tight time frame: Winnipeg, April 13–15 Edmonton, May 10–12 Borden, June 7–9 National Capital Region, June 15–17 Halifax, June 21–23

T H E P I L OT S I T E I N I T I AT I V E In September 1998 the Armed Forces Council agreed that the CMP should proceed with the use of pilot sites to test the applications and validity of ADR. This “testing” was to be done for approximately 18 months, before committing to the implementation of a full national program.
Initially, five pilot sites were chosen, each having several thousand CF members and DND employees. They were the National Capital Region (NCR) headquarters, Camp Borden, Halifax, Edmonton and Winnipeg. The National Capital Region was a suitable pilot site for a number of reasons. The DND/CF population in the region exceeded 10,000 individuals and provided a good balance of military members and civilians. Being a headquarters, it naturally contained organizational units that dealt with disputes at an advanced level. As well, it contained other offices, such as those of the Ombudsman or the Canadian Forces Grievance Board, where collaboration was particularly important. The head offices of the unions were accessible. The fact that EDCM was located in the National Capital Region and was available to provide assistance as required was yet another reason for this choice.

C H A P T E R 5 TESTING MODELS AND PROCESSES

49

The overall objective of each FDW was to incorporate the input of all stakeholders into the design of a system best suited to their needs.

OUTCOMES Each of the sites created similar models, with minor variations to meet specific environmental needs. All sites elected to establish DRCs headed by an individual at the level of major (or civilian equivalent, AS-6) with a combined military/civilian staff of three to seven people. They supported the incorporation of both rights-based (grievances, harassment complaints) and interest-based (self-help, negotiation, mediation) processes in the system, with loop-back provisions. EDCM AND PILOT SITE BASE COMMANDING OFFICER MEMORANDUM O F U N D E R S TA N D I N G The DRCs reported directly through the chain of command at the pilot sites and functionally to EDCM. To ensure that roles and expectations were clear relating to EDCM and the pilot sites, memoranda of understanding were signed by the Base Commanding Officers and EDCM.
These memoranda of understanding covered the nature of the reporting relationships, respective roles and expectations around these, training, financial implications and support by EDCM.

In establishing pilot site DRCs, it was understood that because of the new approaches being put into place, a considerable amount of support would be required from the Office of the EDCM in Ottawa. In the early, critical phases of the Project, the nature of that support was as follows: A coordinator was identified within EDCM to identify common pilot site issues and provide guidance. All sites were assigned an EDCM contact, who provided coaching and guidance to pilot site personnel and DRC Coordinators. As well, these individuals had regular on-site meetings with the pilot site teams to provide guidance around issues such as establishing the DRC, developing a communications plan, developing terms of reference, developing a training strategy and coaching on mediation challenges. A DRC coordinating committee was formed. Two planning and coordination retreats were held in the first year. In addition, there were regular monthly telephone conference call meetings involving all pilot site coordinators. Issues discussed included: – training – mentoring – business plans – regional versus command issues

EDCM SUPPORT TO PILOT SITE DRCS
KEY LEARNING

– project evaluation – mediator work descriptions – communications

MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING CAN BE VERY USEFUL WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE RESPONSIBILITIES, ACCOUNTABILITIES AND FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS
It is important to clearly outline expectations and accountabilities of all parties involved in the pilot process. Financing of pilot sites often involves contributions from several sources, with diverse perceptions as to authorities and potential outcomes. Clarify the understandings in a memorandum of understanding. The process of drafting the memorandum of understanding is, in its own right, useful in creating a common understanding around the project.

– guidelines and ethical standards for the conduct of mediations The three-phase mediator training program (this will be discussed in detail in Chapter 11—Training) was developed and offered to all pilot site mediators. Approximately 40 participants were involved in the initial training. EDCM provided regular mediator mentoring and coaching.

50

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Specific guidance was provided in relation to: – best practices and innovations – resources – preparation of communication strategies – questions and answers about ADR, mediation and conflict management – sample business plans – activity report templates – mentoring/co-mediation – evaluation Guidelines were provided to the pilot site DRCs for the conduct of mediations within DND/CF, including: Ethical Standards for DND/CF Mediators Standards of Practice for DND/CF Mediators Authorization to Serve as Mediator or Co-Mediator (letter) Responsibilities in the Mediation Process Mediation Process and Mediator Evaluation Form Memo to be Sent after Completion of Mediation Mediation Report Framework Agreement to Mediate Template Terms of Settlement Template How to Write Terms of Settlement Report on Confidentiality in Mediation

KEY LEARNING

PILOT SITES WILL RELY HEAVILY ON SUPPORT, GUIDANCE AND ASSISTANCE FROM THE “CENTRE”; ENSURE THAT THE CAPACITY IS THERE TO PROVIDE SUCH SUPPORT
Ensure that support material and guidelines are completed and available to pilot site DRCs before they become operational. As well, consider the contracting of coaches to provide the necessary assistance in the areas where pilot sites are established.

C H A P T E R 5 TESTING MODELS AND PROCESSES

51

C H A P T E R

6

COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

CMS designers are responsible for the creation of a program that fulfills the ADR needs of the organization. Their interest, expertise and core responsibilities are naturally focused on the processes or operational elements of the program. That’s their job. They consider policy, governance, infrastructure, resources, services, procedures, training and all the other elements that go into an efficient and effective system. They also know that a key to any successful CMS is a comprehensive communications strategy, which must be prepared and implemented at the beginning of the project design process. Done effectively, this will help to create awareness about the initiative—its purpose, advantages, services, locations, contacts and processes. While CMS designers recognize the importance of a communications strategy, many feel their expertise in this area is limited. As a result, they often turn to communications experts for help. They may choose experts from the communications branch of their own organization (internal) or they may contract out (external). There are advantages and disadvantages to either choice. The table below highlights some things to consider:

ADVANTAGES Internal Understands the organization and its culture Has vested interest in success (for the organization) Is less expensive Is on site and accessible

DISADVANTAGES Priorities are dictated by the organization rather than its individual clients Is limited by internal resources, responsibilities and processes

External

Is dedicated to client’s needs Is unencumbered by organization’s resources and processes Has vested interest in success (for future contracts)

Is more expensive May not understand culture Has restricted access to organization’s resources and communications networks

52

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Whatever the choice, CMS designers/administrators must recognize that, despite their limited knowledge or interest, they cannot just delegate all responsibilities related to the design of a communications strategy. Communications professionals, no matter how competent, will inevitably need input and direction from the program’s leaders. Furthermore, while program leaders may have a clear vision of what they think is needed, their vision must also accommodate and reflect the needs, wants and opinions of all key stakeholders. It is therefore incumbent on CMS designers to consult with stakeholders to ensure their concerns and suggestions are addressed, not only in the CMS, but also in the manner in which information is disseminated and communicated.

– Provide the right amount of information to address the needs of each target audience. (Avoid saturating audiences with too much information.) – Link the initiative to other relevant or related events and opportunities. – Create and sustain the momentum of communications. – Identify and address—in a proactive way— common concerns. – Acknowledge skepticism and cynicism in order to combat them. – Optimize opportunities for face-to-face communication. Consultation and stakeholder participation Timing

THE COMMUNICATIONS FRAMEWORK
THE BUILDING BLOCKS A comprehensive communications strategy need not be complex; however, the thinking that goes into the creation of that strategy must take into account a broad and complex range of factors—some notional, some specific—with many of them interrelated and codependent. When designing a communications strategy, ensure the following elements are considered:
Purpose and scope of the strategy Context in which the conflict management program is being developed and how that affects related communications requirements Principles guiding a suitable communications initiative. For example: – Wherever possible use existing communication vehicles and media to maximize efficiency. – Ensure internal and external communications are consistent in their messages. – Ensure communication materials have a consistent look and feel. – Ensure information is directed to the appropriate audiences, at the right time and in a format and at a level the audience can understand.

Situational analysis and strategic considerations, including: – culture change requirements (workplace behaviours) – employee/member levels of trust, skepticism, optimism, information overload – managers’ resistance levels – scope of union support (or non-support) – vested and/or opposing interests of affected organizations or individuals – organization structures – CMP coordinator’s role – select case mediation impacts – pilot project impacts – training plan – perceptions around the use of ADR

D I F F E R E N T S T R AT E G I E S F O R D I F F E R E N T P H A S E S A N D D I F F E R E N T O R G A N I Z AT I O N S As noted in earlier chapters, most CMS designs are rolled out in three phases:
project initiation project piloting or testing national rollout

C H A P T E R 6 COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

53

Each of these phases will require its own, specific communications strategies. Articulating the goals of each phase will help determine what strategies should be considered. For example: Phase 1—Project initiation should: officially announce the existence of the CMP; highlight the endorsement of the initiative by the organization’s senior leaders; communicate the benefits of an ADR system within the organization; and raise awareness among pilot site personnel of the importance of the CMP pilots and the objectives of the initiative. Phase 2—Project piloting or testing should: ensure pilot site personnel are aware of the positive impacts of participating in the pilot process; communicate how to use and administer the CMP within each pilot site; communicate the success stories of the pilot implementation (select case mediation); raise awareness of the existence of the CMP and secure widespread support of the CMP throughout the organization; and communicate the training strategy and explain the various training courses and their goals. Phase 3—National rollout should: announce the introduction of services throughout the organization; publicize points of access for information, training, counselling or intervention; implicate leaders at all levels; present ADR as a new, completely optional tool that complements rather than replaces the organization’s other approaches to conflict management; and build on successes realized in the earlier phases. Naturally, each CMS communication strategy will be modified and adapted to reflect and accommodate the unique structure, culture and goals of each organization.

TA R G E T AU D I E N C E S In the same way that the different phases of the initiative will require different strategies, so too will different audiences require different approaches. This does not mean that select groups will receive different messages—only that the presentation, focus and highlights may shift to respond to the special interests and concerns of specific audiences.
It is therefore important to identify the key target audiences and their concerns, so they can be appropriately addressed. Being demonstrably attuned to the interests of each group will help bring them onside. As a result, leaders within these groups will become advocates for the initiative and, through their authority and influence, will support and even promote it among their constituents. Some key target audiences include: senior management stakeholders and partners union leaders pilot site implementation teams project administrators public affairs/communications staff HR professionals key functional communities (e.g. middle managers) employees and members

KEY MESSAGES
While the communications strategy may call for different tools and approaches for different phases or audiences, the core messages must remain clear and consistent. Within DND/CF we identified several key messages. They were clear, relevant and consistent with the goals of both the organization and the initiative. Those messages are also consistent with the aims of most CMS initiatives and should be considered when creating a plan for your own organization. Of course, each organization will have to adapt those messages in accordance with their own needs.

54

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

The DND/CF articulated its key messages as follows: The new CMP will be fair, flexible and fast. The new CMP does not circumvent the chain of command and supports unions’ roles, structures and processes. The CMP is flexible, less formal, voluntary and more confidential, saves costs and time, and helps build strong working relationships. The leadership of DND/CF, in demonstrating a collaborative attitude toward workplace conflict management, has determined that interest-based dispute resolution methods should be used where appropriate. DND/CF leadership is firmly united in its support for the CMP and believes that the new system will help resolve disputes in a timely and cost-effective manner. Once implemented, interest-based dispute resolution mechanisms should be used as a first step in resolving a conflict, unless there are compelling reasons to do otherwise. The CMP model selected for DND/CF is an interest-based dispute resolution system. It has been designed through a collaborative process to ensure that it meets the needs of all DND/CF personnel. The use of pilot sites, before national implementation, is a proven method for designing a CMS and will help ensure that the model implemented nationally is both relevant and effective for all commands. The use of informal dispute resolution mechanisms does not preclude an employee’s right to use formal (poweror rights-based) forms of dispute resolution at a later time. The CMP supplements and enhances formal conflict resolution mechanisms. The CMP does not circumvent the military chain of command or union-employee relationships, and all decisions resulting from informal processes will be consistent with established DND/CF principles and policies. The CMP is about providing personnel with the necessary tools to help them improve interpersonal relationships and quality of life. Dispute resolution principles upon which the CMP is based can also be applied to personal or professional relationships.

Once implemented, CMP mechanisms will be incorporated into DND/CF human resource practices and the training system. Mechanisms will be sufficiently flexible to allow them to evolve and thereby continue to meet the long-term needs of the organization. DND/CF leadership expects the co-operation of all personnel to ensure a successful project outcome. The CMP will result in more timely and fair resolutions. Those using mediation as a means of resolving conflict can be assured that it is confidential, keeping in mind that it is subject to the Access to Information Act and Privacy Act, special investigations and boards of inquiry.

KEY LEARNING

FOCUS ON WHAT YOU CAN SHOW
Before implementing a more elaborate, multi-media plan and creating expectations which might not be met, build the capacity to deliver services and then promote the availability of those services. Rather than approaching it from the perspective of “what is coming,” describe “what you have.”

COMMUNICATION PRODUCTS AND TOOLS
A bewildering number of products and tools (some of them listed below) can be used to convey and disseminate key messages. Many of these are applicable in a wide range of conditions; others are more effective in specific areas. Unique environments and cultures—even within an organization— can make some tools more appropriate than others. Within DND/CF, for example, computer-based messaging (e-mail, Web sites, computer-based learning programs) may be used effectively in a headquarters; however, in operational environments, where computers are scarce, this approach has very limited value.

C H A P T E R 6 COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

55

KEY LEARNING

promotional products (e.g. pens or stress balls with a Web address and/or phone number printed on them) training (while this is usually seen as “education,” it can also double as an effective communications tool) special events (e.g. armchair sessions, conferences, town hall meetings, brown-bag lunches) kiosks at events sponsored by others

LOW-TECH DOESN’T NECESSARILY EQUATE TO LOW RESULTS
These days there appears to be a tendency to seek out the most sophisticated and technologically advanced methods of doing business. Beware! Some of these approaches can be very expensive and difficult to maintain. Furthermore, while many of these tools are quite effective, limited accessibility, compatibility and user capability may negate the benefits that might otherwise be achieved. Face-to-face briefings and learning events were, in my view, the most useful of the communications approaches applied in the early stages of the DND/CF project. While this approach may be “low-tech,” it remains the single most effective way to get information and goodwill across.

KEY LEARNING

USE COMMON KEY WORDS AND PHRASES
Using common words and phrases is important. Not only does it facilitate understanding, but it can also help folks access the information you want them to get. This is especially true when creating Web-based information. By including common key words and phrases in the headers and documents you produce for the Web, you will make it more likely for people using Web search engines to be directed to your site.

No single approach can respond to all communications requirements, so choose several different products and tools and use them where best suited. Also ensure that the various tools can support and complement each other. Below is a brief list of some of the products and tools you should consider: CMP-dedicated Web site (Intra- and/or Internet) inclusion in or links from other related Web sites (e.g. the organization’s HR site) official announcements by the organization’s most senior executives organization-wide communications vehicles (most organizations have such tools, but they are called different things in different places—at DND/CF, CANFORGENs are used; the Australian Defence Force uses “Defence Instructions (General)” for the same purpose) posters and pamphlets CD-ROMs, audio and video tapes information sheets answering “frequently asked questions” (FAQs) newsletters, feature articles, news releases and announcements

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
To respond to inquiries about the project thoroughly and consistently, it may be beneficial to prepare responses to a series of frequently asked questions around: the conflict management project; alternative dispute resolution; and mediation. These questions and answers (Q&As) should address the key messages identified in the communications goals of the project and should be given to key stakeholders and partners. This will permit them to gain a better understanding of the project and will help them respond to questions from peers and constituents clearly and consistently.

56

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

During the next two years DND/CF will develop and implement a stakeholder-driven dispute resolution system that: incorporates an interest-based method of dispute resolution as the preferred course of conflict management; reinforces the authority of the chain of command and the union-employee relationship; and addresses the unique needs of DND/CF. Other FAQs in this section included: What is the objective of the Conflict Management Project? Who heads the CMP?

PREPARATION OF Q&AS IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF THE COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY
The preparation of Q&As will help ensure consistency of messages, particularly in the early stages of system design. The process is also helpful in getting the design team to reflect on some difficult questions and to ascertain consensus and unity of approach.

These Q&As should also be posted on your Web site and be included, either in part or whole, with other communications initiatives. FAQs proved to be a valuable and effective tool at DND/CF, where the Q&As were grouped into three categories (as described above). Below you will find some sample Q&As from that project. I have included all the questions, as these may act as a model for some of the questions you will want to formulate; however, since each organization will have to prepare answers specific to itself, I have included only a couple of the DND/CF responses here to show how those questions might be approached. The complete DND/CF FAQs have been reproduced in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 4. Sample FAQs from the DND/CF Project: (I) Frequently Asked Questions About The Conflict Management Project Why does DND/CF need a conflict management project? The existence of the CMP is a recognition by DND/CF leadership that a spirit of co-operation with respect to workplace conflict leads to a more satisfying and productive workplace environment. When workplace disputes do arise, a collaborative approach is often a more effective and efficient means of dispute resolution than an adversarial approach. In recent years DND/CF’s emphasis on using traditional, formal methods of dispute resolution has proven to be costly and cumbersome. The growing number of harassment and other workplace complaints has further strengthened the need to design a complementary system for dispute resolution.

What is the mandate of the EDCM? How does EDCM carry out its mandate? How did the pilot sites design their dispute resolution systems? What is the mandate of the Conflict Management Steering/Working Committee? How can people access the Conflict Management Project? Where are the pilot sites? Will the CMP be replacing formal channels? Will use of the Conflict Management Project be mandatory? (II) Frequently Asked Questions About Alternative Dispute Resolution What does the term “alternative dispute resolution” mean? Alternative dispute resolution refers to informal methods used to resolve disputes, such as negotiation and mediation, which are outside the formal grievance and discipline system. The objective of ADR is to offer a more efficient, effective and friendly way for people to jointly work out a resolution to a dispute at the earliest stage that leaves everyone satisfied with the outcome. What are the features of ADR systems? The major features of ADR systems are as follows: reinforces authority of chain of command supports unions’ roles, structures and processes provides users at all levels with a process to resolve issues at the lowest possible level

C H A P T E R 6 COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

57

resolves complaints in a “safe,” flexible, timely and cost-effective manner is easily accessible, with many options to choose from and many access points into the system Other FAQs in this section included: What options are available in the Conflict Management Project? What are the benefits of ADR systems? To what issues can ADR processes be applied? Won’t ADR processes just add a layer of confusion? (III) Frequently Asked Questions About Mediation What is mediation? It is a process in which an impartial third party (the mediator) facilitates communication between disputing parties and assists them to voluntarily reach, on their own, a mutually acceptable resolution to the conflict. Other FAQs in this section included: Who will participate in the mediation session? What types of cases are suitable to mediation? What is the role of the mediator? Will mediators come from within DND/CF or from outside (other government departments, consultants, etc.)? Who pays for external mediators? How is a mediator chosen for a particular case? Will mediation be available in the official language of my choice? Is mediation confidential? What if mediation is not successful? What is select case mediation? What happens during mediation?

Well-designed, easy-to-navigate Web sites can be excellent communications tools, as they can host all kinds of information. They are relatively easy to maintain and update (though far too often this is not done!) and they are accessible to people in far-flung geographical locations. Statistical data, such as numbers of visits to the site, how long visitors stayed and what sections they visited, is easy to capture. This data can be used not only to measure the effectiveness of the site, but also to help determine how best to modify and improve it. Web sites also allow individuals to seek information anonymously. This is particularly pertinent where conflict is concerned, since folks who are affected by conflict are often feeling stressed and vulnerable. Given their emotional state, they may be reluctant to approach others in person, particularly if they are unclear about the processes involved in addressing their conflict. Visiting a Web site can allow them to get the information they need without having to deal with the anxieties associated with talking to a stranger about a personal issue. Most organizations use a “common look and feel” for Web sites on their Intranet, and the CMP site should conform to this. It should also reflect the look and feel of other communications tools being used for the promotion of the CMP. This might include a colour scheme, a logo or a catchphrase.

KEY LEARNING

DON’T RELY TOO HEAVILY ON A WEB SITE, NO MATTER HOW GOOD IT IS
While Web sites are excellent tools, they cannot satisfy all the communications needs of any project or program. Though they may be easy to use, comprehensive and attractive, they still require the individual to actively connect to it. Not everyone has access to the Net and some who do are not comfortable using it. Time constraints and lack of knowledge that the site exists may also stop people from connecting to your site. Use other communications tools to support and complement your Web site. Include your Web address in those tools.

WEB SITES The development and use of a Web site is important at both the project and program phases. Naturally, the contents and approach will vary depending on the phase.

A detailed description of the Web sites created for the DND/CF project appears later in this chapter.

58

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

BROCHURES Brochures are an excellent and reasonably inexpensive, low-tech way of conveying information about the project and responding to questions that are frequently raised concerning new programs of this type. They are compact, attractive, unintimidating, easy to distribute and portable, so people can pick them up and read them later, on a bus or while waiting in line at the bank.
Information included on the brochures would also normally be included on the Web site. A brochure entitled What is ADR? was produced by DND/CF for use by the Dispute Resolution Centres, to promote their services. For reference I have included a copy of this brochure in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 5. A brochure entitled Frequently Asked Questions was also prepared for the use of the DRCs. It appears in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 6.

C O M M U N I C AT I N G S U P P O RT O F S E N I O R O F F I C I A L S A N D S TA K E H O L D E R S In launching a CMS (or any other major initiative), it is important to communicate as widely as possible the support accorded to the program by senior officials in the organization. This demonstration of support and intent can immeasurably raise the profile of the initiative while conveying the message that “this is important.”
The vehicle used to convey this message can vary. Some organizations, for example, send out a memo to all employees. Others may place a short note in the pay envelopes of all employees. The RCMP used a Commissioner’s Broadcast.

THE RCMP COMMISSIONER’S BROADCAST The RCMP wanted their first communication with employees to be attention-grabbing and informative. They also wanted to demonstrate the strong support of both senior management and the employees’ representatives.
The Commissioner’s Broadcast, which the Commissioner normally issues to all employees by e-mail or hard copy on matters of importance to the Force, was used by the Commissioner to announce the new ADR project in 1995. It provided an overview snapshot of the project and confirmation of his support for it. In it, he stated that the project was “one of the most important initiatives undertaken by the Force in a long time.” He explained the nature of the ADR process and the objectives of the project and the pilot projects, and he pointed out that it was a joint initiative of management and the employees’ representatives. The impact of the Commissioner’s Broadcast was felt immediately.

KEY LEARNING

SERVICE PROVIDERS WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION SHOULD HAVE BROCHURES PREPARED FOR DISTRIBUTION TO CLIENTS
Service providers will want to have brochures on hand for clients and stakeholders. If the organization has several geographically dispersed locations across the country, it is important to ensure consistency of messages. For this reason it may be useful to have a single brochure prepared. Some organizations prefer to create brochures that are unique to the region or location and contain information about points of contact for that specific region (DND/CF used this approach). If you use this approach, ensure that look and feel, as well as message, are consistent across the organization.

THE DND/CF CANFORGENS
At DND/CF, CANFORGENs are sometimes used by the most senior officials to broadly disseminate high-priority information. The single most important communications initiative undertaken over the course of the CMP was the issuance of a CANFORGEN in January 2000. It was issued jointly by the CDS and the DM. Its purpose was to: officially “announce” the Project and describe its key features; indicate that it was a high priority;

C H A P T E R 6 COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

59

convey the policy that ADR was the preferred approach to resolving workplace disputes; announce the pilot sites; and confirm EDCM as the DND/CF authority for ADR. The document was kept to a single page, with a clear, concise message. It read: CANFORGEN 018/00 CDS/DM 001 261350Z JAN 00 1. Several months ago the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces (DND/CF) decided to proceed with a new and promising initiative, the Conflict Management Project, to more effectively deal with the challenges of conflict in the workplace. This initiative reflects leadership’s commitment to strengthen our organization by introducing new approaches for the prevention and resolution of workplace disputes. These approaches, generally referred to as alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and often involving the use of mediation, will reinforce the importance of employees and members treating each other with common decency, trust and respect in dealing with their differences. This will, in many instances, help to prevent conflict and lead to the resolution of disputes at the earliest possible stage, before they escalate. This initiative is a priority for the DND/CF and is strongly supported by management and unions. Wherever appropriate, the application of ADR is the preferred DND/CF approach to resolving workplace disputes. 2. The Office of the Executive Director Conflict Management (EDCM), under the direction of Peter Sterne, is the DND/CF authority for ADR and is mandated to develop and implement the conflict management system and related training. This system will help to reinforce the authority of the chain of command and continue to support unions’ roles and structures. Through early ADR interventions using voluntary processes such as mediation, employees and members will be provided with ways of resolving issues including harassment complaints and grievances, in a flexible, timely and effective manner. The dispute resolution system which is being put into place does not replace existing recourse mechanisms but complements them in a comprehensive, integrated system.

3. The Project is now underway in five pilot sites: Halifax, Borden, Ottawa, Winnipeg and Edmonton, where Dispute Resolution Centres are being established. Employees and members at these sites have been involved in the design of dispute resolution systems that best serve their specific site’s situation and circumstances. Two new sites are planned for the next fiscal year, including one in Esquimalt and the other in Valcartier. 4. We are fully committed to this initiative and strongly encourage all members and employees at the pilot sites to learn more about the Project and how you might avail yourself of the opportunity to resolve disputes in a more flexible and user-friendly manner should the requirement arise. For more information on this initiative, consult the Conflict Management Project Web site at http://www.hr.dwan.dnd.ca/cmp.

KEY LEARNING

THE PROJECT “CHAMPION” SHOULD SEND OUT THE MESSAGE ABOUT THE LEVEL OF SUPPORT AT THE MOST SENIOR LEVELS
It is important that a clear, concise message be sent out from the most senior person(s) in the organization, officially announcing the initiative and describing the high degree of his/her personal support for it. This is most effective when the message is framed as a policy directive. Having the CDS and DM jointly stating that “the application of ADR is the preferred DND/CF approach to resolving workplace disputes” sent a very strong message to employees and members (particularly given the strong hierarchical nature of the Department).

60

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Following up on the program implementation phase, a second CANFORGEN was issued, in May 2003. This one reiterated support for the initiative, reinforced the momentum which had been built around the success of the Program, increased awareness of the existence of the DRCs and encouraged their use. It read: CANFORGEN ADMHR MIL/CIV SUBJ: CONFLICT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP) ref: CANFORGEN 018/00 CDS/DM 001 26135Z JAN 00 This CANFORGEN supersedes ref. this is a joint ADM HR-MIL and ADM HR-CIV CANFORGEN 1. In August 2001, following the successful completion of its three-year conflict management pilot project (1998), the DND/CF launched a Conflict Management Program (CMP) to assist members, employees and the Canadian cadet movement (CCM) in addressing workplace conflicts early and constructively through the introduction of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms. The Office of the Executive Director Conflict Management (EDCM) has been given the DND/CF authority to develop and deliver ADR services and related training for workplace conflicts. 2. The establishment of the CMP underscores the DND/CF’s strong commitment to resolving workplace conflicts in a timely and co-operative manner. Through its network of 16 Dispute Resolution Centres (DRCs), the CMP offers ADR services, which complement the rights-based processes and have been proven to be effective. DRCs provide services in mediation, training, coaching, facilitation and group interventions. 3. The ADR approach is designed to support the chain of command and unions by offering members, employees and the CCM additional options that can be used to deal with conflict early and with the greater participation and input by those involved. 4. It is expected that when a conflict situation occurs, leaders and managers will make sure that their subordinates and employees are given the opportunity to consider the various ADR options available to deal with their disputes and are provided assistance in making informed choices, particularly at the first stage of the grievance process. It is therefore incumbent upon all leaders and managers within DND/CF to take advantage of the services offered by the DRCs where appropriate. 5. For more information please visit the DRC’s Web site at http://hr.dwan.dnd.ca/drc-crc

KEY LEARNING

COMMUNICATE SUPPORT THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS, FROM PROJECT TO PROGRAM STATUS, AND NATIONAL ROLLOUT
Although it is important to make explicit the level of support for the conflict management initiative early in the process, it is equally important to demonstrate that this support remains strong as the initiative advances from its project status phase to its program implementation phase and on to its program delivery phase. Designers should ensure that there is an ongoing, clear and consistent message from senior officials not only at the beginning of the project, but also throughout the “institutionalization” phase.

MORE ON THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
P U B L I C AT I O N S As part of the communications strategy at DND/CF, an effort was made to identify appropriate publications where information about the CMS could be printed. We identified two types of publications that would serve our purposes— those with a local or regional focus and those with a broader, cross-organization reach.
It was especially important to identify the local publications, produced specifically for DND/CF personnel, that served the regions where we had established our pilot sites. The Base newspapers proved to be ideal vehicles. They included: Borden Citizen (Borden pilot) The Voxair (Winnipeg pilot) The Trident (Halifax pilot) The Garrison, The Ram (Edmonton pilot) The Contact (NDHQ pilot)

C H A P T E R 6 COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

61

Publications that received DND/CF-wide distribution included: The Maple Leaf (military; wide distribution) Vanguard (commercial; wide distribution) Canadian Government Executive (public sector decision makers; wide distribution) Reserve Link (Naval Reserve publication) Legion publications D2000 newsletter Personnel Newsletter (civilian; wide distribution)

The Office of the Executive Director Conflict Management (EDCM), under the direction of Peter Sterne, is the DND/CF authority for ADR and is mandated to develop and implement the conflict management system and related training. This system will help to reinforce the authority of the chain of command and continue to support unions’ roles and structures. Through early ADR interventions using voluntary processes such as mediation, employees and members will be provided with ways of resolving issues including harassment complaints and grievances in a flexible, timely and effective manner. The dispute resolution system which is being put into place does not replace existing recourse mechanisms but complements them in a comprehensive, integrated system. The Project is now underway in five pilot sites: Halifax (Maritime Command), Borden (CFRETS), the National Capital Region (CFSU), Winnipeg (Air Command) and Edmonton (Land Force Command), where Dispute Resolution Centres are being established. Employees and members at these sites have been involved in the design of dispute resolution systems that best serve their specific site’s situation and circumstances. Two new sites are planned for the next fiscal year including one in Esquimalt and the other in Valcartier. We are fully committed to this initiative and strongly encourage all members and employees at the pilot sites to learn more about the Project and how you might avail yourself of the opportunity to resolve disputes in a more flexible and user-friendly manner should the requirement arise. For more information on this initiative, consult the Conflict Management Project web site at http://hr.dwan.dnd.ca/cmp. About the CMP This section included: an introduction by me as EDCM; a description of the EDCM team, including their responsibilities and contact points; the vision, mission and mandate of the CMP; the project objectives; and the role and composition of the Conflict Management Steering/Working Committee. Pilot sites

PROJECT AND PROGRAM WEB SITES Web site #1—The Conflict Management Project
When the DND/CF initiative was in its early project status phase, a CMP Web site was created and placed on the organization’s Intranet. Under the banner of “Working relationships that work,” the CMP Web site provided information on the Project and how it could be accessed and used effectively. It included the following sections: What’s new This section included a letter from the DM and the CDS. It described their optimism and support for the initiative. This letter is reprinted below and is indicative of the important role these individuals played as champions of the CMP: Several months ago the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces (DND/CF) decided to proceed with a new and promising initiative, the Conflict Management Project, to more effectively deal with the challenges of conflict in the workplace. This initiative reflects leadership’s commitment to strengthen our organization by introducing new approaches for the prevention and resolution of workplace disputes. These approaches, generally referred to as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and often involving the use of mediation, will reinforce the importance of employees and members treating each other with common decency, trust and respect in dealing with their differences. They will, in many instances, help to prevent conflict and lead to the resolution of disputes at the earliest possible stage, before they escalate. This initiative is a priority for the DND/CF and is strongly supported by management and unions. Wherever appropriate, the application of ADR is the preferred DND/CF approach to resolving workplace disputes.

62

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

This included a description of their status and services. Acts and policies This section described and provided reference points for further information relating to key legislation and policies, including the Access to Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Canadian Human Rights Act, harassment policy, and grievance policies and procedures. (Note: If the site were being set up today, the Human Resources Modernization Act would be added to the list.) Mediation This section described: the mediation process; responsibilities in the mediation process; the agreement to mediate; ethical standards for DND/CF mediators; and frequently asked questions about mediation. Training This section described the three major training programs associated with the CMP and their respective learning objectives. The three programs are: Conflict Management and Alternative Dispute Resolution Processes; Interest-based Negotiation and Dispute Resolution; and the Mediator Qualification Program. Frequently asked questions This section addressed some of the anticipated questions around the CMP. These are outlined earlier in this chapter. Glossary To ensure that all relevant terminology was clear to CMP users, the following terms were described: alternative dispute resolution, arbitration, caucus, co-mediation, consensus making, conciliation, convening, early neutral evaluation, facilitation, fact-finding, grievance procedure, hybrid ADR, interest-based negotiation, litigation, mediation, med/arb, mini-trial, neutral third party, negotiation, non-binding arbitration, positional negotiation, principled negotiation and stakeholder.

Links This section included links to other related sites, such as the Ombudsman, Members Assistance Program, Employee Assistance Program, Quality of Life Program, the Defence Ethics Program and the sites of other federal government organizations. Web site #2—Dispute Resolution Centre Focus In the fall of 2002, when the Project obtained Defence Management Committee approval for national rollout as a full-fledged DND/CF program, a new Web site was created. By focusing on the roles and coordinates of the 16 Dispute Resolution Centres, it reflected the operational requirements of a program that was evolving at a rapid rate and delivering services across the country. Under the banner of “Talking Solutions,” this Web site described the parameters of the 16 territories and the locations of the DRCs, including addresses and telephone numbers. It also provided a description of ADR as a preventative approach, a collaborative process and a complementary option, working alongside rights-based processes. As well, a number of frequently asked questions were prepared around what ADR is, the role of DRCs, training, coaching, mediation and how to access services.

I N T E R N A L C O M M U N I C AT I O N S … G U I D E L I N E S F O R D R C C O O R D I N ATO R S In September 2002 a communications strategy for 2002/2003 was prepared for the use of the DRCs. This was a fairly comprehensive outline, prepared primarily for the benefit of DRC Coordinators, which provided guidance for advancing communications objectives at the regional level while adhering to a consistent national theme.
The document is specific to the DND/CF initiative, but it may serve as an example for other organizations that may be contemplating a similar undertaking. I have therefore reproduced the full document for the CMS Tool Kit, where it is referred to as Tool 7. It is presented verbatim, in the context of its “future orientation” at the time it was initially prepared.

C H A P T E R 6 COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

63

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

C H A P T E R

7

SYSTEM INTEGRATION

CMS designers strive to accommodate and incorporate several different ways of dealing with conflict—its prevention, management and resolution. To achieve this, they often focus on the adoption and/or development of innovative and effective tools and processes. This is a reasonable approach and can result in significant improvements to the way an organization deals with conflict. However, if the tools are developed in silos, with some processes operating independently, which is often the case, their effectiveness will be severely limited. Furthermore, the ability of those innovations to effect long-term change in the organization’s culture will be confined. A truly successful, integrated CMS goes beyond the implementation of the specific tools and processes that are part of the system. It is predicated on a strategic alignment of the system with the organization’s:

INTEGRATED CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
TOWARD A CONFLICT C O M P E T E N T O R G A N I Z AT I O N In Chapter one I went to some length to distinguish between a dispute resolution system and a conflict management system. In essence, that distinction came down to this: A DRS focuses primarily on the resolution of disputes, whereas a CMS focuses not only on dispute resolution, but also on how knowledge, behaviours and attitudes can influence and encourage a conflict-competent culture where conflict is surfaced early and resolved, before it escalates to the dispute level.
While we all know it’s impossible to completely eradicate conflict in the workplace, it is possible to influence and promote a cultural shift around the way it is viewed and handled in an organization. It’s not easy and it takes time, but if we take a strategic approach—by identifying, aligning and integrating key components—we can create an integrated CMS that will foster and facilitate long-term conflict competence within the organization. An integrated CMS is more than the sum of its individual components. What really makes it work is the alignment of those components to form a symbiotic system in which each element both supports and is supported by complementary elements.

institutions (organizational units whose mandates relate to conflict management); policies; and behaviours. Without this alignment, it is possible to establish a useful DRS that is capable of addressing and resolving disputes; however, the long-term benefits afforded by a fully integrated CMS may not be realized.

KEY LEARNING

ORGANIZATIONS HAVE NOT ACHIEVED THEIR INTEGRATED CMS GOALS UNTIL THERE IS AN ALIGNMENT OF INSTITUTIONS, POLICIES AND BEHAVIOURS
Some organizations believe that by instituting conflict management structures, with the capacity to deliver a variety of dispute resolution services, they have succeeded in creating an integrated CMS. They are mistaken. For example, if policies are not modified to reflect the introduction of interest-based processes, those processes, while available, may not be used. Similarly, workplace behaviours that promote frank and open dialogue need to be in sync with the institution’s policies or the system will not attain a high level of effectiveness.

64

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

ALIGNMENT WITH THE O R G A N I Z AT I O N ’ S I N S T I T U T I O N S In most large organizations conflict management falls under the purview of several different institutions, each with its own mandate, responsibilities and authorities. Each of these institutions provides services and programs that in some way address conflict.
Their ways of dealing with conflict may be formal or informal and may take a wide range of approaches—from counselling to coaching to litigation. Employee assistance counsellors, harassment advisors, ombudspersons, union representatives, grievance boards and ADR-based dispute resolution centres all play a vital role in managing conflict within the organization. As such, each of these institutions should be considered an integral part of the CMS. They are more than stakeholders; they are shareholders. Unfortunately they often function independently and in some instances are unaware of services, offered by others, that may be more appropriate in dealing with certain types of situations. Furthermore, because their resources and funding are often linked to the services they provide, they can be loath to pass on some cases, fearing this might suggest they are incapable of dealing with the problem, which in turn might negatively affect both their credibility and their funding. A concerted effort to create an environment of co-operation, understanding and mutual support is necessary. Pointing out that each player has a common goal—the effective management of conflict within the organization—can be a good first step in getting the various players to co-operate and support each other, rather than compete. By identifying and aligning the processes, goals and services of all these institutions, both the organization and its employees will be more effectively served. Various mechanisms and activities can help promote this alignment. Examples include: formal or informal gatherings to deal with common issues and concerns—this can include anything from a phone call to a chat over coffee to the establishment of working committees; cross-training and briefings to educate each other—aside from the learning, which is itself valuable, this can lead to better client service and referral;

partnering on learning events and presentations—this can range from co-presentation/co-development of events to providing kiosk space or brochure distribution at appropriate conferences; and providing links or references on Web sites or other communications vehicles.

ALIGNMENT WITH THE O R G A N I Z AT I O N ’ S P O L I C I E S All organizations have articulated policies that both reflect and govern how they function. These policies may be promulgated in many different ways, but in all instances there is a hierarchical pecking order that dictates which policies take precedence over others.
At the top of the chain is legislation; below that is regulation; and then administrative orders, directives and instructions. At the unit level this may take the form of standard operating procedures. To be effective, each policy in the chain must be aligned with all other relevant policies, particularly those that come above it in the hierarchy. In the public sector some policies originate within the central agencies and are expressed formally in legislation and regulation. In most instances departments and agencies will augment those policies with their own administrative policies and directives. An example of this is the Treasury Board ethics policy, which is augmented at DND/CF by its own code of ethics. While the DND/CF policy reflects the unique culture of the organization, it remains consistent with the Treasury Board policy and actually complements it. Policies can be disseminated in a number of ways. They can be set out formally and included in the organization’s administrative directives or they can be articulated in very simple terms via widely-distributed announcements, issued by senior management. At the RCMP the initial policy statement came out in the Commissioner’s Broadcast; the Australian Defence Force used its Defence Instructions (General); and DND/CF used CANFORGENs. All these simple statements were later fleshed out and developed in other documents. Conflict management is addressed in the public sector through various policies. At the federal level the recently passed Public Service Modernization Act makes the establishment and accessibility of an informal CMS mandatory. The law does not specify how this system should be designed or administered; it leaves that to deputy heads.

C H A P T E R 7 SYSTEM INTEGRATION

65

Inevitably, each department or agency will have to develop its own policies in order to enact the legislated requirement. Those policies will not only have to complement and conform to the legislation, but will also have to be consistent with other related policies. We must recognize, however, that while the legislation speaks directly to the establishment of an informal CMS, it does not discount or eliminate the many other, formal approaches that have been, and continue to be, used to deal with conflict. They remain valid and useful and, as noted above, an integral part of an integrated CMS. To accommodate the legislation, organizations will have to, at a minimum, articulate the policies, goals and processes related to the informal aspects of the CMS. While this may be done without actively affecting the policies articulated in support of rights-based processes, it is not advised. To create an effective integrated CMS, the interrelationships among the various conflict management approaches should be clearly understood, particularly with respect to interestand rights-based processes. By aligning all the relevant and related policies, that understanding can be encouraged. While I have framed the issue of policy alignment as a legal requirement emanating from legislation, the real reason for doing this is that it benefits both the organization and its employees.

Broad-based ownership and buy-in-When disparate groups take part in the development of a CMS, they assume ownership and promote it within their constituencies. When constituents see that the behaviours are being promoted by a wide range of interests—from union representatives to senior managers—they are more willing to embrace it. Policies and other communications—Raising awareness about interest-based behaviours normalizes the process and makes it an option people will turn to in times of need. Furthermore, well-articulated guidance that is accessible, well known and trusted will help people navigate and understand the process. A CMS that works—A fair, transparent, trusted system that leads to satisfying resolutions to disputes will give people the comfort and confidence to access the system directly or to recommend it to others. This last point is particularly interesting in that it speaks directly to the power of a well-designed and realized integrated CMS to act as a driver for cultural change. Medium and message become one. To better understand how this works, it may be helpful to step back and examine the elements that make an integrated CMS effective.

GUIDELINES AND PRINCIPLES
ALIGNMENT WITH THE O R G A N I Z AT I O N ’ S B E H AV I O U R S Creating a conflict-competent organization requires a cultural shift in the way conflict is handled within the organization. The corollary of that statement is: Cultural change can occur only when the behaviours of those in the organization change.
There are a number of elements that can influence and facilitate that behavioural change. They include: Education and training—Aside from demystifying ADR and providing information about the process, this gives people the knowledge, skills and confidence to test and apply interest-based behaviours in the workplace. Leadership—Support from leaders at all levels of the organization will raise the profile of the initiative and will give it credibility. Good leaders lead by example and walk the talk; others, seeing this behaviour, will follow suit. Identifying the key components of an integrated CMS and establishing guiding principles for its implementation are critical to the design process. Several comprehensive benchmarking initiatives have produced seminal documents that provide significant insights in these areas.

CHARACTERISTICS OF AN E F F E C T I V E I N T E G R AT E D C M S SPIDR (now ACR) and the Institute on Conflict Resolution identified six characteristics of effective integrated conflict management systems, noting that they should:
be all encompassing, by addressing all types of conflict for all people in the organization; create a culture of “conflict competency” where conflict can be surfaced in a “safe” environment, without worry of reprisal or retribution; encourage the resolution of conflict at the lowest possible level through direct interest-based negotiation;

66

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

provide multiple points of access in the organization, with readily identifiable, knowledgeable and accessible individuals who can be trusted for the provision of sound advice about the system; provide multiple options, both rights-based and interestbased, for addressing the conflict; and provide systemic support processes (such as training, resources, incentives) and structures (such as a coordinating office, independent neutrals, policies).

Voluntariness—Employees’ participation in the process should be voluntary. For participants to make an informed choice, they should be given appropriate information and guidance to decide whether to use ADR processes and how to use them. Representation—All parties to a dispute in an ADR process should have a right to be accompanied by a representative of their choice, in accordance with relevant collective bargaining agreements, statutes and regulations. Timing—Use of ADR processes should be encouraged at the earliest possible time and at the lowest possible level in the organization. Coordination—Coordination of ADR processes is essential among all agency offices with responsibility for resolution of disputes, such as human resources departments, equal employment opportunity offices, agency dispute resolution specialists, unions, ombuds, labour and employee relations groups, inspectors general, administrative grievance organizations, legal counsel and employee assistance programs. Quality—Agencies should establish standards for training neutrals and maintaining professional capabilities. Agencies should conduct regular evaluations of the efficiency and effectiveness of their ADR programs. Ethics—Neutrals should follow the professional guidelines applicable to the type of ADR they are practising.

U S F E D E R A L A D R C O U N C I L’ S PRINCIPLES FOR NON-BINDING WORKPLACE ADR PROGRAMS The US Federal ADR Council, a group of high-level government agency officials chaired by the US Attorney General, articulated a number of principles to help guide workplace ADR programs. The principles are based on the combined expertise of ADR specialists in federal agencies with active ADR programs and identify the 10 essential elements that must be present in any fair and effective ADR program. They are:
Confidentiality—All ADR processes should assure confidentiality at the highest possible level, while conforming to all relevant legislative or regulatory provisions. Neutrals should not discuss confidential communications, comment on the merits of the case outside the ADR process or make recommendations about the case. Agency staff or management who are not parties to the process should not ask neutrals to reveal confidential communications. Agency policies should provide for the protection of privacy of complainants, respondents, witnesses and complaint handlers. Neutrality—Neutrals should fully disclose any conflicts of interest, should not have any stake in the outcome of the dispute and should not be involved in the administrative processing or litigation of the dispute. For example, they should not also serve as counsellors or investigators in that particular matter. Participants in an ADR process should have the right to reject a specific neutral and have another selected who is acceptable to all parties. Preservation of rights—Participants in an ADR process should retain their right to have their claim adjudicated if a mutually acceptable resolution is not achieved. Self-determination—ADR processes should provide participants with an opportunity to make informed, uncoerced and voluntary decisions.

SPIDR/ACR GUIDELINES At the same time that DND/CF was developing its program, SPIDR’s ADR in the Workplace Track 1 Committee was preparing its Guidelines for the Design of Integrated Conflict Management Systems Within Organizations. As a result of the inclusive and collaborative approach Committee members took, the DND/CF design team was able to provide input to, and monitor the work emerging from, the Committee. We took considerable comfort in the fact that the DND/CF approach to systems design was consistent with the guidelines being proposed by the Committee.
In 2001 SPIDR, in co-operation with the Institute on Conflict Resolution, published Designing Integrated Conflict Management Systems—Guidelines for Practitioners and Decision Makers in Organizations (www.acresolution.org). It is highly recommended reading for anyone wishing to establish a CMS and covers the following subject areas:

C H A P T E R 7 SYSTEM INTEGRATION

67

How conflict management evolves within an organization: absence of defined dispute resolution processes rights-based grievance process and adjudication interest-based processes integrated conflict management systems The five characteristics of integrated conflict management systems: provides options for all problems and people in the workplace welcomes good-faith dissent and encourages resolution of conflict at the lowest level through direct negotiation provides multiple access points provides multiple options for addressing conflict provides systemic support and structures Elements essential to a fair system: general design considerations design considerations specific to interest-based processes design considerations specific to internal decision-making processes design considerations specific to arbitration Other topics addressed in the report include: Does the organization need a system? phases and components of the design and implementation of an integrated conflict management system How do you know when you have achieved an integrated conflict management system? critical elements in the evaluation and monitoring of systems highlights of the evolution of conflict management systems in the United States a short bibliography of dispute systems design

While the characteristics identified by Ajilon speak specifically to the creation of a fair and effective integrated CMS, they also highlight the value of strategic alignment with institutions, policies and behaviours. The qualities Ajilon identified as key to an effective integrated CMS include: Voluntariness—Disputants should be informed of the key features of conflict management processes and given the right to make an informed decision concerning their participation. Participation by a complainant in any interest-based process should be voluntary. Participation by other disputants should be voluntary in any interest-based process involving a peerto-peer conflict and other disputes among persons not in a supervisory relationship. While the value of mediation is maximized when participation by all disputants is voluntary, organizations sometimes mandate participation by a supervisor when an employee requests mediation over a dispute involving the supervisor. Disputants should be informed that in any interest-based process, settlement is strictly voluntary and they may withdraw after commencement of the process without retaliation and without prejudicing their legal rights.

KEY LEARNING

VOLUNTARY PROCESSES ARE WELL USED IF THEY ARE FULLY UNDERSTOOD
DND/CF elected to make its process fully voluntary, including disputes involving supervisors. In some situations, to encourage members to make informed choices CF members were ordered to attend information sessions where ADR approaches were explained. As well, the process included a voluntary provision for the participation of EDCM personnel. This gave EDCM the right to refuse to take a case even though all disputants wished to proceed. The provision ensured that, if there was an evident abuse of process and the integrity of the process would be undermined, EDCM could opt out. It is useful to state this right up front. It legitimizes the “good faith” provisions of the ADR process.

THE AJILON CANADA REPORT DND/CF hired the consulting firm Ajilon Canada to benchmark integrated CMS design processes. Their study included the above-mentioned SPIDR publication, which had identified several elements deemed essential to a fair system. Ajilon described these as design safeguards and framed them accordingly.

68

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Protection of confidentiality and privacy—The organization should protect the privacy of all disputants and assure confidentiality of the conflict management processes to the fullest extent allowed by law. Those serving in a neutral capacity should not be asked or permitted to reveal confidential communications, or permitted to comment or make recommendations outside the conflict management process. Disputants should be informed when limited disclosure will be necessary to authorize or implement the settlement agreement. A confidentiality agreement is useful to advise participants of their rights under organizational policy and relevant law.

KEY LEARNING

IMPARTIALITY AND NEUTRALITY ARE CRITICAL; CONSIDER THE USE OF ARM’S-LENGTH ORGANIZATIONS
Early in the DND/CF project there was an interest in linking some rights-based functions with interestbased processes. We tried this at a pilot site, where the Dispute Rresolution Centre shared facilities and services with the Harassment Advisor’s Office. It rapidly became evident that this was ill advised. Since the Harassment Advisor was often associated with investigations, clients availing themselves of ADR services feared that the close proximity to an investigative body might affect impartiality. The arm’s-length requirement for the ADR Office is critical and perception of impartiality is key. To ensure impartiality, DND/CF considered establishing the Conflict Management Office as a special arm’slength or “external” operating agency. Because of the unique nature of DND/CF, this was not the preferred approach; however, in other organizations this option may be appropriate.

KEY LEARNING

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FULL CONFIDENTIALITY
Confidentiality provisions should not be exaggerated. A military commander can “order” the revelation of certain information from a subordinate CF member, particularly if s/he believes it important for operational effectiveness. Certain notes or documents may be requested under the Access to Information Act and in the event of a summary investigation or board of inquiry. Err on the side of caution.

Impartiality of neutrals—Those who function as mediators should not have a stake in the outcome of the disputes they handle, nor should they generally be involved in the investigation, administrative processing or litigation of these disputes.

Qualifications and training—The organization should be responsible for the continued training of in-house mediators and neutrals and ensure that they are well qualified and follow the professional guidelines applicable to the process.

KEY LEARNING

OFF-THE-SHELF TRAINING IS NOT AS EFFECTIVE AS CUSTOMIZED, EXPERIENTIAL APPROACHES
Organizations having unique requirements, such as the CF, will need a customized training program for its in-house mediators and neutrals. As well, external mediators or service providers will require training around the unique mediating environment associated with specific organizations.

C H A P T E R 7 SYSTEM INTEGRATION

69

Diversity and accessibility—Any system should be seen as legitimate, inviting and accessible to all employees and managers. The methods and language used to inform the workforce of its rights and options should reinforce the principle of inclusion, including the accommodation of those groups identified in the Employment Equity Act. Diversity should also be reflected in the cadre of mediators. Reprisal—Reprisal or retaliation should be prohibited for bringing forward, in good faith, a concern for consideration through the CMS; for engaging in any form in the process, whether it be as a neutral or accompanying person; or for representing anyone using the system.

KEY LEARNING

PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCESS
Since most large organizations in the public sector are unionized, the prevailing interests of the unions as bargaining agents must not only be recognized, but also be well understood. DND’s approach went beyond the concept of not undermining the rights of the unions, to supporting their roles and the collective bargaining process. This may be seen as a nuance; however, it was critical in establishing a constructive working relationship with the unions and obtaining their enthusiastic support.

KEY LEARNING

ENSURE THAT POLICIES AGAINST REPRISAL ARE IN PLACE
As well as having the appropriate support policies in place, unless all members and employees know and understand that it is in the organization’s and their own best interests to ensure that there are no reprisals around the use of the system, the system will not function well. This is particularly true in any command-and-control organization. This requirement should be emphasized in all core training and briefings. Workplace rights—The statutory or constitutional workplace rights of disputants cannot be undermined by the CMS. Participation in interest-based processes should not preclude access to rights-based processes. Submitting a dispute to an adjudicative process should not preclude access to the public justice system or government agencies, unless the parties voluntarily and knowingly agree otherwise.

KEY LEARNING

Collective bargaining agreements—The system must not undermine the contractual and legal rights of exclusive bargaining agents, or result in outcomes which conflict with the collective bargaining agreement unless there is concurrence from the union and management.

ENSURE THAT THE “LOOP-BACK” PROCESS IS WELL UNDERSTOOD
The DND/CF provision for “loop-backs” between interest- and rights-based processes helped provide maximum flexibility in the dispute resolution process. At the same time, it created a comfort level among potential users in that they felt they were not being encouraged to take a route they did not fully understand and could not abandon if they changed their minds. Although ADR practitioners may be very enthusiastic about the advantages of ADR applications, they should keep rights-based options on the table as a viable option.

70

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Representation in mediation—In some organizations, mediation will be credible only if complainants have the opportunity to be accompanied by the person of their choice, such as a lawyer or union representative. Some organizations providing internal mediation encourage disputants not to bring a lawyer. This is credible only if no participants are bringing a lawyer and disputants have the time to confer with legal counsel or other advisor before executing an agreement.

Opportunity to request information—A complainant who requests mediation of a formal complaint involving a statutory or contractual claim should be informed of the right to request information about the claim and the right to withdraw from mediation without prejudice. Disclosure—Mediators must disclose prior relationships that could cause a disputant to question their impartiality. Neutrals should decline to serve if they have reason to believe they cannot be impartial in a particular dispute.

KEY LEARNING

THE INTEGRATED CMS MODEL
We have spoken much about the components of an effective integrated CMS and how those components contribute to and ensure confidence and commitment from both stakeholders and users. It is now time to look at the system framework and structure to determine where and how those components can best be integrated.

BE FLEXIBLE WHEN IT COMES TO ACCOMPANIMENT AT MEDIATIONS
In the early stages of the CMP, DND/CF elected not to restrict accompaniment. In fact, we encouraged legal and union accompaniment if there was any doubt whether accompaniment would be appropriate. We found that this added great value to the deliberations, as long as those individuals understood their roles in the mediation. The nature of the involvement and role of legal counsel, for example, is different in mediation than in litigation. It was important to spend time with those lawyers who were unfamiliar with the mediation process to give them a common understanding of the process and how they might add most value, before proceeding. Similarly, the role of the union representative is different in a mediation than, for example, a grievance hearing. Ensuring that processes and roles are clear is important in any mediation. Disputants often requested that their spouse, a friend or a relative be allowed to accompany them to a mediation. Our view was that this would be acceptable if it provided a level of comfort to the individual or provided another perspective that would be useful to the discussion—unless the other party objected to the presence of the individual. They would be subject to rules of participation and be required to sign the Agreement to Mediate, which included confidentiality clauses. We found that, generally, their presence did not impede the process, while it provided a comfort level to the disputant(s). Again, the success of this is a function of how their participation is “managed.”

THE “GENERIC” DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM While each organization will strive to design a CMS that suits its specific needs, the end result will usually be based on a generic dispute resolution system. In metaphorical terms, this is a little like buying a car. You start with the base-model, then add the options and accessories that serve your special needs.
The diagram below illustrates how a generic dispute resolution system functions:

Generic Dispute Resolution System
Other Party(ies) Party with concern Existing Access Points

DIR Coordinator

Interest Based Third Party Processes

Rights Based Third Party Processes

Resolution

C H A P T E R 7 SYSTEM INTEGRATION

71

In the diagram, interest-based processes and the more traditional rights-based processes (such as harassment investigations and grievance redress processes that are commonly used to address workplace disputes) co-exist and even complement each other. Parties with a concern can directly access either the rightsor interest-based processes. If they choose a more traditional access route, such as immediate supervisors, union representatives or harassment advisors, their concerns can be referred to a rights-based process; however, if referees believe there is merit in trying an interest-based approach, they may recommend this. If the party with a concern agrees, the issue can be referred to a dispute resolution coordinator. A dispute resolution coordinator helps disputants understand interest-based processes and procedures. Where appropriate, parties are encouraged to give serious consideration to the interest-based approach. It is a voluntary process and entirely their choice as to what route they wish to pursue. A key element of this model is the “loop-back” provision. This enables parties to change their minds and select a different process if, during the course of a process, they feel another approach might be more effective. For example, an individual may have filed a formal grievance which is under review in accordance with normal redress of grievance processes. The individual may then decide that use of the mediation option is a better way to proceed. S/he may then put the grievance on hold and loop back to the mediation process. If the mediation is unsuccessful in bringing about a satisfactory outcome, s/he may loop back again to the grievance review process.

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
SETTING GOALS Even in the conceptual stages of the Conflict Management Project, DND/CF was clear on what it wanted—an effective, comprehensive and integrated CMS that addressed not only the resolution of disputes, but also the underlying causes of conflict within the organization. In fact, EDCM’s original mandate made direct reference to the design and implementation of an integrated system that would reflect a systematic approach to the prevention, management and resolution of conflict. In articulating that vision, a number of elements were identified. They included:
processes which result in problems being addressed as early as possible and at the lowest possible level; processes which are flexible, collaborative and userfriendly, and are understood by all employees within the organization; conflict resolution approaches which are collaborative in nature and are reflected in the culture of the organization; processes which are comprehensive in that they cover the broadest possible range of issues for the broadest array of people in the organization through a variety of structures and functions; and alignment with the organization’s vision, mission and values as it brings about behavioural change. The aim was to bring about cultural change within the organization by moving it away from highly confrontational workplace behaviours to more collaborative processes. In this way, the organization would become a more “conflictcompetent” entity.

KEY LEARNING

ENSURE PROCESSES ARE CLEAR AND PROPERLY FOLLOWED
Some rights-based processes stipulate that disputants must register their intention to access the process within a given time. It may therefore be prudent to first initiate a formal process, even when an interest-based process appears to be a better approach. In those instances the formal process would be placed “on hold” while the disputants seek resolution through an informal method. If they find that the interest-based approach is not working, they can then loop back to the rights-based process even if the time limit has been exceeded.

T H E I N T E G R AT E D C M S M O D E L F O R D N D / C F In the early stages of the Project, at the facilitated design workshops involving key stakeholders, the understanding of what an integrated system really was needed clarification. The generic integrated dispute resolution system presented earlier in this chapter was used as a model.
When we held this model up against our goals and then factored in the institutions and practices that were already in place, we were able to develop and modify the model significantly.

72

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

We added detail to the model. Where the generic model referred to something only in general terms, we identified the specific components of those references as they applied to DND/CF and inserted them in the appropriate spots. For example, where the generic model referred to “existing access points,” we identified and inserted the actual DND/CF access points where, in the organization and process, they would be situated.

Recognizing that we wanted our CMS to deal with not only dispute resolution, but also prevention, we added this element to the model and gave it prominence. Once we completed this exercise, we had a model that, though based on a generic DRS, reflected our specific goals and identified those components that were already in place. The integrated CMS for DND/CF is characterized in the following diagram:

Prevention IF NO
4

CONFLICT

OPTIONS

AVOIDANCE
(No action by Disputants)

INTEREST-BASED APPROACH

EAP/MAP

CO QR&Os

RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH

MECHANISMS AVAILABLE • Self Help • Coaching • Conciliation • Negotiation • Meditation (Internal, External) • Early Neutral Evaluation

Civ Grievance Process 5 levels (DIR-DG-DGER-PSSRBFed Crt)

Harassment Investigation (Mil & Cil)

Ombudsman MPCC

Fed Crt Mil Grievance Process 2 levels: CO or Initial Authority DCFGA (CDS)
(Final decision)

RESOLUTION: END OF CONFLICT

NO RESOLUTION: RIGHTS-BASED OPTIONS

CO or Initial Authority DCFGA (CDS)
(Referral Stage)

Human Rights Commission

CFGB
(Recommending Body)

CDS
(Final decision)

C H A P T E R 7 SYSTEM INTEGRATION

73

The DND/CF model has a heavy emphasis on the prevention of conflict, which is demonstrated by its prominent placement right at the top of the diagram. If prevention of the conflict fails and a dispute arises, there are normally five different approaches that can be taken: avoidance; interest-based approach; the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) or, for military personnel, the CF Member Assistance Program (MAP); superior’s intervention (often guided by regulation); and rights-based approach. Avoidance—This is where individuals tend to avoid the issue and not do anything about it. They continue along and use internal coping mechanisms. They internalize the issue in the hope that it will eventually go away. Issues usually resurface at some later date, often in a more serious manifestation than the original issue. Interest-based approaches—This refers to various ADR approaches, which are shown in the above diagram. Employee Assistant Program or CF Member Assistance Program—Employees and members sometimes avail themselves of these programs, where they get confidential counselling to help them cope with conflict and other related matters. Superiors—Individuals often elect to approach their superiors for help. In most instances the superior will refer to regulations, policies or directives for guidance. For military members, the Commanding Officer may refer to the Queen’s Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces (QR&Os) to provide direction around how certain issues must be handled. The CDS’s Guidance to Commanding Officers and/or the Defence Administrative Orders and Directives (DAODs) may also provide relevant guidance. Rights-based approaches—These are commonly used when there is a grievance, harassment complaint, human rights complaint and a whole array of other disputes.

roles and mandates of the primary rights-based authorities and institutions within the organization. Understanding where the checks and balances are and who does what to whom inevitably helped us create a more integrated system. It also gave us the opportunity to promote informal processes, and this prompted some institutions to either add some of these processes to their arsenal of tools or to refer clients to ADR processes. It was also interesting to note that many of the rights-based institutions had already identified and incorporated ADR processes into their own. As the DND/CF CMS has evolved, the value of alignment and co-operation among institutions dealing with conflict has been recognized. For example, an initiative called the Good Grievance Network has been introduced. The network is made up of representatives from institutions dealing with conflict resolution and brings them together to share information and seek better ways of delivering services through education, coordination and referral. I have included a list of some of the primary DND/CF rights-based authorities, along with descriptions of their mandates, to show the range of responsibilities and how they relate to each other. They are: Director General Employee Relations (DGER)—DGER is the centre of employee relations expertise for civilians. It is responsible for policy development and advice on employee relations matters, including civilian discipline, compensation, pensions, collective bargaining, consultation, harassment, exclusions and designations, and strike management and contingency planning. DGER is also the final level in the departmental grievance procedure, as well as the final departmental level for National Joint Council grievances. As well, it represents departmental interests with central agencies. Ombudsman—The Ombudsman, on the Minister’s behalf, acts as a neutral and objective sounding board, mediator, investigator and reporter on matters related to DND/CF. The Office acts as a direct source of information, referral and education to assist individuals in accessing existing channels of assistance and redress within the DND/CF. The Ombudsman is independent from the management and chain of command of DND/CF and reports directly to and is accountable to the Minister. If a complaint is made to the Ombudsman about the handling of a complaint or complaints by or under certain existing mechanisms, the Ombudsman may review the process only, to ensure that the individual or individuals are treated in a fair and equitable manner. While conducting a

ALIGNMENT
ALIGNMENT WITH DND/CF INSTITUTIONS Like most CMS design initiatives, the DND/CF project sought to introduce and integrate ADR processes to complement and augment the rights-based processes that were already in place. It was, therefore, important to identify and understand the

74

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

review, the Ombudsman will not interfere with or obstruct an authority responsible for administering an existing mechanism in the discharge of the authority’s statutory duties. The Ombudsman may investigate any matter referred to the Ombudsman by written direction of the Minister and may, subject to these directives, on the Ombudsman’s own motion after advising the Minister, investigate any matter concerning the DND/CF. The Ombudsman is bound by any general policy directives affecting the activities of the Ombudsman that are issued and made public by the Minister. Judge Advocate General—JAG’s mandate is to provide effective and efficient legal services in respect of military law and to superintend the administration of military justice. The JAG is statutorily responsible to the Minister of National Defence and “accountable” for the legal advice given to the CDS, the military chain of command and the DM. This clear accountability structure was designed to enhance the integrity of the Office of the JAG and ensure the independence of the JAG from the chain of command in the provision of legal advice in all areas including military justice. Office of the DND/CF Legal Advisor—The Office of the Legal Advisor provides legal advice to DND/CF in all areas of the law, except those related to military law, military discipline and the military justice system for which JAG is responsible. Areas of practice include alternative dispute resolution; civilian labour relations; claims and litigation support; drafting legislation, regulations and directives; legal risk management; materiel procurement, environment and real property; national security; pensions and finance; and public law, including human rights, information and privacy, and intellectual property. Canadian Forces Grievance Board (CFGB)—The Board is mandated to complete an objective and impartial review of each grievance referred to it by the CDS. It makes recommendations to the CDS with the goal of helping him redress grievances. Although the Board’s findings and recommendations are not binding, the CDS must provide reasons, in writing, to the Board and the grievor if he does not act upon them. The Board intervenes at the second and final stage of the grievance review process. The grievor must first go through the CF internal process by submitting the grievance to the Commanding Officer, who has the opportunity to address the

dispute. Should the grievor not be satisfied with the decision, the grievor may submit the grievance to the CDS. The CDS must refer any grievance of the type described below to the Board before giving a decision on the grievance. The CDS may also refer other types of grievances to the Board for recommendation. The CDS is the final grievance authority. Grievances related to the following matters are reviewed by the CFGB: administrative action resulting in the forfeiture of, or deduction from, pay and allowances, reversion to a lower rank or release from the CF the application or interpretation of CF policies relating to the expression of personal opinions, political activities and candidature for office, civil employment, conflictof-interest and post-employment compliance measures, harassment or racist conduct pay, allowances and other financial benefits the entitlement to medical care or dental treatment any grievance in which the CDS is personally involved Military Police Complaints Commission (MPCC)— The MPCC was established as a quasi-judicial, independent, civilian agency to examine complaints arising from either the conduct of military police members in the exercise of policing duties or functions or from interference in or obstruction of their police investigations. The Chairperson of the Commission has the power to investigate, to cause the Commission to conduct an investigation, convene public hearings, report its findings and make recommendations based on those findings. These findings and recommendations are submitted to designated senior officers in the Canadian Forces, the Deputy Minister of National Defence, and the Minister of National Defence, depending on the circumstances. The designated officials are obliged to report in writing to both the Minister and the Chairperson of the Commission, explaining the action they have taken or plan to take in response to the Commission’s recommendations. Similarly, officials must explain to the Minister and the Chairperson if action is not taken on any of the Commission’s recommendations. While the Commission does have significant powers, it attempts at all times to resolve complaints as informally and expeditiously as possible.

C H A P T E R 7 SYSTEM INTEGRATION

75

ALIGNMENT WITH DND/CF POLICIES Like most large organizations, DND/CF has created a collection of administrative directives designed to provide guidance to its employees and members. They are the DAODs and they are accessible to everyone in the organization. DAODs articulate the Department’s administrative policies, stipulate related requirements, identify the authorities responsible for the policies and provide guidance on how those policies ought to be managed within the Department. Ignoring or acting in a manner that is contrary to the guidance provided in the DAODs can result in disciplinary action.
While the decision of the Defence Management Committee and a subsequent CANFORGEN from the DM and the CDS in January 2000 were instrumental in communicating that ADR was a priority for DND/CF, strongly supported by management, and that it was the preferred approach to resolving workplace disputes, a subsequent draft DAOD policy document was prepared. The DAOD was intended to institutionalize the above message and clarify the responsible authorities. The draft document, in its entirety, reads as follows:

As an integral component of the DR range, the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism: supports the chain of command; supports the role and mandate of unions; promotes unit cohesion and morale; contributes to operational effectiveness; supports the priorities of the DND and the CF; provides users at all levels with a process to resolve issues at the lowest level and at the earliest stage; complements other formal processes; provides easily accessible, voluntary, multi-optional processes that are integrated with existing processes; and does not restrict the chain of command in its ability to command and to take administrative or disciplinary action as it sees fit in the circumstances. The goal in implementing this ADR mechanism is to prevent disputes from arising or escalating wherever possible, and where they do arise, to facilitate their resolution informally and quickly. The benefits of such a mechanism include improved morale and productivity and a reduction in the number of formal grievances, as well as the time and money spent dealing with them. ADR processes shall not replace existing formal, traditional, legal methods of resolving disputes. Members continue to have the right to use any other available dispute resolution process and to return to any of these processes even after ADR has been attempted. Detailed information on ADR, and when to use ADR, is contained in the Conflict Management Program—Guidelines for the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution Processes.

DEFINITION Alternative dispute resolution means any process used to resolve disputes, other than the more formal, traditional or legal methods of resolving disputes such as court adjudication, tribunals, the CF grievance process or the national standardized grievance process.
It includes a variety of processes such as: negotiation (self-resolution), mediation (third party assistance), and coaching (of parties to a dispute).

POLICY DIRECTION Context
The DND and the CF promote a working environment that respects core ethics and values, builds morale and encourages a high level of operational readiness. They recognize that in order for this to occur, a range of dispute resolution (DR) mechanisms must be available to address conflict that will inevitably arise.

P O L I C Y S TAT E M E N T The DND and the CF are committed to:
resolving workplace conflicts in a timely and co-operative manner; establishing, promoting and utilizing ADR as the preferred approach to preventing the escalation of disputes and resolving workplace disputes wherever and whenever appropriate; and continuing their leadership role, within Canada and internationally, in promoting and expanding the use of ADR.

76

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

REQUIREMENTS The DND and the CF shall:
provide an ADR mechanism that is flexible and respects the confidentiality concerns of participants and the chain of command as well as current legislation; ensure that all DND employees and CF members are well informed as to the ADR options available; ensure that high quality ADR services are available to and accessible by all DND employees and CF members, employees of associated agencies (e.g. CFPSA) and the Canadian Cadet Movement on a voluntary basis, in a timely manner and without fear of reprisal or retaliation; provide easily accessible information concerning ADR processes, principles and procedures so that all DND employees and CF members may make informed decisions regarding workplace conflict resolution;

ensure that ADR processes are aligned with the values and ethics of the DND and the CF; provide standardized ADR training for DND employees and CF members in conflict resolution skills; provide standardized training leading to qualification of authorized ADR practitioners of the DND and the CF, including mediators; and ensure that the qualified mediators of the DND and the CF adhere to the Code of Ethics for mediators in DND/CF, the Ethics Code for the Public Service of Canada and the Code of Conduct for the CF as applicable to civilian and military mediators respectively.

AUTHORITIES The following table identifies the authorities related to ADR:

THE… ADM (HR-Mil) and ADM (HR-Civ) Director General Conflict Management Program

HAS/HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO… approve of ADR policy and to delegate procedures to the DGCMP.

approve ADR procedures; implement the Conflict Management Program; oversee the activities of the Dispute Resolution Centres; and act as departmental authority for ADR-related activities.

Level 1 advisors

implement workplace dispute resolution policy and procedures for their organizations that are consistent with this DAOD. ensure that their subordinates are given the opportunity to consider the various ADR options available to deal with their disputes.

Managers and supervisors

SOURCE REFERENCES Access to Information Act (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/A-1/) Canadian Human Rights Act (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/H-6/) Privacy Act (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/P-21/) Policy on the Prevention and Resolution of Harassment in the Workplace, Treasury Board Secretariat (http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/ hw-hmt/hara1_e.asp

DAOD 5012-0, Harassment Prevention and Resolution (http://hr.dwan.dnd.ca/harassment/) CANFORGEN 064/03 ADMHRMIL 022 071545Z MAY 03 Conflict Management Program—Guidelines for the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution Processes (http://hr.dwan.dnd.ca/CMP)

C H A P T E R 7 SYSTEM INTEGRATION

77

KEY LEARNING

KEEP POLICY STATEMENTS SHORT AND TO THE POINT
Keep your ADR policy statement short and clear. Too many organizations try to define, explain and provide detailed direction around their ADR initiative, to the point where it becomes more like an operations manual than a policy directive. A letter from the Commissioner of the RCMP to all its members became the core policy framework for the RCMP. The CANFORGENs issued jointly by the DM and CDS for DND/CF members and employees captured the essence of the ADR policy in a dozen or so lines. That’s all that was required to kick-start the initiative. The balance can be covered off and institutionalized in official collections (like the above DAOD), operational policies and procedures manuals later.

A key component of the harassment prevention and resolution policy and related guidelines is the prominent positioning of ADR options. A comprehensive ADR component was introduced into the guidance document. The opening paragraph of the Harassment Prevention and Resolution Guidelines sets the tone. It reads: It is well recognized that early resolution and/or use of ADR techniques usually provide for speedier and more satisfying resolution to conflict situations in general and harassment situations in particular. DND/CF has therefore made a conscious decision to include these mechanisms in its culture and leadership philosophy. In concert with this philosophy, DND/CF has decided to make serious consideration of these techniques and offer their usage, unless there are compelling reasons not to do so, one of the first steps in the resolution of any harassment situation. Additionally, such techniques may become appropriate at any time during the resolution of a complaint and should be utilized. The rest of the document, which I have included in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 8, goes on at length about the use of ADR in the resolution process. This is an excellent example of how related policies can be aligned to help create a fully integrated CMS, where messages and processes are consistent and in keeping with the ultimate goals of the organization.

DND/CF HARASSMENT POLICY AND ADR During the early stages of the CMP there were two separate harassment policies in place: one for civilians, the other for CF members.
Among CF members there was a perception that whenever there was an allegation of possible harassment, an administrative investigation was obligatory. This often led to confrontational, hard-line positions being taken and a further expansion of the conflict. The results of the investigation, or the decision of the responsible officer, would often lead to individuals filing a grievance consistent with current grievance procedures. Recognizing that this approach was counterproductive and that it was inconsistent with the goals of an integrated CMS, EDCM worked with appropriate institutions to institute change. After all, if you want to ensure the system will be used effectively, it is important to synchronize policies with intended outcomes. To change this cycle, the two harassment policies were combined. Strong, clear statements articulated how harassment should be handled. Among them were: Leaders and managers at all levels have a duty to take immediate steps to stop any harassment they witness or that is brought to their attention.

REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE POLICIES AND ADR The redress of grievances policy is another example of how rights-based policies can be aligned to reflect informal ADR processes.
CF members who believe they have been aggrieved by a decision, act or omission in the administration of the affairs of the CF for which no other process for redress is provided under the National Defence Act, and that is not specifically precluded in the Act or the Queen’s Regulations and Orders, have the right to submit a grievance up to and including the effective date of their release from the CF. The Canadian Forces Grievance Manual makes reference to ADR as another option for those considering, or having already commenced, the grievance process.

78

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

The published CF Grievance Process Matrix and flow chart has the following statement prominently displayed: Remember that Mediation Remains an Option Throughout. The document also states: Potential Grievors are encouraged to seek a solution to their concerns in the least formal and most appropriate means possible. The right to grieve does not preclude a verbal request for resolution directly to the Commanding Officer prior to submitting a grievance. Mediation is another option when both parties to the dispute agree to meet and seek resolution. Even after a grievance is submitted, so long as the relevant Grievance Authority has not yet rendered a decision, Grievors may still withdraw or suspend their grievances in favour of an informal resolution.

Their endorsement has been echoed by other leaders within the organization—union representatives, managers and the chain of command, not to mention the many disputants who have availed themselves of these processes and been satisfied—which has served to strengthen support for ADR processes. The buy-in from so broad a base has sent the message that the process works and that it benefits everyone. An effective communications plan has helped raise awareness, and a series of well-designed training programs—catering to the unique needs of the organization and reflecting its culture—has helped demystify ADR while also endowing participants with the knowledge and skills to apply interestbased processes in their day-to-day interactions. Those same interest-based processes have been applied in contexts other than conflict resolution and have proven successful. An example of this can be seen in the joint efforts of labour and management in developing and promoting the CMS. Both groups have recognized that a successful program is in their best interests and have actively worked to satisfy those interests—another example of alignment, this time between message and action. Finally, the integrity of the system has played a significant role in promoting the program and its related behaviours. Professionalism, openness, confidentiality, access, high ethical standards, impartiality and neutrality allow users to trust the system and feel comfortable using it.

KEY LEARNING

POLICIES DEALING WITH RIGHTS-BASED OPTIONS SHOULD INCLUDE REFERENCE TO RELATED INTEREST-BASED APPROACHES
If it is the intention of the organization to encourage the use of interest-based approaches, policies and guidelines for rights-based processes should include a thorough description of ADR options and processes.

ALIGNMENT WITH DND/CF BEHAVIOURS Senior leadership at DND/CF has been very visible in its support for ADR processes. They have not only talked about it, but have also actively participated in training and have used the processes in their own dealings. This has gone a long way toward making ADR a recognized and viable option of choice.

C H A P T E R 7 SYSTEM INTEGRATION

79

C H A P T E R

8

MEDIATION

Furthermore, within the workplace there is often a wide range of perceptions concerning the nature and scope of mediation. If confusion about the mediation process is prevalent, it can impede implementation of the project. For example, at DND/CF mediation was initially seen by some as a highly structured process, with narrow applications and rigorous rules (sometimes internally referred to as “big M” mediations); others viewed it as a very informal process, with few guidelines (“small M” mediations). Often these views stemmed from training that had been received from different training providers who held varying views about the subject. Other times it was a result of incomplete knowledge gleaned, in snippets, from sources that were themselves unclear on the concepts. Whatever the reasons, the constant debate over what mediation really was and how it should be approached made implementation and acceptance difficult. It is therefore critical to clearly define terminology at the outset. For example, at DND/CF mediation was defined by a number of characteristics, listed below. CMS designers may find these characteristics consistent with the goals of their own programs. They are: It is a negotiation between two or more parties that is facilitated by an organization-qualified or approved external, impartial mediator. It is voluntary for all parties. It is confidential within defined limitations. Parties agree on the selection of a mediator. An Agreement to Mediate is signed before mediation begins. Minutes of Settlement are drafted and signed at the conclusion of the process if an agreement is reached between the parties.

MEDIATION IN A PUBLIC SECTOR ENVIRONMENT
In simple terms, mediation can be defined as a negotiation in which an impartial third party assists disputants in their attempts to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. In most conflict management programs, mediation tends to be the ADR mechanism of choice and often is the key driver of such programs, particularly in the early stages. In the public sector, the public interest, the need for transparency of process, legislative requirements (e.g. the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act) and the related interests of central agencies (e.g. the Treasury Board or Public Service Commission) can produce a mediation environment that is often more complex than in the private sector. In some cases the existence of a parallel culture can further complicate the issue. This is very evident at DND/CF, where the military, with its own justice system and regulations, coexists with a civilian workforce that is subject to different employment conditions and regulations. While DND/CF is an extreme case, some similar conditions exist at the RCMP and Foreign Affairs. In other organizations this duality of cultures may be present between functional groups (e.g. operational versus policy folks or labour versus management).

80

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

ESTABLISH A COMMON VOCABULARY AND UNDERSTANDING AROUND THE TERMINOLOGY YOU ARE USING; BE AS PRECISE AS POSSIBLE
I’ve said this earlier, in a different context, but it bears repeating. Because people have very different perceptions about ADR and mediation, it is useful to have an upfront discussion with stakeholders, decide on operational definitions and standards, and communicate this within the organization. For example, at DND/CF we decided to use the term “mediation” only if there was an Agreement to Mediate signed by the disputants and where a successful mediation would lead to the signing of Minutes of Settlement. Other, more informal “assisted negotiations” were referred to as interventions. This proved very useful in moving the organization forward, beyond the distraction of semantic debate.

The DND/CF model was strongly influenced by the work in this area by leading mediators, including Chris Moore, Bernie Mayer, Roger Fisher, Frank Sander, Cheryl Picard and Gordon Sloan. The framework we developed consisted of five phases; however, we added an extra phase at the outset of the process, which we called the pre-mediation preparation.

P R E - M E D I AT I O N P R E PA R AT I O N — THE CONVENING PROCESS The pre-mediation preparation (sometimes referred to as meta-negotiation) is an important phase that is often overlooked or given inadequate attention. It is in fact a key step in the mediation process as it:
sets the tone; clarifies the process; defines the roles and responsibilities of all parties; provides an opportunity to establish trust; and permits disputants to agree on some less contentious issues (this can set a precedent for later agreement on issues that may be more contentious). DND/CF refers to the process whereby a third party neutral determines if individuals wish to avail themselves of an ADR process to help resolve their conflict as the convening process. The convening process involves: intake; assessment; and planning.

The need for clarity and understanding also goes beyond terminology. Standards, guidelines, roles, responsibilities and processes all need to be unambiguously articulated and disseminated throughout the organization, so they are both accessible and well understood.

THE PROCESS—STANDARDS AND PRACTICES
Very early in any conflict management project, it is important to develop a mediation model that will suit the organization’s culture and establish an element of consistency while allowing for flexibility where necessary. When designing that model there may be many options to consider, but a lot of these options are linked to the specific characteristics of the organization—its culture, institutions, size and so on. At the core, most models are based on the fundamental processes employed in common mediation practices.

T H E I N TA K E P R O C E S S The intake process is where an impartial person, usually the mediator:
determines if the parties are interested in resolving their issues through an ADR process; speaks to all parties involved in the conflict to understand the issues and the dynamics associated with the conflict; explains the ADR process to the parties and explores whether ADR is appropriate to the dispute and is preferred by the parties; ensures the parties have access to information on other options if they choose not to pursue mediation; and obtains the consent of the parties to proceed with ADR.

C H A P T E R 8 MEDIATION

81

The pre-mediation stage enables the mediator to get information on the problem and generally understand the conflict (the characteristics of the file, the participants, the nature of their conflict, their backgrounds). With this information, the mediator can structure a process that is most useful and comfortable for the parties. The mediator will establish a working relationship with the disputing parties by: contacting the parties and providing context for the intervention; building rapport with the parties; establishing personal credibility with the parties; informing the parties about the process and responding to related questions; providing a contextual understanding concerning ADR and the organization; and enhancing the confidence of the parties with the mediation process. In collaboration with the disputing parties, the mediator will select a strategy to guide the mediation. This is a coordinating function to ensure all parties understand the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches. The mediator will collect and analyze background information by: reviewing relevant data about the people, dynamics and substance of the conflict; and verifying points of contention and the accuracy of data. The mediator will prepare for the mediation by: outlining strategies that will enable the parties to move toward agreement; and identifying contingent approaches to respond to specific situations. The mediator will build trust and co-operation by: listening to the disputants; ensuring ADR is understood and is an informed choice; ensuring the right people are involved; building confidence and preparing the disputants psychologically; managing strong emotions; checking assumptions and perceptions;

not generalizing or stereotyping people; acknowledging the legitimacy of the parties and issues; being open and transparent; clarifying communications; and treating parties equally and fairly. The mediator will make parties aware that any of the parties involved in a mediation may, with the concurrence of the other parties, have support persons or expertise during the pre-mediation and mediation processes. A support person could be a union representative, harassment assistant, HR advisor, legal counsel, spouse or friend. At the same time, the mediator will encourage the parties to speak for themselves as much as possible rather than through a representative or supporting person. As well, the mediator will make all parties aware of the confidentiality provisions. At DND/CF, EDCM provided mediators with a checklist of intake guidelines. This document was not only helpful in ensuring that mediators covered all key steps, but also served to establish a common standard of practice across the organization. It read: Introduce yourself and put the party at ease through attentiveness and openness. Get a general overview of the circumstances that have led the person to approach the Dispute Resolution Centre. Determine if a rights-based process has been started, how the individual became aware of the DRC, what informal attempts have been initiated to resolve the conflict, etc. Provide information about ADR. Discuss the services available at the DRC. Provide an overview of the role of the third party neutral and the participants in various ADR processes. Discuss the parameters of confidentiality. Determine if the person requires information from process experts and inform him or her of appropriate contacts. Inform people that recourse to rights-based processes is not eliminated by a decision to try ADR processes. If applicable, discuss the need to suspend or extend timelines for formal procedures (abeyance, in grievances). Identify the people involved in the conflict.

82

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Confirm how other people in the conflict will be approached to consider ADR. Clarify the level of involvement, if any, of the chain of command. Arrange to meet the initial contact in person. Provide participants with documents describing ADR and DRC services. Complete a data collection form to record the contact details. Open a file. Assessment Before proceeding with an ADR intervention, an assessment must be made to determine whether this is the most appropriate approach. Some assessment guidelines include: Identify and understand the conflict issues and the participants’ goals. Encourage all participants to focus on their concerns (regarding the conflict, as well as the ADR processes), interests and objectives. Help participants consider the implications of the best and the worst possible outcomes of rights-based and interest-based processes (BATNA and WATNA) for themselves and the other people involved. Timing: Explain how long an ADR intervention may take and explore timing concerns and needs. Assess the motivation of people to resolve issues and their readiness to be open and honest. Identify those people whose advice, participation or agreement could be required in an ADR process to reach and follow through on an agreement. Ask the participants to evaluate whether the situation is appropriate for ADR. Determine whether the situation warrants informing the CMS coordinator. Evaluate whether the situation is appropriate for ADR intervention.

Determine whether participants wish to have an assistant (e.g. a union representative or legal counsel) and/or support person (e.g. friend, spouse) present in an ADR intervention. Determine ADR process accommodations or adaptations desired by the participants (forms of address, attire, language, safety considerations). Explain the agreement to participate in ADR interventions (Agreement to Mediate, Agreement to Conflict Coaching). Identify suitable third party neutrals (gender, civilian/ military, rank, culture, particular expertise or experience). Provide participants with a list of key questions that will assist them in preparing for an ADR intervention. Planning Planning is where the third party neutral organizes the mediation or other ADR intervention. Some planning guidelines include: Whenever more than one third party neutral is anticipated, determine the roles and responsibilities of each third party neutral and determine how feedback will be shared. Design or co-design the appropriate ADR process. Determine responsible centre for data collection. Determine budget for ADR intervention, including cost allocations and who is responsible for covering those costs, as appropriate and as needed. Ensure logistical preparations are in place (room, refreshments, flip charts). Address specific needs identified by the participants (health needs, breaks, etc.). Inform all participants in the ADR process of the arrangements made, preferably in writing. Getting agreement from all on the administrative and other details will not only ensure that parties are comfortable and prepared for the mediation, but will also establish, even before the really contentious issues are raised, that there are areas where the disputants can find accommodation. Though subtle, these minor agreements can help to create a positive atmosphere that can encourage co-operation and accommodation.

C H A P T E R 8 MEDIATION

83

THE FIVE-PHASE MODEL
The 12-stage mediation model described by C. Moore in his publication The Mediation Process served as a foundation for the design of the DND/CF model, described below: 1. Introducing the process: Setting the stage 2. Identifying the issues: What needs to be resolved 3. Exploring interests: What’s important and why (priorities, expectations, assumptions, concerns, hopes, beliefs, fears, values) 4. Generating options: Developing creative solutions 5. Reaching agreement: Commitments that are realistic, understood and operational

PHASE 3—EXPLORING INTERESTS Interests are underlying needs that a person wants satisfied or met. The mediator will uncover hidden interests of the disputing parties by:
identifying the interests and needs of the parties. These include: a) substantive interests—money, time, goods or resources; b) procedural interests—specific types of behaviour or the way something is done; and c) personal interests—how one feels, how one is treated, or conditions for an ongoing relationship; educating the parties about each other’s interests; encouraging an exchange of information among the parties through dialogue related to interests; exploring interests through the use of open-ended questions and listening skills; and gathering key interests into a statement of joint goals and inviting solution generating.

PHASE 1—INTRODUCING THE PROCESS This phase sets the stage for a collaborative approach to the negotiation, establishes a positive climate and generates further confidence in the mediation process.
The mediator: welcomes and encourages the parties; begins with a positive tone; establishes the ground rules; gets agreement on behavioural guidelines; attends to the signing of the mediation agreement and answers questions in relation to its content; raises issues for discussion and addresses topics that will not be covered; and opens the negotiation among the parties.

P H A S E 4 — G E N E R AT I N G O P T I O N S This phase helps parties identify creative, tailored and durable outcomes. The mediator will help in the generation of options by:
using brainstorming techniques; developing an awareness among the parties of the need for multiple options; moving parties away from fixed and limiting positions; generating options using interest-based bargaining approaches; and reality testing alternatives. The mediator will help in assessing the options for settlement by: using interests to assess options; using objective criteria or standards of legitimacy; assessing the costs and benefits of selecting options; and assessing the costs of not reaching a settlement.

PHASE 2—IDENTIFYING THE ISSUES This phase helps the parties explore what concerns they expect the mediation to solve.
The mediator will assist in identifying issues and setting an agenda by: identifying broad topic areas which are perceived to be of concern to the parties; getting agreement on the issues to be discussed; and outlining the sequence for the handling of the issues.

84

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

PHASE 5—REACHING AGREEMENT During the last phase the mediator helps the parties keep focused and draft the agreement they have reached in the form of Minutes of Settlement.
The mediator will assist the parties by: verifying that the agreement is achievable and sustainable; identifying procedural steps to operationalize the agreement; helping establish an evaluation and monitoring procedure; formalizing the terms of the agreement and drafting the Minutes of Settlement; helping create an enforcement and commitment mechanism; congratulating the parties; and communicating administrative handling of Minutes of Settlement.

EXTENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY Open and honest communication is a fundamental principle of mediation. To achieve this, parties must trust that their openness will not be used against them later. To that end, mediation should not be used to gather facts or information for use in another process, such as a complaint, grievance or legal process.
At the outset of a mediation, parties will be asked to agree upon the extent of confidentiality. In most cases they specify in the Agreement to Mediate that they will not discuss with persons outside the process the issues discussed in the course of the mediation. Confidentiality issues often present a substantial number of questions on the part of new mediators. Guidelines around the issues of, for example, the destruction of mediator notes following a mediation can be ambiguous and situational. On this subject, section 5 of the National Archives Act states that no record under the control of a government institution and no ministerial record shall be destroyed or disposed of without the consent of the National Archivist of Canada. However, the National Archives issued a document in 1990 entitled Authority for the Destruction of Transitory Records, which states that certain transitory records can be destroyed. Transitory records are defined as “those records required only for a limited time to ensure the completion of a routine action, or the preparation of a subsequent government record. Transitory records do not include records required by government institutions or Ministers to control, support or document the delivery of programs, to carry out operations, to make decisions or to account for activities of government.” DND/CF, like most government organizations, is sensitive to the destruction of material and this has resulted in a very cautious approach. Still, it has been determined that where the contents of the mediator’s notes are reflected in Minutes of Settlement or other record, they may be considered transitory and be destroyed. A mediator’s initial views, if they are not shared with anyone else and do not add value to the mediation itself, may also be considered transitory. At DND/CF, information provided by the parties in a mediation will be kept confidential by the mediator unless: the matter raised is of a potentially criminal nature; the mediator learns that impending harm may occur to the disclosing party or to another individual; a violation of the National Defence Act is required to implement the Minutes of Settlement where agreement has been reached; or

KEY LEARNING

DEFINE AND COMMUNICATE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF YOUR MEDIATION MODEL AND RELATED STANDARDS OF PRACTICE
There are several different mediation models to which organizations can subscribe. These include transformative models (Bush and Folger, The Promise of Mediation), narrative approaches (Winslade and Monk, Narrative Mediation) and interest-based approaches (Sander, Fisher, Moore). Some are more directive in nature than others. For large, geographically dispersed organizations where there is a great deal of change (e.g. military posting cycles), it is possible to use different approaches in different organizational units. It is important that the organization: consider the mediation options available to it; test different approaches if necessary; make a choice as to the most suitable model; and clearly define and communicate this throughout the organization. This should include the standards of practice that will be used.

C H A P T E R 8 MEDIATION

85

there is another predominant legal or policy obligation— for example, those reflected in the National Defence Act, the Queen’s Regulations and Orders, and other legislation, such as the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act. As well, parties may elect to waive confidentiality requirements. In some instances Agreements to Mediate include a clause indicating that all parties agree that the mediator’s notes will be destroyed. DND/CF and the Public Service Staff Relations Board currently use this clause.

Office of the DND/CF Legal Advisor—Directorate of Claims and Civil Litigation Judge Advocate General mediators

C L A S S I F I C AT I O N O F M E D I AT I O N DOCUMENTS Documents pertaining to the mediation process, including the case intake file, the Agreement to Mediate and the Minutes of Settlement, should be classified at a minimum Protected B (when completed) and safeguarded accordingly.

T H E R O L E O F T H E M E D I ATO R A standard of practice should be established to which potential mediators can be trained. This is especially true in large, diverse and geographically dispersed organizations. It is critical where mediators are being developed, tested and qualified internally, particularly when this qualification is reflected in their personnel files.
Clients interested in the mediation option are often particularly interested in the role the mediator would play. A simple handout, summarizing what a mediator does and does not do, can be a very helpful tool—for clients and mediators. The handout used at DND/CF stated that the role of the mediator is to: be impartial, not take sides provide a thorough explanation of the mediation process and establish ground rules with the parties help everyone listen, communicate and stay focused on the mediation shift the focus from one of blame to a creative exchange between the parties help the parties clarify the important issues and interests help identify the interests of the parties shift the focus from the past to the future, from positions to interests, from wants to needs help develop realistic options deal respectfully with all the parties help the parties finalize their Minutes of Settlement The role of the mediator is not to: take sides give advice on the legal implications of the agreement provide his or her own opinions take responsibility for the issues solve the issues

ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND STANDARDS FOR THE PARTIES TO A MEDIATION
In the early stages of a conflict management project, there is often confusion or, at least, a lack of familiarity with the roles and responsibilities of the organization’s institutions and individuals as they relate to ADR and mediation. When individuals—whether they are acting as representatives of an organizational institution/Office or as an advocate for one or more of the parties—are brought into the mediation process, their specific roles, responsibilities and standards of conduct need to be clearly articulated. It can be helpful to identify individuals and institutions that may commonly be asked to participate in the mediation process and to describe what they need to know and what is expected of them. At DND/CF these descriptions included the roles of: Executive Director Conflict Management Dispute Resolution Centre Coordinators environmental commands and group principals Commanding Officers supervisors and managers union representatives human resources representatives

86

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S O F T H E PA RT I E S A N D M E D I ATO R S TO T H E M E D I AT I O N P R O C E S S Entering into a mediation carries with it certain responsibilities and standards of behaviour, for interested parties as well as mediators. It should not be assumed that these will be intuitively understood or known.
As well as defining the general role of mediators, it is therefore useful to prepare and distribute to interested parties an outline of some of the responsibilities of the disputing parties, and of the mediators, to the mediation process itself. An example of the outline used at DND/CF is reproduced below and can be adapted to the needs of your organization.

not limit his or her role to regulating conflict or “keeping the peace” at the bargaining table; be prepared to assume the role of a resource person to assist the parties in successful negotiations by providing procedural or substantive recommendations when called upon to do so; understand his or her inherent authority and the responsibility that comes with it; understand that the mediator must demonstrate integrity, objectivity and fairness to ensure an effective mediation process; demonstrate—in addition to positive character— intellectual, emotional, social and technical attributes in written and oral communications to the parties; not make false, misleading or unfair statement or claim as to either the benefits of the mediation process or his or her skills, role or qualifications; reveal all monetary, psychological, emotional, associational or authoritative affiliations that he or she has with any of the parties that could cause a conflict of interest or affect the mediator’s actual or perceived neutrality; recognize that if any of the parties feel that the mediator’s background will have or has had a potential to bias performance, the mediator should disqualify himself or herself from the mediation process; demonstrate behaviour that is impartial and non-adversarial; recognize that information received in confidence or in a private session, caucus or joint session with the parties is confidential and should not be revealed outside the negotiations without the express consent of the party(ies); understand that if any of the parties require or are receiving psychological treatment, the mediation process should be suspended, as such treatment may impair the judgment of the parties; mediation is not a substitute for therapy; recognize that the objective of mediation is to present and promote a process that is seen as fair and equitable by all parties and to assist the parties to that end; ensure that a written statement or the terms of settlement of the mediation are signed by the parties; understand that the mediator’s satisfaction with the agreement is secondary to that of the parties;

R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S O F T H E PA RT I E S TO T H E M E D I AT I O N P R O C E S S Given that parties agree to the mediation process voluntarily, the parties should:
participate in the mediation in good faith using honest and open communications; where possible, negotiate without the mediator’s assistance; where necessary, initiate an intervention; assume responsibility for the resolution of a dispute; and respect all provisions as reflected in the Agreement to Mediate.

R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S O F D N D / C F M E D I ATO R S TO T H E M E D I AT I O N P R O C E S S Given that mediation is a participatory process, the mediator should:
educate the parties about the mediation process and encourage their involvement where appropriate; understand that a specific mediation intervention is important not only to the situation at hand, but also to future conflicts in which the parties may be involved; promote mediation as applicable in many, but not all, cases… it is not a universal remedy to resolve all disputes; be familiar with other dispute resolution mechanisms in the event that mediation is not appropriate; ensure that the resolution mechanism recommended to parties is appropriate to the situation at hand and the desired outcome;

C H A P T E R 8 MEDIATION

87

in the event of an agreement that the mediator feels is illegal, grossly inequitable, the result of false information, the result of bad faith or impossible to enforce, or which may not hold over time, pursue certain of the following alternatives: – inform the parties of the difficulties seen in the agreement, – inform the parties of suggestions that may remedy the problems, – withdraw from the process without disclosing to any party the reason, and – withdraw from the process, but disclose in writing to all parties the reason for such action; not offer legal advice to any party but, instead, refer the parties to appropriate legal counsel; make the parties aware of deadlocks in the mediation process and recommend termination of the process to the parties where appropriate; not allow prolonged, unproductive discussions that result in increased time and emotional costs for the parties; and avoid any appearance of disagreement with or criticism of co-mediators.

not attempt to mediate in an unfamiliar field; seek a co-mediator when required or refer cases to other qualified mediators who are trained or experienced in a specific field, where this expertise is required; and support the organization’s code of ethics.

I N D E M N I F I C A T I O N O F, A N D L E G A L A S S I S TA N C E F O R , C R OW N E M P L OY E E S A common question asked by mediators working in a public sector environment is: “How vulnerable am I to being personally sued?”
This is a legitimate concern since, as a result of the performance of their duties, public servants can be instructed to appear before the courts or other tribunals, be sued personally or be charged with an offence. In such cases they may be entitled to legal assistance, including representation at public expense, or in the event of an award of damages against them, to indemnification by the Crown. The provision of legal assistance to, and indemnification of, public servants is governed by the Treasury Board’s Policy on the Indemnification of and Legal Assistance for Crown Servants. The policy authorizes Ministers, Deputy Ministers and Deputy Ministers’ delegates to approve the provision of legal assistance, at public expense, to public servants on the advice of the Department of Justice. The policy does not include persons engaged under a contract for services, with the exception of Ministers’ exempt staff. Public servants may request legal assistance when, arising from the performance of their duties, they are: required to appear before, or to be interviewed in connection with, any judicial or investigative tribunal, inquest or other inquiry; sued or threatened with a suit; charged or likely to be charged with an offence; or faced with other circumstances that are serious enough to require legal assistance. A deputy head may approve a request for legal assistance if satisfied that the request arises from the performance by the servant of his or her duties and the servant has met “reasonable departmental expectations.” The term “reasonable departmental expectations” is not defined in the policy and is generally given a broad interpretation. The policy provides that servants will be indemnified against personal civil liability incurred by reason of any act or omission within the scope of

R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S O F T H E M E D I ATO R TO THE PROFESSION Mediators are skilled professionals. They learn their profession through a variety of opportunities, such as formal training or education, workshops, practical experience, coaching and supervision. They adhere to strict codes of conduct and ethical guidelines and act in a responsible, appropriate and professional manner in the conduct of their duties. They recognize their responsibilities, not only to their clients, but also to their profession. As such, they strive to:
meet the minimum standard for mediators in their organization; be responsible for upgrading their skills and theoretical background and endeavour to better themselves and their profession through continuous learning; promote the profession and make contributions to the field by encouraging or participating in research, publishing or other forms of professional and public education; practise only in areas of mediation in which they are qualified by either experience or training;

88

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

their employment or duties “so long as they acted honestly and without malice.” Unless there are extenuating circumstances, no legal assistance at public expense is authorized for a mediator who has clearly stepped beyond the scope of assigned duties. In civil cases the Department of Justice will, in most instances, provide legal advice. The policy includes provisions addressing the circumstances in which private counsel may be retained and the circumstances in which the public servant may be personally responsible for payment of legal fees. When the Department of Justice has conducted the defence, it is the practice of the government to pay, out of public funds, any judgment, including costs, against the servant, as long as the servant is entitled to indemnification under this policy. In cases involving offences, payment by the Crown does not include any fine or costs of prosecution. The costs of legal assistance paid by the Crown will be recovered from the public servant should it be determined, during the course of the proceedings, that s/he was not acting within his or her scope of duties or employment.

Self-determination is the fundamental principle of mediation. It requires that the mediation process rely upon the ability of the parties to reach a voluntary agreement. Further, any party may withdraw from mediation at any time. Impartiality A mediator shall conduct the mediation in an impartial manner. The concept of mediator impartiality is central to the mediation process. A mediator shall mediate only those matters in which she or he can remain impartial. If at any time the mediator is unable to conduct the process in an impartial manner, the mediator is obliged to withdraw. Conflict of interest A mediator shall disclose all actual and potential conflicts of interest reasonably known to the mediator. A conflict of interest is a dealing or relationship that might create an impression of possible bias. The basic approach to questions of conflict of interest is consistent with the concept of self-determination. The mediator has a responsibility to disclose all actual and potential conflicts that are reasonably known to the mediator and could reasonably be seen as raising a question about impartiality. If all parties agree to mediate after being informed of conflicts, the mediator may proceed with the mediation. If, however, the conflict of interest casts serious doubt on the integrity of the process, the mediator shall decline to proceed. A mediator must avoid the appearance of conflict of interest both during and after the mediation. Competence A mediator shall mediate only when the mediator has the necessary qualifications to satisfy the reasonable expectations of the parties. Any person may be selected as a mediator, provided that the parties are satisfied with the mediator’s qualifications. Training and experience in mediation, however, are often necessary for effective mediation. A person who offers herself or himself as available to serve as a mediator gives parties the expectation that she or he has the competency to mediate effectively and meets the appropriate DND/CF standards. Confidentiality A mediator shall maintain the reasonable expectations of the parties with regard to confidentiality.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR MEDIATORS
It is important to establish, have approved and publish—early in the project—the ethical standards expected of mediators. These standards act as a “touchstone” to guide mediators in the fulfillment of their obligations. At DND/CF the ethical standards were prepared in collaboration with key stakeholders such as the Defence Ethics Office and approved by the CMP Steering Committee. The DND/CF Defence Ethics Program served as a starting point for the development of the mediation ethical standards. The standards for mediators by the ACR, the American Bar Association and the ADR Institute of Canada provided additional guidance in the preparation of DND/CF’s standards. The document outlining the DND/CF ethical standards for mediators was approved and published and made available to mediators as well as stakeholders. It represents a minimum of what can reasonably be expected of mediators providing services within the organization. The contents of that document appear below: Self-determination A mediator shall recognize that mediation is based on the principle of self-determination by the parties.

C H A P T E R 8 MEDIATION

89

The mediator shall meet the reasonable expectations of the parties with regard to confidentiality. The parties’ expectations of confidentiality depend on the circumstances of the mediation and any agreements they may make. The mediator shall not disclose any matter that a party expects to be confidential unless given permission by all parties or unless required by law or other public policy. Quality of process A mediator shall conduct the mediation fairly, diligently and in a manner consistent with the principle of selfdetermination by the parties. A quality process requires a commitment by the mediator to diligence and procedural fairness. There should be adequate opportunity for each party in the mediation to participate in the discussions. The parties decide when and under what conditions they will reach an agreement or terminate mediation. Advertising and solicitation A mediator shall be truthful in advertising and solicitation for mediations. Advertising (or any other communication with parties) concerning services offered or regarding the education, training and expertise of the mediator shall be truthful. Mediators shall refrain from promises and guarantees of results. Obligations to the mediation process A mediator has a duty to improve the practice of mediation. Mediators are regarded as knowledgeable in the process of mediation. They have an obligation to help educate the public about mediation; to make mediation accessible to those who would like to use it; to correct abuses; and to improve their professional skills and abilities.

As organizations may wish to consider another framework which can be modified to serve their own purposes, I have included the Australian Defence Force description (taken directly from their document) in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 9.

KEY LEARNING

IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE A CODE OF ETHICS FOR MEDIATORS WHICH IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE ORGANIZATION’S BROADER STATEMENT OF ETHICS AND CAN SERVE AS A COMPASS WHEN MEDIATORS ARE FACED WITH ETHICAL DILEMMAS
The development of ethical standards for mediators not only serves to provide guidance to mediators, but also gives the mediator the authoritative framework to respond to demands which may be inappropriate (e.g. a senior official requests confidential information). Ensure these standards are formally accepted at the senior decision-making level of the organization. Furthermore, since the document is available to everyone within the organization, it speaks to all employees, not just mediators. As such, it is another effective communications tool that adds to the integrity of the program while providing both information and reassurance.

MEDIATION TOOLS— THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
As noted earlier, DND/CF made a distinction between the terms “assisted negotiation,” which referred to very informal interventions, and mediation, which described a more formal (though not rights-based) third party ADR intervention. This differentiation went beyond mere semantic hairsplitting. In fact, mediation was distinguished from more informal interventions by the development and signing of key documents that helped articulate goals, understandings, processes and decisions. These documents lent weight, authority and structure to the process and provided touchstones and concrete evidence of progress within the mediation.

CODE OF ETHICS: AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE FORCE The Australian Defence Force’s Defence Instructions include an annex outlining a code of ethics with which registered defence ADR practitioners must comply. The code of ethics described in the ADF Instructions go into greater detail around specific standards of practice than does the DND/CF’s more general statement of ethics. Either model works well.

90

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

T H E AG R E E M E N T TO M E D I AT E The Agreement to Mediate is the key document to the commencement of the mediation process. Parties are normally asked to sign an Agreement to Mediate at the first joint session of all disputants. Copies are usually provided to them in advance of the mediation to assist in advancing the process.
This document gives the mediator the mandate to proceed and confirms the parties’ willingness to proceed. The Agreement to Mediate provides the mediator with legal protection by DND/CF, provided that s/he is acting ethically, in good faith and within the bounds of the Project’s prescribed mediation process. It outlines roles and responsibilities of the mediator and participants and specifies the issues that are to be mediated. The DND/CF Agreement to Mediate model was developed by EDCM in collaboration with the Office of the DND/CF Legal Advisor and the Office of the Judge Advocate General. Key items in the Agreement to Mediate include: Authority to Settle Generally the mediator will ensure that those who have the authority to settle the dispute are involved in the mediation process. Occasionally, if the responsible authority cannot be at the table, the mediator can make arrangements to ensure that the parties have access by telephone or some other means to this person. Without Prejudice Communication This means that the information exchanged during the mediation process cannot be used in any future proceedings regarding the issue in question. In other words, if a mediation does not result in an agreement between the parties, the parties have the right to continue with any other redress processes that may help them resolve their complaint. However, the information provided and discussed during the mediation cannot be used in any of those proceedings. Mediation cannot be used as a fact-finding tool by any of the parties. Termination of the Mediation In keeping with the concept of self-determination, any party may terminate the mediation at any time in the process. Similarly, if the mediator feels parties are not acting in good faith, or for any other reason, he or she may choose to terminate the process.

Disclosure of Information Within the context of the Agreement to Mediate, the mediator will not disclose information discussed during the process unless the parties specifically and unanimously consent or, exceptionally, as ordered by an appropriate authority. Indemnity and Compellability This clause confirms that the parties will not bring lawsuits against the mediator, nor will the mediator be called upon to testify at any subsequent proceedings. A basic template was developed and modified as circumstances warranted and I have included it in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 10.

MINUTES OF SETTLEMENT Normally, the drafting and signature of the Minutes of Settlement concludes the mediation process. The mediator will usually draft the minutes and present them to the parties for review and signature. The mediator does not usually sign the Minutes of Settlement.
A suitable agreement should normally be: Substantive. It will define specific tangible exchanges (money, services, labour and so forth) that will result from the negotiations. Unambiguous. It will be worded clearly and precisely. Achievable and legal. It will be possible to implement and meet all legal requirements. Comprehensive. It will address all key issues in a dispute. Enduring. It will be sustainable over the long term. Final. It will include all elements in their final form and constitute full and final settlement of the complaint. Clear about implementation time frames. Items for action by specific participants in the mediation include dates for completion. Unconditional. It will provide for the termination of the dispute without the requirement of future conditional performance. Binding. It will bind the parties and, where possible, identify the consequences if a party does not comply.

C H A P T E R 8 MEDIATION

91

The agreement will often include the term “for valuable consideration.” In legal terms, this means: “…that which is given, done or forborne in return for the promise or act of another party. Consideration may be a promise to do or forbear from doing something, or some loss or detriment suffered. It is normally a payment, transfer of goods, provision of services or surrender of another legal claim. It is not anything which the individual is already under an obligation to do. It must be of some value, but not necessarily value equivalent or adequate to the promise.” Once agreed to, the minutes are signed by the parties affected by the agreement and they are provided with a copy. A sealed copy is kept in the Dispute Resolution Centre. Since the mediator has no involvement in the execution of the agreement, the mediator does not sign the Minutes of Settlement. Support persons (such as union representatives or legal representatives) would normally be asked to sign to signify their agreement to respect the confidentiality of the settlement. In some cases, they also commit to clauses in the Minutes of Settlement. Once signed, the Minutes of Settlement become a contract between the parties. When completed and signed, the Minutes of Settlement are annotated “Protected B” and safeguarded accordingly. A sample Minutes of Settlement relating to the conduct of a hypothetical grievance is included in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 11.

KEY LEARNING

ENSURE ALL MEDIATION DOCUMENTS/TEMPLATES AND RELATED PROCESSES ARE PREPARED IN COLLABORATION WITH, AND REVIEWED BY, THE APPROPRIATE LEGAL AUTHORITIES
It is important that the mediation process be conducted in a manner that can withstand all legal scrutiny and that all related documentation be prepared within the parameters of sound legal standards. For this reason we considered it very important to prepare templates in collaboration with the Offices of the Legal Advisor and Judge Advocate General to cover specific recurring situations, particularly in relation to elements included in the Agreement to Mediate and Minutes of Settlement. The correct legal terminology is very important, and the preparation of templates, language and clauses acceptable to departmental legal authorities is critical, particularly where practitioners have limited legal backgrounds. Bring in Legal Services (if the program is not housed within that organizational unit) early in the process.

RETENTION OF DOCUMENTS The to Mediate and the Minutes of Settlement are retained by the DRC or EDCM for a minimum of five years. Signatories are given a copy. If persons who are not present at the mediation need a copy of the Minutes of Settlement or the Agreement to Mediate for administrative purposes, all parties to the mediation agree to the release of the document and make note of this in the Minutes of Settlement.
As part of the monitoring function, the CMS program authority (at DND/CF this is the Director General Conflict Management Program) may review the Minutes of Settlement to ensure that professional standards are being maintained. Contracts awarded to external service providers indicate that the intervention will be conducted in accordance with DND/CF guidelines and that the supplier will use the standard Agreement to Mediate and Minutes of Settlement. As well, the external supplier provides a copy of the Agreement to Mediate and the Minutes of Settlement to the responsible DRC or to DGCMP.

A D M I N I S T R AT I V E C L O S U R E TO T H E M E D I AT I O N F I L E Where administrative action is required as an outcome of a mediation, parties obligated to take action will require direction. In some instances, with the concurrence of the parties to the mediation, the Minutes of Settlement will be provided to the appropriate individuals within the organization, even though they may not have been directly involved in the mediation.
If, for example, the responsible officer, as specified under the organization’s harassment or grievance policies, requires a copy of the Minutes of Settlement in order to bring closure to the process, this should be discussed between the parties at the beginning of the mediation and so indicated in the Minutes of Settlement. For certain grievances the Canadian Forces Grievance Authority will accept a signed annex to the minutes, which contains specified agreed-upon clauses. Examples of documents used in instances where there is full or partial settlement of a grievance have been included in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 12 and Tool 13 respectively.

92

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

SEPARATE TEMPLATES SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FOR THE CLOSURE OF FILES RELATED TO DIFFERENT REDRESS APPLICATIONS OR THE REQUIREMENTS OF DIFFERENT UNITS WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION
Different organizational units may have their own, unique requirements in order to close files. Templates will need to take these requirements into consideration.

The completion of these evaluation forms enabled program managers to analyze and determine strengths and areas for improvement. The type of analysis conducted is demonstrated in the following two graphs. These are based on the returns of 68 questionnaires which were completed at the conclusion of a series of mediations. They provide useful information on both the mediation process and the mediators.

Evaluation of Mediation Process Based on 68 Returns
100 80 60 40 90% 87% 86% 86% 81%

74%

A D M I N I S T R AT I V E C L O S U R E — I N F O R M I N G THE MANAGER To provide administrative closure to a mediation requested by a manager or unit, the mediator will send a memorandum or letter to that unit and provide the following information:
The mediation between Party A and Party B was conducted on (date) to address (identify issue that was mediated); The matter was resolved to the satisfaction of all parties; or It was not resolved and is therefore referred to the appropriate administrative mechanism; No further involvement is required on the part of the DRC mediator; and Questions may be referred to the DRC. All such correspondence is classified and marked PROTECTED B.

20 0
I received a good explanation about the process. The mediation was worth the time and effort. The mediation facilities were adequate. I would recommend mediation to others. I understand the other party’s perspective better. The other party understands my perspective better.

Evaluation of Mediator at Based on 68 Returns
100 94% 93% 93% 93% 90% 89% 88% 86% 85% 80 60 40

E VA L UAT I O N O F M E D I AT I O N S A N D M E D I ATO R S To ensure that individual mediations meet program standards and that mediators meet expectations, all mediations are evaluated by the participants. This generates feedback that will enable continuous program improvement and enhance the skill levels of mediators. These learnings are shared among other program officials and mediators who make up the community of practitioners. An evaluation form and return pre-addressed envelope are given to the parties at the conclusion of the mediation. A sample evaluation form is included in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 14.

20 0
Dealt respectfully with all. Acted in accordance with guidelines. Good explanation of process. Fair and impartial. Helped everyone listen. Clarified issues and interests of parties. Satisfied with minutes of settlement. Facilitated realistic options. Identified common interest.

C H A P T E R 8 MEDIATION

93

KEY LEARNING

KEY LEARNING

EVALUATE THE MEDIATION PROCESS IMMEDIATELY UPON THE PROVISION OF SERVICES
There is a tendency in many conflict management programs to wait until a number of mediations have been conducted before initiating an evaluation regime. As well, mediators are often reluctant to recognize the importance of this and either neglect to hand out evaluation forms or fail to convey the importance of this to the participants, who should be completing and mailing them to the coordinating office. Completing an evaluation of the mediation is very important to ensure the quality of the process and sustain ongoing modifications and improvements. The evaluation process should begin early in the program, as soon as the first mediation is conducted. With the start of the conflict management program, managers should implement a monitoring process to ensure evaluations are completed. Mediators should understand that facilitating the completion and return of evaluation forms is their responsibility and that they will be held accountable for this requirement.

PREPARE AND DISTRIBUTE FACT SHEETS ON THE MEDIATION PROCESS EARLY IN THE PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Clients often want only a simple, straightforward overview of what the mediation process is all about so they can assess its appropriateness for their situations or better prepare themselves for an intervention in which they will be involved. The use of fact sheets based on questions and answers can fulfill this need very effectively.

M E D I AT I O N C H E C K L I S T S At DND/CF we found it useful to prepare checklists for officials who might have an overall responsibility or accountability for the provision of mediation services, either directly or indirectly, within their organizations. These individuals found it helpful to have these clear guidelines around the process.
A good example of this is the checklist prepared for Base Commanders. The following summary of the Commanding Officer’s Checklist for Mediation was in the Chief of the Defence Staff Guidance to Commanding Officers workbook. This was distributed to all Base Commanders to provide guidelines to ensure the consistent application of the process. It read: Commanding Officer’s Checklist for Mediation: Have the parties agreed to attempt mediation? Are all directly interested parties (to the degree possible) at the table? What additional people will be present at the mediation? Should the mediator be empowered to bring other people into the process if he/she feels that their presence would enhance the mediation? Are the parties at the table represented by people with enough authority to agree to a final resolution? Have the issues to be mediated been identified? Has a process to select a mediator been established?

M E D I AT I O N FAC T S H E E T S B A S E D O N F R E Q U E N T LY A S K E D Q U E S T I O N S At DND/CF potential users of the mediation process frequently made inquiries about the process and how they might use it to address their own circumstances. Based on these inquiries, we prepared fact sheets with frequently asked questions, which could be distributed to interested parties. These were also included on our Web site.
An example of one of these fact sheets, prepared at an early stage of the Project, is included in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 15.

94

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Is there a mechanism for selection if the parties are not able to agree on a mediator? Does the mediator need to be bilingual? Has a mediation agreement been entered into which includes: – the mediator’s mandate, – a provision for a written agreement if the dispute is resolved, and – the confidentiality of the process? Have the date and time of the mediation been determined? Has a neutral location been chosen? Have limits been set on how long the mediate session will take? Have any special requirements been met (i.e. translation, wheelchair accessibility)? Has a procedure to be followed been established and agreed upon by all parties? Does the mediator have the authority to set the mediation procedure? Is there a provision for disclosure? Will the disclosure be in advance or as required by the mediator? Is it established who will draft the agreement? Will any eventual agreement be subject to independent legal advice?

T H E M E D I AT I O N P R O C E S S A N D M E D I ATO R COMPETENCIES In the chapter on training I described a number of mediator competencies which form the basis for the training and qualification of mediators. This includes, among others, competencies identified by the ADR Institute of Canada. The Institute’s competency framework also gives a good perspective of effective mediation processes. Viewing mediator competencies in relation to processes makes sense, as good mediation processes are largely a function of good mediator skill sets.
The skill sets of ADR Institute Charter mediators are presented in four areas: administrative procedural relationship facilitation Key recommendations, supported by specific actions, are presented within each area. An outline of the document follows:

A D M I N I S T R AT I V E Organize and conduct the practice of mediation in an efficient and effective manner.
Organize and maintain office systems. Work within the system/rules governing the accepting and handling of engagements. Allocate time, effort and other resources. Organize the required needs of the mediation.

KEY LEARNING

Bring the engagement to completion.

CHECKLISTS CAN BE VERY USEFUL FOR A SUMMARY REVIEW OF RESPONSIBLE PARTIES; DIFFERENT PARTIES WILL HAVE DIFFERENT NEEDS, SO THEY SHOULD BE CUSTOMIZED FOR EACH USER GROUP
Mediation checklists are useful as reference points for stakeholders; however, these should be designed separately and customized for different stakeholder groups such as commanders, legal counsel, unions and mediators to reflect their specific needs.

PROCEDURAL Recognize the nature of the dispute and establish clear understandings, concerning the process, with and between the parties.
Determine legitimacy and jurisdiction. Establish clear understandings. Supervise the preliminary meeting. Deal with preliminary matters.

C H A P T E R 8 MEDIATION

95

R E L AT I O N S H I P Instill and maintain a positive relationship and good communication.
Maintain a positive relationship. Listen effectively. Speak effectively. Maintain a conducive atmosphere during the session.

FAC I L I TAT I O N Conduct the mediation session using fair, flexible and effective procedures, skills and techniques.
Conduct a fair session. Promote an assertive tone. Deal with high emotion. Organize and analyze data. Deal with the issues. Surface needs and interests. Advance the process. Bring closure and achieve settlement. The complete document is worth reading. It appears on the Institute’s Web site (www.adrinstitute.ca), but for the sake of convenience I have also included it in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 16.

96

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

C H A P T E R

9

CONSIDER COACHING AS A KEY COMPONENT WHEN ESTABLISHING A CMS AND RELATED SERVICES
Organizations considering a comprehensive CMS based on ADR should consider the inclusion of conflict coaching. This would include consideration of standards of practice, qualification standards, training, operational policies and procedures. Many organizations add coaching or similar processes to their client services after the mediation function is in place and well grounded. While it may represent a substantial capacity-building challenge for system designers, developing a coaching program (and other services) at the same time as the mediation program can help both stakeholders and clients better understand how all the services within the CMS relate to each other.

COACHING FOR CONFLICT COMPETENCY

THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SPECTRUM
Mediation and arbitration are often considered the centrepieces of ADR-based systems. When evaluating those systems we tend to measure their success by the extent to which rights-based processes such as grievances, harassment complaints and litigation are replaced with interest-based interventions, particularly mediation. This is a narrow view of ADR and does not allow for the full potential of an integrated CMS. An effective CMS makes use of a wide spectrum of activities, ranging from interest- to rights-based processes. Coaching may play a role in several of these functions, especially around self-directed or third-party-assisted initiatives, as illustrated below.

Conflict Management Specrum

Interest-Based

Rights-Based

Prevention initiatives • training • Ombudsperson • ADR centres • teambuilding

Self-directed “issue-resolution” initiatives • negotiation • coaching • dialogue/consultation • collaborative inquiry

Third party assistance • mediation • facilitation • coaching • workplace conferencing • conciliation

Advisory processes • early neutral evaluation • peer panel • mini trial

Adjudicative processes • arbitration • management decision • litigation • board/tribunal

C H A P T E R 9 COACHING FOR CONFLICT COMPETENCY

97

COACHING
The term “coaching” can mean different things to different people. For some it conjures up images of some edgy guy in a too-tight sports jacket pacing behind a players bench while barking instructions in clipped, staccato bursts. Well, yes … and no. While that may be accurate in a hockey arena, it has little to do with coaching in a conflict management context. Other people may picture a silver-haired gentleman in a $500 suit sententiously doling out advice based on years of experience, but that image is more suited to mentoring, a term which is often confused with coaching. A mentor provides advice and answers to questions that are based on his or her own experiences; a coach coaxes and guides, so that the coachee can better develop and access his or her own competencies. It’s about helping others see things they don’t normally see about themselves and the culture around them. It empowers the coachee to realize his or her own potential. By enhancing individual competence, it increases organizational capability. In practice, conflict coaching is similar to the emerging field of executive coaching and draws heavily upon its principles; however, while executive coaching usually takes a broad approach, dealing with a multitude of competencies related to leadership and good management, conflict coaching is more targeted and specialized in application. Coaching, in the context of ADR and conflict management, is a relatively new discipline with largely undefined standards of practice. Many conflict management practitioners have been conscripted as coaches and have been very effective in helping parties reflect on their approaches to conflict and create enhanced awareness and skill sets to address the conflict with which they must deal. However, the function appears to be used more as an informal service than as a rigorous discipline. With the emerging importance of coaching in a conflict management context, there is considerable work to be done in articulating the conceptual underpinnings and practice standards around this discipline.

F O U R A P P L I C AT I O N S F O R CONFLICT COACHING In the context of any conflict management program, a number of conflict coaching applications or models may be implemented. I have identified four major applications in this domain and characterize them as follows:
Client-focused conflict coaching—This refers to the coaching function that may be applied in an ADR practitioner/client relationship, where a qualified individual provides coaching services to a client who is experiencing difficulties in dealing with conflict, either broadly or around a specific situation or issue. The client-focused conflict coach may focus upon long-term competency enhancement or a shorter-term, specific issue. Mediator competence coaching—This coaching function is used to enhance the capacity of another ADR practitioner, normally a mediator. The mediator competence conflict coach normally focuses the coachee on knowledge, skill and actions. Mediation coaching—In this application the focus is on coaching one of the parties involved in a mediation, beyond that level of support normally provided by the mediator. This application may also be characterized as “negotiating and mediation” coaching. In this capacity the coach provides assistance in preparing the party for the mediation and its various interest-based processes. This coach may also attend the mediation with the party and assist the individual and his or her representatives (e.g. lawyer or union representative) in being most effective in the mediation. This commitment involves a much shorter time frame, as it centres on a specific mediation. Since this practice is usually dispute-specific and concentrates largely on process advice around a particular issue, it tends to be more consultative in nature, rather than focusing on a long-term, competency-enhancing relationship. The peer conflict coaching circle—Peer coaching circles bring peers together to reflect on specific workplace conflict challenges and to consider how best to manage them. This practice leads to enhanced learning about conflict and about themselves as conflict-resolvers. The peer conflict coaching circle may include mediators as peers, or individuals as a group or team within an organization. Coaching circles are consistent with the principles of a learning organization and may be viewed in that context as action learning groups.

98

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

D I F F E R E N T I AT I N G F E AT U R E S O F THE FOUR CONFLICT COACHING A P P L I C AT I O N S / M O D E L S The four conflict coaching applications or models can be differentiated as follows:
Focus—The focus of a coaching intervention can vary. It may centre on a client wishing to enhance conflict management competencies, or on mediators and their need to enhance and sustain their mediation abilities, or on peers wishing to help each other through coaching circles. Scope—The scope of an intervention can vary from coaching around anything within the ADR spectrum to coaching directed only on mediation. Orientation—The orientation of an intervention can be around accomplishing a specific task/resolving a specific issue, or enhancing long-term performance/behaviour. Time frame—The time frame for an intervention can be short if it is around a specific mediation or long if it is related to enduring competency enhancement. Service delivery—The way a coaching intervention is delivered may differ according to the needs each application demands. In some client-focused coaching interventions, the client may need extensive face-to-face contact … in peer coaching situations, e-mail might suffice. In most instances a combination of face-to-face, telephone and e-mail approaches is appropriate; however, this will be a function of the circumstances at play. Relationship—The nature of the coach/coachee relationship will vary from one which requires a high degree of trust (client-focused), to one which is more directive (mediation), to one of joint learning (peer). Trust is key in all these models. Confidentiality—Although confidentiality is central to all coaching relationships, it plays a more prevalent role in some models (e.g. client-focused) than others (e.g. peer coaching circles).

Directed to what/whom—The coaching intervention may focus on the needs of the individual, the organization, or a group or team within the organization. Often it is a combination of these elements; however, the client-focused intervention will have more of an individual orientation than, for example, the peer coaching circle, which will be more team-oriented. Accountability—In all four models both the coachee and coach assume accountabilities for the outcomes. Peer coaching circles assume a broader, collective accountability. Contribution to results—The coach and coachee will contribute to the results of the intervention to different degrees, according to the model. The client may play a more significant role in the client-focused model, whereas the coach’s role may be more significant in the mediation coach model.

KEY LEARNING

BE CLEAR ABOUT COACHING OBJECTIVES AND ENSURE COACHING MODEL(S) ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THOSE OBJECTIVES
Before deciding which application/model is most appropriate, consider your objectives. A clear understanding of your requirements will dictate the model you choose.

C H A P T E R 9 COACHING FOR CONFLICT COMPETENCY

99

The following chart illustrates some of the different features of the four models. It is important to note that this demonstrates tendencies, not absolutes, and that each case will be different according to each situation.

D I F F E R E N T I AT I N G F E AT U R E S O F T H E F O U R C O N F L I C T C OAC H I N G A P P L I C AT I O N S / M O D E L S
CLIENTFOCUSED COACH MEDIATOR COMPETENCE COACH MEDIATION COACH PEER CONFLICT COACHING CIRCLE Peer-oriented ADR spectrum Performance/Behaviour

Focus Scope Orientation

Client-oriented ADR spectrum Performance/ Behaviour Medium-Long In person, phone

Mediator- oriented Mediation Task

Client- oriented Mediation Issue

Time frame Service delivery

Medium In person, e-mail, phone Authority, More advisory, expertise Medium Individual and Organization Joint Coach and mediator play significant role

Short In person, e-mail, phone Authority, More directive High Individual

Medium-Long In person, e-mail

Relationship

Partnership, High levels of trust High Individual

Partnership, Joint learning Medium-Low Team/group and Individual Collective Peers play significant role jointly

Confidentiality Directed to: individual/organization Accountability Contribution to results

Joint Client plays significant role

Joint Coach plays significant role

THE CONFLICT COACH Conflict coaching is a relationship of mutual commitment, dedicated to improved client performance in the prevention and resolution of conflict. Although this is generally focused on conflict of a specific nature, where coaching clients wish to improve their dispute resolution abilities it can also take in the broader aspects of conflict management.
The conflict coach focuses on: developing a coach-client relationship based on trust, mutual respect and open, candid communication;

enhancing long-term, enduring capabilities in preventing and dealing with conflict, as well as shorter-term client interests around specific issues; facilitating the journey of client self-discovery and self-correction capacities; developing client capacity for continuous self-learning and improvement in conflict management; ensuring clients hold themselves responsible for their own progress in reaching goals; providing a framework for self-reflection and perspectives that will lead to enhanced conflict competency; and

100

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

ensuring a practical, outcome-based approach to addressing the conflict raised by the client. The conflict coaching process generally helps individuals (coaches/clients) to: attain a higher level of performance; clarify their conflict competency objectives (around a specific conflict or conflict in general); understand and measure how well they are currently doing in attaining their goals; recognize what impediments exist to the attainment of these objectives; decide what constructive actions they will take to overcome these impediments; and determine what steps they will take to self-correct and enhance their capacity to deal with similar circumstances in the future.

In the intake process an agreement describing the coaching relationship should be established. It may include: coach’s and client’s respective responsibilities; what is, and is not, included; the coaching methodology; logistics and scheduling; who will be involved; time frames; confidentiality; and professional standards and ethical guidelines. Establishing the coaching relationship—A good relationship between the coach and client is the foundation of conflict coaching success. The coach will engage in a series of steps to build a good rapport with the client. This will involve creating a coaching environment that is safe and supportive and leads to trust and respect for each other. In doing this the coach will: demonstrate sincere concern for the welfare of the client; allow for freedom of expression and candid conversations; ensure confidentiality; demonstrate integrity and honesty; seek permission to explore sensitive issues; live up to his/her word; be flexible; be open-minded and non-judgmental; validate progress being made by the client; deal with emotional or difficult issues in a sensitive manner; and adhere to standards of conduct and ethical guidelines (such as those of the International Coaching Federation). The depth of the coaching relationship and the commitment of the parties will influence the scope of the process. This could include such things as giving advice, resolving a conflict, improving a skill or changing personal priorities. Diagnosis and assessment—This normally focuses on two things: the client and the conflict.

THE PHASES OF CONFLICT COACHING There may be several approaches to conflict coaching; however, most of them are based on seven phases:
background and intake establishing the coaching relationship diagnosis and assessment alignment and commitment coaching communication follow-up and accountability Background and intake—This initial phase involves an examination of the background to the conflict and those factors that led an individual to consider the conflict coaching option. This will influence the nature of the coaching intervention. If, for example, the client is interested in coaching because s/he recognizes a deficiency in the handling of conflict, the coaching relationship will be different from one in which the “interest” is the result of a direct “suggestion” from his or her supervisor, or there is a business need. Conflict coaching usually emerges from a situation where an individual is immersed in a particular conflict and seeks assistance. The client recognizes the value of this assistance in a broader context, and this often leads to a longer-term coaching relationship.

C H A P T E R 9 COACHING FOR CONFLICT COMPETENCY

101

In relation to the client, the coach will want to gain a better insight into the client’s: understanding of, and ability to prevent and deal with, conflict; interests and concerns around interpersonal behaviours; daily operating environment and mode of operation; assumptions and perceptions; goals and motives for having these goals; and definitions of success. In relation to the conflict, the coach will seek to understand: what happened; why the client thinks it happened; what the client’s reaction was and if this is typical; what the client’s perception was of the appropriateness of this reaction; the reactions of others; the consequences; and interests and options. Alignment and commitment—Before proceeding with the coaching process, the coach will want to ensure that there are no false assumptions and that there is alignment among the coaching goals, the process and procedures, the responsibilities of all parties and the commitments all parties are prepared to make. The clarification of objectives will include an enhanced understanding of: priorities of the client; where coach and client should start; the most pressing issues; what needs to happen; what success looks like; and short- and longer-term considerations.

Coaching—The coaching conversation can take different forms, depending upon the coaching objective. This can vary from enhancing a specific conflict management competence to bringing about fundamental change. It will usually involve: confirming that the client wishes to pursue a particular direction/topic; understanding the client’s desired outcome; examining the thinking behind the behaviour/ communication that was exhibited; looking at other behavioural options; and reviewing the supporting measures the coach may provide. Conversations may relate to the exploration of new possibilities, relationships and courses of action. Communication—The communication skills that conflict coaches demonstrate are similar to those demonstrated by effective mediators. They include: the capacity to surface difficult issues in a sensitive manner; empathetic, attentive listening; constructive feedback; questioning, to encourage further self-reflection on the client’s part; speaking in a clear, direct, but compassionate manner in order to bring about constructive outcomes; and observing body language. Follow-up and accountability—Conflict coaching is a well-defined process, with start and end points. It involves a shared commitment on the part of all parties, and progress should be evaluated on an ongoing basis.

102

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

CORE COMPETENCIES FOR COACHING
T H E I N T E R N AT I O N A L C OAC H I N G F E D E R AT I O N The International Coaching Federation has identified 11 coaching competencies which it uses as the foundation for its coach credentialing process. These core skills, with the addition of ADR skills, are also applicable to conflict coaching. They include:
Meeting ethical guidelines and professional standards. In this regard, the Federation has published standards of conduct and guidelines, as has the ADR Institute of Canada, for mediation and arbitration. Setting the foundation and establishing the coaching agreement. This deals with process and relationship issues. Co-creating the relationship, including establishing trust and intimacy with the client. This involves demonstrating integrity, honesty and genuine concern for the client’s welfare. Creating a coaching “presence” with the client. This includes a style which is confident, open and flexible. Active listening, to understand the client’s objectives, values and needs. This involves the words that are spoken, how they are said and the body signals that add to further understanding. Powerful questioning that stimulates further insight and clarity. Clear, articulate, direct and appropriate communication. Facilitating learning and creating further awareness on the part of the client. The coach will make interpretations from several sources of information and not rely solely on the client’s interpretation of the facts. Designing actions that will most likely lead to the results sought from the coaching intervention. This may include brainstorming, experimentation, testing assumptions and advocating the consideration of new approaches. Developing and implementing an effective, measurable and attainable coaching plan with the client. Managing the progress of the intervention so as to move the client closer to the intended goals and ensure that accountabilities are respected.

KEY LEARNING

HAVE WELL-DEFINED STANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR COACHING AND SPECIALIZED TRAINING TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE COMPETENCIES ARE IN PLACE
When coaching is introduced as a component of an organization’s conflict management and is offered as a service to clients within the organization, it is important to ensure that standards of practice for the coaching function are well defined and articulated and that appropriate coaching competencies either exist within the unit providing services or can be readily accessed externally. Some organizations believe that because individuals are well trained in conflict management and are qualified mediators, they are qualified to be conflict coaches. This is not necessarily the case. Conflict coaches require specialized training according to rigorous, well-defined training standards.

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
The DND/CF Conflict Management Program’s objective was to prevent or resolve conflict at the earliest stage, at the lowest possible level. We anticipated that as the Program matured, we would see increased movement from rights- to more interest-based processes and the prevention of disputes. In effect, this would be a movement from the right to the left side of the spectrum, described earlier in this chapter. We expected mediation to reduce, for example, the focus on grievances or harassment redress procedures. Similarly, we anticipated that with proper training and coaching, over time individuals would be equipped to resolve disputes themselves rather than relying on the assistance of a mediator. Part of this training would be interest-based negotiation and conflict resolution. We also recognized that in many instances coaching would be necessary. This has subsequently proven to be the case.

C H A P T E R 9 COACHING FOR CONFLICT COMPETENCY

103

In the early stages of the DND/CF Conflict Management Project, I assumed the role of the conflict coach, but these interventions were usually case-specific and provided only to senior executives who were facing particularly challenging issues. In these instances coaching was used in the place of a mediation. The DND/CF Conflict Management Project did not, however, include a comprehensive conflict coaching component, though elements of this were included in the training for the Mediator Qualification Program (see chapter on training). In retrospect, I believe we should have considered conflict coaching as a service right from the beginning, and I would recommend this course of action to those considering a CMS for their own organizations.

As the DND/CF project moved on into the program stage, a conflict coaching component was added. It is also interesting to note that, as I write this, a Conflict Coaching for Managers Course is being developed as a direct response to a request made by the DND Managers’ Network and its ADM Champion, who see this as an essential management tool.

104

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

C H A P T E R

10

WORKPLACE ASSESSMENTS

Workplace assessments are a valuable tool in conflict competent organizations, as they can often help resolve issues that are at the root of workplace conflicts. In resolving the root problems, many of the interpersonal disputes that plague an organization can be prevented at the source. This, in turn, normally leads to a healthier workplace, with improved satisfaction and productivity. In a continuous learning environment, healthy organizations consider workplace assessments a best practice, which permits management to monitor the workplace with respect not only to work practices, but to the overall work culture as well. An assessment allows an organization to establish a benchmark on a range of issues, set clear targets for the future and assess the progress over time. The capacity to assist managers in organizing workplace assessments should be addressed in the establishment of an integrated CMS. For a variety of very valid reasons, most organizations will choose not to conduct such assessments themselves. Still, they will want to take a leading role in determining the model and related standards most appropriate to the organization. They should also assume a role in the facilitation of the workplace assessment process for clients. There are many differing perceptions of what a workplace assessment is, what it might accomplish and how it should be conducted. An array of private service providers offer a broad range of approaches, and choosing the one that is best for you can be daunting. Understanding the needs, goals and expectations of the organization can help determine the type of intervention that is most appropriate.

WORKPLACE ASSESSMENT AS A CONFLICT MANAGEMENT TOOL
Conflict usually manifests itself in disputes among individuals and is commonly focused on specific issues, relationships or circumstances; however, in some environments conflict may be quite pervasive, affecting an entire organization or unit within the organization. The disputes arising within these environments may seem, on the surface, to be interpersonal in nature or issue-specific, but this is not always the case. Symptoms, such as an increased use of sick leave, grievances, harassment complaints, high attrition rates, mistrust and poor performance, often indicate that underlying sources of friction are at the root of a broader malaise. When conflict in the workplace negatively affects employees and detracts from a healthy and constructive work environment, managers may wish to identify the nature and causes of these problems in a comprehensive and objective manner. A workplace assessment, which can be done with small teams or large work units of several hundred employees, provides managers with the means to identify the sources of the conflict and the actions necessary to improve the health of the organization.

USING EXTERNAL CONSULTANTS
Workplace assessments are usually undertaken by experienced, external consultants. Their neutrality, both perceived and real, is key to the success of the activity. Employees and managers seem to be reassured when independent, professional consultants with a reputable track record undertake workplace assessments. Consultants are perceived as being more neutral, objective and independent than departmental officials.

C H A P T E R 1 0 WORKPLACE ASSESSMENTS

105

Furthermore, being external to the organization is an asset in assuring confidentiality. This is particularly true in public service organizations, where openness from employees might be curbed because of concerns over Access to Information Act and Privacy Act requests. While a workplace assessment report, once submitted to management, is accessible through the Access to Information Act, the information provided to the consultant in the data-gathering phase would not be subject to a request. The selection of the consultant usually depends on the size of the group, the level of financial resources available and the time frame in which the project must be completed. Consultants should be familiar with the principles of research design and organization development to ensure the methodology is sound.

include time to develop questionnaires and other tools. Another phase could include time for completion and return of questionnaires, focus groups or interviews. A final phase could outline the time required by the consultant to analyze information and prepare a final report. In the end, the proposal should clearly specify the deadline for submission of the report to management. The communications strategy—The consultant should indicate how and what information is to be communicated to employees/members and how their concerns are to be addressed to ensure the widest participation. The proposal should specify if the consultant is to be involved with management in explaining the reasons for the assessment and whether the consultant will be required to draft letters or e-mails to employees/members for management’s signature. Methodology—The consultant should indicate which tools will be used to obtain information from employees/ members, how the participants will be selected for focus groups or interviews and how confidentiality will be ensured. The report—The proposal should specify the deadline for the submission of the report to management and employees. It should also specify the form of the report, whether it will be bilingual, whether it will be made available to employees in paper or electronic format, and when it would be provided to employees. Proposed cost—The submission should outline the proposed cost of undertaking the assessment. If you are planning to create a request for proposal, it may be worthwhile to review the sample RFP contained in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 1. While that RFP was designed for a different purpose, many of the elements remain applicable.

KEY LEARNING

WORKPLACE ASSESSMENTS SHOULD BE CONDUCTED ONLY BY AN INDIVIDUAL OR CONSULTING FIRM EXTERNAL TO THE ORGANIZATION
Any workplace assessment should be done by a neutral external party for it to be viewed as a credible process by employees. Ensure that full confidentiality is built into the process.

H I R I N G E X T E R N A L C O N S U LTA N T S — REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Where a workplace assessment is to be undertaken by an external consultant, written proposals should be requested. Proposals should include the following:
The goal of the assessment—What the workplace assessment is attempting to achieve. Time frames—Start and end dates, as well as timings for critical phases of the project, should be stipulated. For example, there could be a design phase during which the consultant meets with management and possibly union representatives to discuss reasons for the workplace assessment and the issues to be addressed. This phase would

COSTS Since workplace assessments are undertaken to provide information to management about the nature and cause of conflicts in the workplace, the organizational units should assume the costs associated with the study. Management is also responsible for the implementation of the findings and recommendations and any associated costs (the need to retain the services of organizational consultants to deal with leadership or management training, coaching, etc.).

106

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

WORKPLACE ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES
At DND/CF, EDCM, with assistance from the consulting firm Watson Wyatt, developed guidelines to help both service providers and clients navigate through the process. These overarching guidelines, while DND/CF-specific, are applicable in most situations.

environment. At their best, such assessments not only lead to the resolution of existing conflicts, but also make it possible for teams to discuss how future conflicts can be either avoided or dealt with more effectively. Sources of workplace conflict may include: the personal behaviours of supervisors, managers, co-workers or clients in the workplace; organizational issues (communications, staffing and classification; ratios of supervisors to employees, etc.); other issues unique to the workplace (such as shift work, use of consultants); work practices; the culture of the workplace—positive and negative aspects; the incidence of discrimination, harassment or abuse of power; and how well the team or group work together and why or how.

W H AT I S A W O R K P L AC E A S S E S S M E N T ? A workplace assessment is an objective study of the perceptions of all employees, including managers and supervisors, to determine what impact a number of different problems or issues have on the work environment. Workplace assessments measure an organization’s “health” by identifying what works well and what doesn’t. The information gathered often opens the door to implementing concrete measures to improve leadership and human resource practices.
Management may undertake workplace assessments when there are symptoms of organizational or interpersonal conflict. These may include a significant number of grievances or harassment complaints, or conflicts between supervisors and employees, those between peers, or those between units within the organization. Union representatives may also voice their concerns during union-management consultations or during informal discussions with management. A workplace assessment can be completed within four to six weeks in smaller organizations, within two to three months in larger ones.

METHODOLOGY—THE TOOLS The three most common methods or tools used to obtain information from employees about workplace conflicts are questionnaires, interviews and focus groups.
Questionnaires are cost-effective tools for gathering comprehensive information, especially where the group being surveyed is large. They consist of a series of closed and open-ended questions. Because open-ended questions allow respondents to elaborate or to raise matters not otherwise specifically addressed, they often provide valuable insights into the sources of discontent within an organization. Responses are always kept confidential. One-on-one interviews by the consultant with all or a representative sample of employees and supervisors can be most effective if the participants are concerned about confidentiality or there is a need to probe deeper into the issues identified in a survey. Where the group is large, interviews are usually conducted with a randomly drawn, stratified, representative sample. To ensure the sample is not biased, the consultant generally makes selections based on information provided by management. Focus groups are less resource intensive than interviews since several employees can meet with a consultant at one time to discuss workplace issues. Focus groups can be held with or without the prior completion of a written questionnaire.

HOW DOES IT WORK? A workplace assessment allows an organization to:
identify the underlying reasons for the conflict; determine the extent of the conflict in the organization; validate the results by team members; discuss issues that give rise to the conflict in an open and constructive manner; and identify and agree on how to resolve the conflicts. Workplace assessments are especially effective because they are not designed to point fingers at specific individuals. Rather, they are a means of compiling information provided by employees and managers to produce a report that focuses on problem trends and patterns—the bigger picture. Workplace assessments enable people to discuss difficult matters constructively to find ways of improving the work

C H A P T E R 1 0 WORKPLACE ASSESSMENTS

107

Depending on the size and nature of the workplace, focus groups can be structured in different ways; however, managers, supervisors and employees are usually placed in separate groupings so that each group can feel free to express its views openly. Groups can be composed of employees from the same section or, if the organization is large enough, across the different sections of the organization. In a workplace where employees are from both official language groups, it may be appropriate to hold separate focus groups. In a conflict-ridden workplace where employees are concerned about the confidentiality of their views, focus groups may not be appropriate. In small groups (less than 20), interviews could be held with all or most employees, supervisors and managers. In order to cover the same ground with all participants, consultants should use a prepared list of questions. In medium to larger groups, all employees, supervisors and managers could be asked to complete a confidential questionnaire. In addition, either one-on-one interviews of employees or focus groups could be held to enable participants to expand on the information provided in the questionnaire. In both cases, use a set list of questions. Participants should come from a stratified, randomly selected group of employees, usually selected by the consultants.

Leadership or management style may be identified as a source of discontent or conflict. While individuals are not identified in the report, it may be apparent to whom the reference applies if management or leadership style is identified as an issue, particularly in smaller work units. If management commits to taking action based on results of the workplace assessment, failure to implement changes will likely lead to greater dissatisfaction and poorer morale.

STARTING THE PROCESS
Once a manager has decided to undertake a workplace assessment, steps should be taken to solidify buy-in and participation in the process, both of which are key to the success of the initiative. Identifying a champion—A management champion should be appointed to steer and promote the workplace assessment. The level/position of the champion may signal the level of management commitment for the initiative. Conveying key information—Before a workplace assessment begins, management should address and try to mitigate any employee feelings of fear, distrust or skepticism by communicating to everyone (through e-mail, memorandum or meeting) the rationale behind the assessment, as well as its objectives, the steps required, the approach and the time frame. Time permitting, information sessions with the consultant are a useful means of describing the process in greater detail and of answering questions. Such openness will tend to mitigate negative perceptions about the process. Confidentiality—Employees are likely to seek reassurance that the information provided to the consultant during the research phase would be confidential. Management commitment—Management should state clearly its intent to act on the findings of the assessment. Participation—A high participation rate is important, particularly in small and medium-sized organizations, to ensure that the views of the full team are captured. When participation is low, results can be difficult to interpret. For example, does the assessment reflect only the views of those who are most satisfied or dissatisfied? Management buy-in—Getting buy-in from middle managers and supervisors at an early stage is key. They should be informed of the objectives of the workplace assessment and have the opportunity to voice concerns. Middle managers and supervisors may have valuable views about the assessment, especially about the

BENEFITS There are numerous benefits associated with workplace assessments, including:
improved morale; identification of areas that work well, upon which employees and managers can build; quick identification of sources of conflict so that remedial action can be taken; improved conflict competence within the organization; and tailor-made approach—the assessment can be tailored to the needs of each workplace.

RISKS Despite the many benefits related to workplace assessment, management should be aware that there are some risks involved:
Assessments may not satisfy all employees; some sources of discontent or conflict may be individual and not widely shared.

108

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

information-gathering and action-planning phases. Any concerns that the workplace assessment will point a finger at certain individuals should be dispelled. If convinced the workplace assessment is beneficial, managers are more likely to also become its champion. Union consultation—In a unionized environment, the manager should consult with union representatives about all aspects of the assessment. By representing their members’ concerns, union representatives provide valuable input into the process. Their endorsement of the workplace assessment may increase the level of participation and confidence of employees in the process. Also, union representatives will likely play a significant role in the implementation of the action plan following the release of the report. Validation of information—Employees should be given an opportunity to ensure the areas to be probed by the consultant are relevant to their workplace. If the team is small, all team members can comment on the questions that will be posed during the information-gathering phase. In larger teams or organizations, a small advisory committee of employees and managers can be consulted. Employees who are not part of the advisory committee can provide input by means of a suggestion form. Involving employees in this initial stage gives them tangible signs of both the transparency and inclusiveness of the process.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the information extracted from the data-gathering phase, the consultant prepares a report which is submitted to management. The results are usually shared with employees and supervisors as soon as possible. If time and resources permit, the consultant may present the findings to supervisors and employees and address any questions that might arise. It may be necessary to provide the report in both official languages, depending on the linguistic profile of the employees. A typical report usually includes an executive summary, an introduction, and the consultant’s findings regarding such areas as leadership, management style, work practices and interpersonal interactions. The report normally concludes with a summary and a number of recommendations. A typical table of contents would appear as follows: Executive Summary Introduction Context and Purpose Methodology Information-gathering Process Section 1—Leadership

D I AG N O S I S — G AT H E R I N G I N F O R M AT I O N Consultants and management usually meet to determine whether the appropriate methodology to be used for collecting information will be the anonymous questionnaire, the one-on-one interview, the focus group or a combination thereof. Whatever the choice, however, it should ensure that the widest possible cross-section of employees is consulted. In very small groups it may be preferable to gather information through individual interviews, since there may be insufficient numbers of participants to get the necessary quantitative information through a survey.
It is usually best to have this phase well planned and done as quickly as possible to minimize any operational disruptions and reduce any anxiety employees may have regarding the assessment. Because workplace assessments may generate fear and concern among managers and employees, which in turn may affect productivity and morale, the workplace assessment should be completed as soon as possible. Employees may also be concerned about the time they will need to devote to this initiative, especially if their workload is high and the unit is understaffed.

Quantitative Results Qualitative Results Summary of Results Recommendations Section 2—Management Style Quantitative Results Qualitative Results Summary of Results Recommendations Section 3—Work Practices Quantitative Results Qualitative Results Summary of Results Recommendations

C H A P T E R 1 0 WORKPLACE ASSESSMENTS

109

Section 4—Interpersonal Interactions Quantitative Results Qualitative Results Summary of Results Recommendations Section 5—Conclusions Appendix A—Questionnaire Appendix B—Focus Group/Interview Questions

If the cause of organizational conflict is related to systemic problems (such as leadership, communication, culture, management training), help with the action planning phase and with the implementation of specific human resource initiatives could come from organization development consultants, who can provide assistance with team-building, coaching for leadership development and communications skills. Management may wish to reassess the workplace at a future time to determine how much progress and improvement has been made. Such a formal follow-up workplace assessment should not be undertaken any earlier than 6-12 months after the report has been tabled, as most changes take time to implement.

IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Management is ultimately responsible and accountable for taking action on the findings and recommendations outlined in the report. The initiatives they will have to take will depend on the results of the assessment; however, management should consider the following principles: Having committed at the outset to act on the consultant’s findings, management is expected to implement some or all of the recommendations or risk even lower morale, more conflict and skepticism from the employees. Management should regularly inform employees of the progress of implementation. Over the following months employees should receive periodic progress reports until the organization has implemented the necessary changes. Management may wish to involve employees and supervisors in the implementation process. In a small team all could be involved; in larger work units a committee of employees and managers could be established to advise management. For example, teams or a committee might prioritize issues and recommend to management that a limited number of issues be addressed immediately, while others are delayed until these are implemented. Where the findings point to a need for conflict resolution advice, training or interventions, managers should be encouraged to consult with their local CMS resource. (At DND/CF this is the local Dispute Resolution Centre.)

KEY LEARNING

DON’T CONDUCT A WORKPLACE ASSESSMENT IF THERE IS NO COMMITMENT TO TAKE ACTION ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS
If you conduct a workplace assessment, you create expectations that action will be taken. If no action is taken, more damage will occur than if the workplace assessment had not been undertaken.

THE ROLE OF THE CMS SERVICE PROVIDER
Where management intends to undertake a workplace assessment for the purpose of identifying the sources of conflict in a workplace, local CMS service providers (at DND/CF this is the DRC) can offer advice and support to management and unions in matters related to the processes. In doing so, they should maintain their role as neutral third parties. Local CMS service providers can: provide the name or names of qualified consultants; assist in the evaluation of proposals from consultants and advise on contracting procedures; advise on the communications strategy; and at the request of management, provide specific conflict resolution services in response to the report’s recommendations.

110

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

If local CMS service providers are uncertain about their roles or the type of advice best suited to the circumstances, they should consult with the CMS central authority to discuss any problems or seek advice on different aspects of the request.

KEY LEARNING

IT IS USEFUL TO HAVE UNIFORM, CONSISTENT STANDARDS FOR WORKPLACE ASSESSMENTS ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION
If you elect to include workplace assessments as a service offered by your organization, ensure that you have clearly defined policies and service standards associated with these initiatives. There is a tendency for large organizations to have different versions of workplace assessment processes. This should be avoided.

At DND/CF a CANFORGEN regarding human subject research was issued in December 2002. It stipulated that all research activities involving humans—including surveys— would have to be approved by the Director Human Resources Research and Evaluation. In accordance with this directive, a process was established whereby DRCs contacted EDCM to report that a workplace assessment was being requested and discussed any problems or sought advice on different aspects of the request. Once informed, EDCM acts as the conduit between the DRC and the Director Human Resources Research and Evaluation in order to have the methodology approved. Throughout the process DRCs maintain their role as neutral third parties while providing advice and support to management and unions in matters related to workplace assessments processes. The DRC support consists of: provision of the name or names of qualified consultants; assistance in the evaluation of the proposals from consultants; advice on contracting procedures under the Conflict Management Program National Master Standing Offer;

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
As noted earlier, DND/CF chose to include workforce assessment as a component of its CMS. Recognizing the significant advantages to having this activity run by an external consultant, DND/CF focused on its capacity to assist in the process rather than deliver it. Because DRCs were being established across the country to provide conflict resolution advice, training or interventions, they were in an ideal position to provide advice on workplace assessments. Their reputation for confidentiality, professionalism and knowledge related to conflict resolution made them an obvious point of contact for managers who might be concerned about conflict situations within their units. EDCM provided all DRCs with the Workplace Assessment Guidelines (outlined earlier in this chapter) and briefed DRC staff to ensure they understood when to recommend assessments and how to assist managers in implementing them. DRCs were encouraged to consult with EDCM to discuss problems or seek advice on different aspects of the request.

recommendations on the communications strategy; and at the request of management, provision of specific conflict resolution services in response to the report’s recommendations.

C H A P T E R 1 0 WORKPLACE ASSESSMENTS

111

KEY LEARNING

C H A P T E R

11

TRAINING

PREPARE DETAILED TRAINING FRAMEWORKS AND OUTLINES TO GUIDE LEARNING PROGRAMS; “OFF-THE-SHELF” PROGRAMS WILL NOT GENERALLY SUFFICE FOR GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATIONS; DON’T PROCEED WITHOUT THE COMPLETION OF TRAIN-THE-TRAINER PROGRAMS
One of the biggest challenges for large organizations initiating training to a critical mass of individuals in dispersed regions and organizational units is consistency. Although many providers characterize their training programs as, for example, interestbased negotiations, in many respects they are quite different. We benchmarked many of these offerings. All were valid in their own contexts, but different. If you expect to meet a standard across a large organization, you will need to provide direction around the key themes and messages you expect to be covered. Do not provide a rigid and inflexible “script.” This stifles the trainers’ creativity and the unique value they bring to the group. Still, it is necessary to provide detailed resource material (including case studies and simulations) around the subject matter you need covered. In addition to the provision of the appropriate material to trainers, it is important to have a trainthe-trainer session for all trainers, including those who may be experienced in a particular functional area but not necessarily in the context of a specific government department or agency.

CORE TRAINING PROGRAMS
Broad-based and specialized training are key components of any successful CMS and should be included very early in the project. The effect on the organization will go well beyond learning; it will also have an impact on the overall acceptance of the program and will plant the seeds of behavioural and cultural change. In considering a training program, several factors will need to be addressed. What type of training is required? How much and to what level? Who will deliver it? What are the target audiences? How do you assure accessibility and consistency in large non-centralized organizations? Who pays for what?

MAKE OR BUY?
Once again the question of make or buy arises, and once again there are advantages and disadvantages to either option. That said, the options in this case may be limited— particularly in the initial stages. Training is key to a CMS from its inception, so the first challenge will likely be capacity. How and where do you find enough competent trainers to meet the substantial and immediate needs of the organization—especially if it is geographically dispersed and culturally and functionally stratified? Since the project is still in its infant stages, the chances of finding that capacity from within the organization are negligible. Contracting out may be the only viable option. While this resolves the capacity dilemma, it may not address the issues of consistency or specific organizational needs. Many external providers will offer ADR training, but approaches may vary widely from one to the next. And while they may know the policies and behaviours prevalent in some environments, they may not fully understand the unique culture of your organization. To resolve these issues, CMS designers will have to establish their own standards and have service providers trained to these standards. Working with stakeholders and contractors, they will determine the approaches they wish to embed in their training programs. Establishing, approving and/or

112

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

contributing to course curricula will be necessary. In effect, the organization will be training the trainers they hire, by providing them with direction and insights into the organization’s policies, procedures and culture. Ongoing evaluation, consultation with stakeholders and benchmarking of training programs will help in the development and standardization of training. Maintenance of a training program delivered entirely by external service providers may be expensive, so building internal capacity should be part of the long-term CMS plan. As training evolves and course benchmarks and content are solidified, standards for trainers should be established. Organizations that have set up dispute resolution centres as part of their CMS infrastructure may wish to develop internal trainers and offer courses from within these local service delivery centres.

TRAINING—WHAT AND FOR WHOM?
While there are many courses and training programs worth instituting, it’s best to keep things simple in the initial stages. Three core training courses/programs should be considered: Conflict Management and ADR Processes Interest-Based Negotiation and Dispute Resolution Mediator Qualification Program (MQP) As well, organizations may want to add two support programs—one on conflict coaching and the other on group interventions and facilitation. When contemplating these courses/programs, determine the goals, scope and target audience for each offering. In the development of training products, be sure to align content with the organization’s needs, policies, procedures and culture.

KEY LEARNING

NOT EVERYONE HAS THE APTITUDE TO BE A GOOD TRAINER
In today’s workplace we often hire people for their expertise in one area while assuming they have competencies in others. For example, we may hire an engineer for her expertise in avionics, but we also expect her to manage the project. The two skills aren’t necessarily compatible. While project management can be learned, aptitude and experience will certainly influence performance. The same applies to trainers. Being an excellent mediator or administrator doesn’t necessarily ensure the individual can also be an excellent trainer. Since training is a key element in the promotion and development of a CMS, it is important to ensure that trainers are exceptional. When training internal trainers be sure to choose candidates who demonstrate the appropriate competencies, aptitudes and interest.

THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND ADR PROCESSES COURSE The objective of this course is to provide participants with an understanding of workplace conflict, ADR processes (with a focus on mediation) and the application of these processes to workplace disputes within the organization. It is a knowledgebased training event with limited skill/attitudinal modules. In most instances this is a one-day session.

KEY LEARNING

KEEP TRAINING EVENTS SHORT AND WELL FOCUSED
Workload has been the number one concern of public servants for many years and the situation is not likely to change dramatically in the foreseeable future. It is also a high priority in the private sector. As a result, individuals are often torn between the long-term benefits of training and the short-term cost of leaving work to pile up while on course. Limiting course length can be key to accessibility and participation. Finding the balance between course length and content is therefore essential. In some cases breaking course elements into stand-alone modules can help to resolve this.

C H A P T E R 1 1 TRAINING

113

This is an orientation or introductory course and would usually be a prerequisite to any further training. The target audience is broad-based—ADR users, particularly those who may be recommending/advising or participating in mediations. The course is intended to provide participants with an understanding of: the organization’s integrated CMS; the relevant policies and procedures; the dispute resolution (DR) spectrum; the role of effective communication skills in DR processes; the key processes in the DR spectrum; the types and causes of conflict; the interest-based negotiation (IBN) process; the mediation process; how to access the mediation process; and how to use the mediation process.

KEY LEARNING

DON’T TRY TO DO TOO MUCH IN AN ORIENTATION COURSE; KNOWLEDGE AND AWARENESS ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN SKILLS DEVELOPMENT
This is an orientation session to familiarize potential users with ADR concepts. It provides context; it does not focus on skills. Don’t aim for skill enhancement with a course of this type. Focus on awareness enhancement.

T H E I N T E R E S T- B A S E D N E G O T I AT I O N A N D DISPUTE RESOLUTION COURSE The objective of this course is to provide participants with a basic understanding of the IBN process and where it fits within the organization’s CMS. It should also introduce and permit the practice of basic negotiating skills. Participants
EVENT REMARKS

TIME 0830–0900 0900–0930 0930–1015 1015–1030 1030–1100 1100–1200 1200–1300 1300–1430 1430–1445 1445–1615 1615–1630

Introductions and opening remarks Policies overview Understanding conflict in an organizational context Health break Understanding conflict cont’d Communication skills Lunch Interest-based negotiation Health break The mediation process within the organization Wrap-up Video Role Play Practical Context Conceptual

114

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

should take part in several negotiation role plays (the DND/CF course uses four of these), one of which will involve multi-parties. Since there may be a significant time lapse between this course and the prerequisite Conflict Management and ADR Processes Course, the policies and DR spectrum segments will need to be reviewed. As well, some new theoretical concepts will be taught. However, this course should focus mainly on developing the initial skills necessary for participants to take part in interest-based negotiations. This is normally a two-day course, but some organizations may wish to deliver it immediately following the Conflict Management and ADR Processes Course. With this approach, theory from the first session need not be reviewed, as it is still fresh in the participants’ minds. The time saved can be used to add another activity. This course is designed for employees who wish to develop their conflict prevention skills or are trying to resolve disputes themselves. In addition, HR professionals, leaders at all levels and individuals providing advice to leaders will benefit from this course. Day One TIME 0830–0900 0900–0930 0930–1015 1015–1030 1030–1100 1100–1200 1200–1300 1300–1415 1415–1430 1430–1530 1530–1630 EVENT Introductions and opening remarks

The course is intended to provide participants with an understanding of: relevant policies and procedures (review); the DR spectrum (review); effective communication skills (part review, part new); how to apply effective communication skills; the role of IBN in the DR spectrum; the types and causes of conflict and how they relate to IBN; the IBN process—key elements and approaches; how to conduct the IBN process using the appropriate IBN planning framework; and the relationship between negotiation and mediation. Outlined below is a sample of a typical schedule template for this type of course:

REMARKS

Definition and overview of negotiation How policies apply in IBN Health break DR spectrum overview Negotiation Styles—Kilmann Instrument Lunch Communicating in IBN Health break Moving from positions to interests, BATNA Role play #1

Introduce 7 stages

Principled vs competitive vs co-operative

Includes debrief

C H A P T E R 1 1 TRAINING

115

Day Two TIME 0830–0930 0930–1015 1015–1030 1030–1200 1200–1300 1300–1400 1400–1415 1415–1430 1430–1600 1600–1630 EVENT Generating options and applying legitimate criteria Preparing for a negotiation Health break Role play #2 Lunch Role play #3 Health break Relationships in IBN Role play #4 “Parking Lot” items and wrap-up Complete negotiation Multi-party negotiation Includes debrief REMARKS

T H E M E D I ATO R Q UA L I F I C AT I O N P R O G R A M Some organizations will want to develop a cadre of qualified mediators from within their own ranks. This approach has clear advantages, particularly where organizational cultures

are unique and operations are geographically dispersed. There are also disadvantages. The table below highlights some factors CMS designers will want to consider before instituting an MQP:

Advantages and Disadvantages of an MQP ADVANTAGES

DISADVANTAGES

Ensures mediators are qualified to the organization’s standards. Mediators are more likely to know and understand the organization’s policies, procedures and culture. Disputants may feel more comfortable with “one of their own.” Mediators are available locally and can respond to issues quickly. Has potential long-term cost benefits. Helps promote a conflict competent culture.

Investment in developing mediators is lost when individuals leave the organization. Disputants may feel more uncomfortable with “one of their own.” Mediator responsibilities may conflict with core responsibilities. May not be cost-effective.

● ●

● ●

Requires significant maintenance. May present serious difficulties with perceptions of neutrality/impartiality.

116

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Most organizations, even if they recognize the value of an MQP, choose not to go that route. However, because of its size, complexity and unique culture, DND/CF did decide to institute the program. Since such programs are uncommon, I will discuss the design and structure of the DND/CF program in detail later in this chapter.

provision of bibliographies; Web-based discussion groups and virtual networks; and armchair sessions. DRCs are ideally placed to provide leadership in this area. For individuals whose interest in ADR is more than casual, additional learning should be promoted. This is particularly true in organizations that have instituted an MQP. At the end of a session, once mediators have been qualified as members of a community of practitioner learners, they are expected to continue their own learning and to contribute to the learning of colleagues. They may do this through: regular meetings and conferences—such as those run by the Association for Conflict Resolution, the American Bar Association and the ADR Institute; one-on-one learning—by linking up with one or two mediators to share learning on a regular basis; formal and informal mentoring and coaching relationships; distance learning and conference calls—where they can: – share information, – discuss issues of concern, – review pre-determined topics, and – share lessons learned;

SUPPORT PROGRAMS—CONFLICT COACHING AND GROUP INTERVENTIONS A N D FAC I L I TAT I O N As discussed in a previous chapter, conflict coaching can be an important tool in developing a viable integrated CMS. Training in this area is generally aimed at professional practitioners.
Because target audiences for this type of training will be smaller, training is often focused specifically on the needs and characteristics of the target group. Individual coaching and customized courses are not uncommon. Informal approaches (e.g. peer coaching circles, virtual networks and communities of interest) can augment formal training and should be encouraged and facilitated. Training for group interventions and facilitation will also be aimed primarily at professional practitioners. The training elements will be closely akin to those used in organizational development.

CONTINUOUS LEARNING
In some instances formal training programs and courses merely act as a stimulant for further learning. Some participants find great value in what they have learned and are eager to expand their knowledge and practise the techniques they have acquired. Organizations should encourage this type of learning by creating opportunities for people to pursue their interest in ADR. By sponsoring informal activities or providing relatively simple and inexpensive resources, organizations can foster continuous learning. Some informal activities worth considering include: brown-bag lunch-and-learn activities, such as discussion groups and role-play practice sessions; subject-relevant lending libraries of books and audio and video tapes;

keeping a mediator’s journal—where, after a mediation, they would enter information such as: One thing I learned…One question I have…What I handled well …. This will facilitate introspection and encourage the individual to become familiar with his or her own issues, strengths and weaknesses; regular bulletins—to address substantive mediation issues and provide written guidance on issues such as confidentiality or breach of contract; mediator’s hotline—where mediators can call experts with specific questions, as required; external opportunities—such as shadowing an external mediator to gain or broaden experience; specialized training course modules—developed for various learning requirements as appropriate; coaching;

C H A P T E R 1 1 TRAINING

117

teaching—which is an excellent way to learn. By volunteering as a teacher’s aide on formal courses, both students and volunteers benefit; and learning plans—which can help individuals focus on learning needs and order their learning in a methodical way. Such plans should be discussed with supervisors, mentors and coaches—all of whom can make valuable suggestions.

THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND ADR PROCESSES COURSE EDCM worked with some leading consultants in the field to establish course content and a presentation framework. Consultants brought their own approaches and experience to the table, and these were augmented by organization-specific information about policies, procedures and culture.
Initially it was primarily consultants who delivered the course (as internal capacity grew, some sessions were also delivered by DRC personnel). DRCs normally handled consultant hiring and contracts, course-related communications and administration. Most sessions ran for one day and followed the template presented at the beginning of this chapter. In some locations courses ran for two days and included a bit more on IBN.

KEY LEARNING

LEARNING, TRAINING AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT END AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE FORMAL TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION COURSES
A community of practitioners will form peer coaching groups and live the principles inherent in a “learning organization.”

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
As noted in earlier chapters, at the outset of the Conflict Management Project, customized training workshops were designed and delivered to key stakeholders within DND/CF. These sessions were very successful, as participants learned about ADR, how and why it worked. They also gained some skills to help them apply what they had learned. A secondary but equally important benefit that came out of this training was that it galvanized the stakeholder commitment to support and promote an ADR-based CMS within the organization. A Conflict Management and ADR Processes Course, aimed at a broader audience, was introduced early in the Project and this was complemented by an Interest-Based Negotiation and Dispute Resolution Course. As well, a Mediator Qualification Program was put in place. This program not only provided training and development for prospective mediators, but also signalled the Department’s commitment to ADR and particularly to mediation as a key tool in the organization’s CMS.

T H E I N T E R E S T- B A S E D N E G O T I AT I O N A N D DISPUTE RESOLUTION COURSE The IBN and DR course, like the one above, was developed by EDCM in collaboration with several external consultants. A variety of internal and external consultants delivered the course, which normally ran for two days and followed the template presented earlier in this chapter. In some instances, the IBN and DR course was tacked on to the prerequisite course, described above, to create a three- or four-day package.
To ensure consistency across diverse regions and commands, a series of overhead slides were developed by EDCM for the use of all instructors, who embellished them with their own material. To ensure a degree of consistency among service providers, a framework and fairly detailed instructor’s notes accompanied all course material. To show the level of detail used in these notes, I have included—in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 17—the speaking notes that accompanied some course slides related to conflict theory and the DR spectrum. Information of this type was provided to all instructors for all components of all three programs. This kind of detail is necessary for any training program that is designed to meet a specified standard and may need to be delivered under a variety of circumstances to large numbers of individuals in geographically dispersed regions.

118

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

CONFLICT COACHING As noted in an earlier chapter, DND/CF did not institute a Conflict Coaching Course. EDCM did, however, provide one-on-one coaching to some senior managers on an as-needed basis.
Coaching is also used in the MQP to help mediators develop skills. It may be worth noting that, as the Project progressed, interest in this type of training has been expressed among non-professional practitioners. For example, the DND Managers’ Network recently requested a Conflict Coaching Course for its constituents, and as I write this a pilot is being developed.

The following is a prioritized list of key factors that were considered when selecting candidates for mediation training: Directly linked to pilot sites. It was important that candidates be selected strategically in terms of how they would add the greatest value to the dispute resolution initiative in the long term. With that in mind, priority was given to those individuals who had been assigned as Dispute Resolution Centre staff or played a key role in the DRC mediation strategy. Cross-section of military and civilian members and employees. Since conflict impacts on the entire department, it was important to have a good mix of military and civilian mediators. Cross-section of military ranks as well as regular and reserve components. The selection of a mediator is very much dependent on agreement of the parties. It was deemed useful to have a variety of rank levels and components from which to select mediators. Cross-section of civilian employees. Again, this cross-section was important to facilitate the provision of mediation services to a broad population. A diverse mix of people reflecting employment equity criteria. Availability of candidates to mediate. Candidates and their supervisors needed to realize the extent of the commitment required on the part of individuals selected for mediator training. Long-term availability. It was important that candidates be selected based on the long-term strategic requirement. In general, individuals about to retire or be transferred were not considered for training. Professional experience. Candidates should have had some experience in dealing with people and human resource-related issues. In addition to these criteria, we established a list of personal characteristics deemed to be helpful in enabling candidates to become effective mediators. The following is a prioritized list of personal attributes that were considered when selecting candidates for mediation training: acceptance and tolerance of individual differences ability to remain objective when presented with differences patience ability to remain non-judgmental

THE DND/CF MEDIATOR QUALIFICATION PROGRAM
This three-phase program (over several months) provides potential DND/CF mediators with the knowledge, skills and attitudes required to conduct mediations to the prescribed DND/CF standard. Phase 1 is a knowledge and skills-based one-week course. Phase 2 is an on-the-job-training/practicum component, in which candidates must complete two co-mediations and a research activity. During Phase 2 candidates receive individual coaching. Phase 3 consists of advanced mediation training and evaluation.

T R A I N I N G S TA N DA R D F O R T H E M Q P : Aim—The aim of the Mediator Qualification Program is to qualify participants in the mediation process. Upon completion, participants will be able to mediate disputes between individuals in a DND/CF workplace environment.
Course pre-requisites—Candidates for this training must have completed the ADR Processes and Interest-Based Negotiation courses or their equivalents. Equivalencies are evaluated case by case by EDCM. Candidate selection—Initially in the Conflict Management Project, candidates were nominated from different units within the organization for mediation training. To identify appropriate MQP candidates, DND/CF established a list of key factors and personal attributes that it deemed desirable in nominees. Since not all candidates would fit all these criteria, the list was used only as a broad guide.

C H A P T E R 1 1 TRAINING

119

ability to be impartial as much as possible, to be free from conflict a high degree of personal integrity flexibility and creativity in problem solving strong communication skills ability to tolerate high levels of conflict ability to deal with emotions and anger ability to perform under stressful conditions ability to stay focused and not get sidetracked a high degree of self-esteem “presence” which leads to inspiring confidence

understand effective communication skills demonstrate effective communication skills describe the key processes in the DR spectrum describe the interest-based negotiation process conduct interest-based negotiations understand the mediation process conduct mediations

PHASE 1 OF THE MQP—CLASSROOM This phase is five days long and combines theory and skills. For those interested in the course content, a table outlining the learning objectives, teaching points and time allotted for each is included in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 18.
The following is a sample schedule for Phase 1 of the MQP. The learning objectives and teaching points would normally be covered within the parameters of this schedule:

M Q P C O U R S E D E TA I L S The MQP learning objectives are described as follows:
understand the relevant DND/CF policies and procedures understand the dispute resolution spectrum Phase 1 Schedule: Day One TIME 0800–0900 0900–1015 1015–1030 1030–1200 1200–1300 1300–1415 1415–1430 1430–1600 TITLE

COMMENTS EDCM in auditorium

Welcoming remarks and introductions Government policies and procedures Health break Understanding conflict and the DR system Lunch Effective communication for mediators Health break Effective communication cont’d

This is a refresher only Debrief Kilmann here

Includes practical

Note: Thomas Kilmann tests are completed by participants before arrival.

120

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Day Two TIME 0830–1015 1015–1030 1030–1200 1200–1300 1300–1415 1415–1430 1430–1630 TITLE Interest-based negotiation process Health break IBN role play #1 Lunch Introduction to mediation Health break Intro to mediation cont’d Includes ethics and responsibilities Includes debrief COMMENTS

Note: Hand out roles for role plays 3 and 4. Day Three TIME 0830–1015 1015–1030 1030–1200 1200–1300 1300–1430 1430–1445 1445–1600 1600–1630 Mediation demo Health break Mediation techniques Lunch Role play #1 Health break Pre mediation/convening Day 4 preparations Includes demo TITLE Includes Q&As COMMENTS

Note: Mediation preparations are done in the evening.

C H A P T E R 1 1 TRAINING

121

Day Four TIME 0830–1015 1015–1030 1030–1200 1200–1300 1300–1415 1415–1430 1430–1600 1600–1630 Role play #2 Health break Terms of settlement Lunch Moving from issues to interests Health break Role play #3 Day 5 preparations Includes debrief Includes practical TITLE Includes debrief COMMENTS

Note: Mediation preparations are done in the evening. Day Five TIME 0800–1030 1030–1045 1045–1200 1200–1300 1300–1500 TITLE Mediation role play #4 Health break MQP Phase 2 and 3 outline/Q&As Lunch Evaluation and wrap-up COMMENTS Includes pre-mediation

PHASE 2 OF THE MQP— D I S TA N C E L E A R N I N G This phase is approximately 4–6 months in duration. It consists of a research activity and requires the involvement of the candidate in at least two co-mediations or other directly related DR processes. R E S E A R C H P R O J E C T O R R E L AT E D AC T I V I T Y Candidates are required to conduct a research activity related to ADR and DND/CF. If the candidate chooses to write a research paper, topics are available from EDCM. Candidates may also choose an alternative activity, such as developing specific ADR training, creating a video or writing role plays. Candidates discuss their ideas with EDCM training staff before beginning their research.

A Web site was created that included a newsgroup for candidates. It allowed candidates to exchange ideas and information and also provided access to EDCM staff for guidance and mentoring. Candidates are required to lead a classroom discussion on their research activities during Phase 3 of the MQP.

M E D I AT I O N S / D R P R O C E S S E S The mediations/DR process involvement may consist of any one of the following or a combination thereof:
co-mediation coaching

122

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

mentoring advising Upon completion of each mediation/DR process, the candidate must complete a self-assessment and submit it to EDCM.

PHASE 3 OF THE MQP—ADVANCED M E D I AT I O N A N D A S S E S S M E N T PHASE—CLASSROOM This phase consists of a 4-day classroom session, with extensive one-on-one coaching and evaluation/assessment conducted by coaches. The following schedule shows the flow of the session:

Day One TIME 0800–0830 0830–1000 1000–1015 1015–1200 1200–1300 1300–1415 1415–1430 1430–1530 Opening remarks Round-table discussion of research activity Health break Micro-skills/mediation open space technology session Lunch Mediation process refresher Health break Role play preparations TOPIC REMARKS

Day Two TIME 0800–1015 Role play #1 TOPIC REMARKS This is a practice role play and is not formally evaluated; however, an evaluation form is completed

1015–1030 1030–1200

Health break—Preparation for role play #2 Role play #2 This is a practice role play and is not formally evaluated; however, an evaluation form is completed

1200–1300 1300–1415

Lunch Role play #3 This is a practice role play and is not formally evaluated; however, an evaluation form is completed

1415–1430 1430–1600 1600–1630

Health break—Preparation for role play #4 Role play #4 Wrap-up and day 3 preparations This is the first formally evaluated role play

C H A P T E R 1 1 TRAINING

123

Day Three TIME 0800–1015 1015–1030 1030–1200 1200–1300 1300–1400 1400–1415 1415–1530 1530–1600 Role play #5 Health break Role play #6 Lunch Debrief role plays to date (Q&As) Health break Role play #7 Day 4 preparations Evaluated Evaluated TOPIC REMARKS Evaluated role play

Day Four TIME 0800–1015 1015–1030 1030–1200 1200–1300 1300–1330 1330–1500 1500–1530 Role play #8 Health break Role play #9 Lunch Multi-party mediations Role play #10 Wrap-up and closing Multi-party practice Evaluated (last one) TOPIC Evaluated REMARKS

This session is heavily oriented toward evaluating and assessing the knowledge, skills and behaviours of potential mediators. It is a key component in determining whether a candidate will be qualified as a mediator or whether further work is required.

M E D I ATO R E VA L UAT I O N C R I T E R I A Candidates are evaluated using a detailed evaluation form. The form is filled out in duplicate, with the candidate receiving a copy on completion of the role play and the second copy submitted to the EDCM Course Director. A copy of the Mediator Assessment Form is included in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 19.

124

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

understand and deal with power imbalances; preserve parties’ autonomy;

ENSURE THAT MEDIATOR QUALIFICATION PROGRAMS HAVE A RIGOROUS ASSESSMENT PROCESS AND THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS ARE AWARE OF THE CRITERIA BY WHICH THEY WILL BE EVALUATED
Participants respect a rigorous learning program and have a good sense of confidence in meeting the challenges of the task at hand. They do need to know and understand the conditions by which they will be assessed.

understand the negotiating process and the elements of effective negotiation; earn trust and develop rapport; uncover parties’ needs and interests through questioning; screen out non-mediable issues; help parties invent creative options; help parties identify principles and criteria to guide their decision making; help parties assess their non-settlement alternatives; help parties make their own informed choices; and help parties assess whether their agreement can be implemented. The above list is similar to that used by DND/CF and provides a useful assessment framework.

C O M P E T E N C I E S I N M E D I AT I O N … ADR INSTITUTE OF CANADA The ADR Institute of Canada has identified competencies and desirable qualities for mediators which form the basis of skill assessment for chartered mediator certification by that organization. The competencies include the ability to:
describe to the disputants the importance of confidentiality in the mediation process and how that be will maintained; listen actively; question the parties effectively and get the facts and perceptions out on the table; deal with complex factual material; analyze problems, identify and separate the issues involved, and frame these issues for resolution or decision making; use clear, neutral language in speaking and in writing; be sensitive to the strongly felt values of the disputants, including gender, ethnic and culture differences; treat the parties equally and fairly; act in an honest, dignified manner that demonstrates respect for the parties and ability to create and maintain control of a diverse group of disputants; identify and separate the mediator’s personal values from issues under consideration;

KEY LEARNING

ENSURE YOU HAVE A STRUCTURED MEDIATOR ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT
Some organizations have a good understanding of what they are looking for in a mediator. When this is articulated clearly, it adds credibility to the assessment process and the quality of the outcomes.

MQP “CONVERSION COURSE” Before the CMP was established at DND/CF, a number of employees and staff had been trained externally in the field of mediation or dispute resolution and in some cases were conducting mediations. There was a need to recognize the training and mediation experience those individuals had completed. To that end, it was deemed appropriate to “grandfather” those individuals as qualified DND/CF mediators.

C H A P T E R 1 1 TRAINING

125

The Director General Conflict Management Program reviewed more than a dozen private sector courses to compare their learning objectives to those of the MQP. For the most part, they met MQP objectives as well as the two DND/CF-designed prerequisite courses; however, in all cases these private sector courses were found lacking in that they had no: convening/pre-mediation segment; DND/CF policies segment; and drafting of terms-of-settlement segment. DND/CF recognized its review was not all-inclusive and looked at other programs case by case. A two-day Conversion Course, designed to help participants convert to the DND/CF standard, was established to enable those who had taken other training to pick up the elements they might have missed. At the end of this course successful individuals would qualify as DND/CF mediators. The schedule and flow of the course is described below: Day One 0830–0900—Intros 0900–1030—DND/CF policies 1030–1045—Break 1045–1200—Mediation model 1200–1300—Lunch 1300–1345—Pre-mediation/convening 1345–1430—Drafting terms of settlement 1430–1445—Break 1445–1600—Simulation #1 1600–1630—Wrap-up

Day Two 0800–0900—Legal issues in mediation 0900–1030—Simulation #2 1030–1045—Break 1045–1200—Simulation #3 1200–1300—Lunch 1300–1330—Mediation techniques 1330–1500—Simulation #4 1500–1600—Wrap-up and Q&As

KEY LEARNING

USE TRAINING ORGANIZATIONS OUTSIDE GOVERNMENT TO DELIVER CUSTOM TRAINING PROGRAMS; PROVIDE THEM WITH INFORMATION RELATED TO THE PUBLIC SECTOR CONTEXT FOR INCORPORATION INTO THEIR PROGRAMS
There are many private sector training organizations which offer very good mediation training courses and certify successful participants. Although these are useful courses, in many instances they do not cover subject areas consistent with the unique requirements of government organizations. As well, the material covered, the depth of coverage and the models of mediation promoted vary dramatically. Most government agencies will require a standard that can be applied equally across their organizations. They will require some customization of their training programs. Most certainly, they will need to define the nature of the mediation model to which they subscribe and design their training accordingly.

126

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

AWA R D I N G O F T H E D N D / C F M E D I ATO R Q UA L I F I C AT I O N The DND/CF mediator qualification is awarded by EDCM upon successful completion of the MQP. Partial qualifications may also be awarded. For example, where a candidate may need more experience or additional tutoring, the qualification would be awarded pending completion of the annotated requirements.
Once a candidate is qualified as a DND/CF mediator, the qualification is entered into the ITMIS/PeopleSoft database. DND/CF mediators must conduct a minimum of two co-mediations/mediations over a two-year period; otherwise the qualification will lapse. Those mediators whose qualifications have lapsed and who wish to maintain their qualification must contact EDCM to discuss a requalification plan.

M Q P Q UA L I F I C AT I O N M E M O R A N D U M It is useful to have a standardized format that can be used to award the mediator qualification. At DND/CF a memorandum is provided to those participants of the MQP who have successfully met all the qualifications to serve as a mediator in the Conflict Management Program. A sample copy of that memorandum is included in the CMS Tool Kit as Tool 20.

C H A P T E R 1 1 TRAINING

127

C H A P T E R

12

NATIONAL ROLLOUT: ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE
FROM PROJECT TO PROGRAM
As we have seen, most large organizations start with a limited-scope conflict management project before committing fully to the institutionalization of an organization-wide program. During the project stage, structure, capacity, approach and service delivery are set out and tested. Pilot sites and select case mediations are used to help determine what works and what doesn’t. Processes are tested, modified and retested. Training and other awareness-building initiatives are put into place. Alignment, alliances and stakeholder co-operation are carefully nurtured. Now it’s time to move to a full-fledged, organization-wide program. It’s a big step and the ultimate success of the CMS depends on doing it right.

E VA L UAT I O N Testing, performance measures and evaluation are integral elements of the project stage. That’s why we ran the Select Case Mediation Program and established pilot sites. We also built evaluation, monitoring and feedback mechanisms right into the design of most of our activities—course evaluation forms, and evaluations of the mediation process and mediators, are just a few examples. We’ve gathered the data, assessed it and made adjustments accordingly.
In many instances, however, this data was examined only in its own context—course evaluations were reviewed to help us improve and fine-tune the quality of our courses; feedback on the mediation process helped us streamline and improve those processes. It is now time to take a bird’s-eye look at all the data, to synthesize it and get the “big picture.” We need to test our assumptions and see how individual initiatives fit together to contribute to our broader goals. Aligning activities and services with the organization’s policies and the ideological goals of the CMS is critical. Choosing an organizational and governance model that can accommodate and promote that alignment is also key. While CMS designers may be well qualified to do a comprehensive evaluation, their involvement in the project will likely skew their perspective. Once again, objective, qualified consultants can help with this process and can produce framework options for a structural model.

C O N S U LTAT I O N As in the initial stages of the CMP, comprehensive consultation with all stakeholders remains critical—only, now the stakes may be higher, the interests more pronounced and, with the expansion of the initiative, the number of players larger.
Initiatives promoted from the “centre” are often funded by the centre in the project stage, but when the project expands and becomes a more permanent fixture, funding and resources often get decentralized. While regional authorities are often willing—even eager—to assume control of program services delivered in their jurisdictions, they rarely want to assume the associated costs. As well, stakeholders have a tendency to look out for their own constituents, while being somewhat less concerned about the needs of others.

ONE STEP AT A TIME
In moving to the rollout of an organization-wide program, CMS designers will normally go through an iterative five-step process: evaluation consultation presentation/approval organization implementation

128

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Grappling with the many competing interests, financial implications and concerns over authority and accountability will be a test. Count on it. (You may want to bone up on your IBN skills for this.) Just remember, it’s not enough to accommodate each stakeholder. The real trick will be in finding or creating a consensus that can lead to a viable organizational model that not only accommodates the needs of stakeholders, but also is aligned with policies and overarching CMS goals.

It is now time to look at what you’ve actually got and to design the organizational structure you will need to put it in place to make the model and the program work. You will need to be specific and detailed in defining the components of the organization. You will have to determine the number of people you will need, at what level, with what authorities, responsibilities and accountabilities—not only at the centre, but also in your satellite service centres. You will also need to clearly establish reporting lines and governance principles. You may even want to create a team charter that reflects the philosophies and norms of the unit.

P R E S E N TAT I O N / A P P R OVA L With a well-designed and viable model in hand, it’s time to approach decision makers for approval to move on to the program stage.
While the presentation to decision makers has the same goals as when you first went to them for approval of the project, its format and content will not be the same. In the initial presentation, decision makers wanted overview, concepts and prospects for success. Numbers and data, though important, were suspect because they had not been tested within the organization. Furthermore, the limited scope of the project mitigated some of the long-term and financial risks associated with approval. As a result, they were more focused on anecdotal assurances from respected sources. But times and conditions have changed. You now have data to present that is directly relevant to the organization. You can show what worked and what didn’t—and what it cost. Do your homework. Present your options and link them directly to a well-developed business case, complete with management controls and financial breakdowns.

I M P L E M E N TAT I O N Going from a limited-scope project to an organization-wide program will place significant stress on resources. Even with high-level approval and an adequate budget it will take time to staff and train key positions. Office space and equipment will also have to be arranged.
In the early stages of implementation you will likely require help from external service providers. Build this into your plans and processes. As internal capacity rises, readjust. As you roll out the organization-wide CMS, you will want to complement and promote the initiative with an effective communications plan. The processes and considerations discussed in the chapter on communications will apply here.

GETTING IT DONE
The steps described above are logical, simple and maybe even self-evident-at least on paper. Getting it done is, however, another story. In the following segment, as I have done in other chapters, I will present the DND/CF experience to show how the above principles were applied.

O R G A N I Z AT I O N If and when approval from decision makers does come, it will usually be somewhat different from what you originally asked for. They will make suggestions about structure, reporting relationships and any number of other things. And financial allotments will almost always be less than you had requested.

C H A P T E R 1 2 NATIONAL ROLLOUT: ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

129

Since this segment will also present a comprehensive picture of the DND/CF Conflict Management Program as it was initially implemented, I have been a bit more detailed than in previous chapters. CMS designers, while focusing on the rollout of the program, may also want to look at this segment as a benchmarking model from which some elements may be extracted.

3. EDCM as a central control with services provided by DRCs 4. chain-of-command control over DRCs 5. DRCs reporting to EDCM for a transition period of 1 to 3 years, and then reporting to the chain of command 6. DRCs reporting to the chain of command, with a strong functional reporting relationship to EDCM Ajilon recommended option 6, based on the assumption that cultural transformation was the organization’s strongest interest. Option 5 was also considered a strong choice as it responded to the organization’s second strong interest-that of developing a trusted system that was seen to be neutral and confidential. The report noted that option 6 could also meet this second concern if EDCM’s role was made extremely strong and clear and if EDCM closely monitored the system and made adjustments where necessary.

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
T H E C O N S U LTA N T ’ S E VA L U AT I O N R E P O R T S Before we implemented a national program, the consulting firm Ajilon Canada thoroughly evaluated the pilot project and pilot sites to identify strengths and weaknesses and to determine which of these might apply across the board. Ajilon prepared four separate reports:
The Dispute Resolution System and the Design Process The Dispute Resolution System: Launching the Pilot Sites

KEY LEARNING Recommendations for the DND/CF-wide Rollout Summaries and Appendices

ALIGN ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE WITH LONG-TERM PROGRAM GOALS
Structural models are often based on financial, operational and short-term considerations. While these are essential elements, when designing and choosing a model it is equally important to look beyond immediate functional efficiencies to the long-term effect you are trying to achieve with the institution of the CMS. Try to find a balance between pragmatic and idealistic interests.

THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM AND THE DESIGN PROCESS This measured the DND/CF system and design process against industry standards. These standards included the five key features of integrated CMSs, support mechanisms, safeguards and the system design components within EDCM. THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM: LAUNCHING THE PILOT SITES This included findings from the five initial pilot sites located at Canadian Forces Base Borden; 17 Wing Winnipeg; Maritime Forces Atlantic (MARLANT), Halifax; Land Force Western Area, Edmonton; and the National Capital Region, Ottawa. R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S F O R THE DND/CF-WIDE ROLLOUT This report described six rollout structure options, recommendations to EDCM, and Dispute Resolution Centre support requirements. The rollout structure options were:
1. EDCM as a central organization providing all services 2. all services provided by an external, arm’s-length, neutral agency

The report envisioned the overall role of EDCM as that of champion or “keeper of the flame.” It also recommended that EDCM provide central project management and direct the design of the rollout, as well as its administration and support. In addition, EDCM would, on an ongoing basis: determine resource allocation; oversee communication; be involved in training development and standards; assess the qualification of neutrals and DRC staff; select case mediation; mentor neutrals; maintain rosters;

130

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

handle complex and sensitive cases; organize alignment and integration; gather documentation and establish policies; set best practices; and assume the departmental authority for ADR.

THE CONSULTATIVE PROCESS
Although we had a good understanding of the model that would work well for DND/CF nationally, we considered it important to get further input from stakeholders. We recognized that the acceptance of the initiative would be directly related to the process we used to put it into place. In the fall of 2000, many consultations took place—some formal, some informal. Some key consultations included: Union Management Consultative Committee—The Committee discussed the status of the project and national rollout options. The union confirmed its support. The Minister of National Defence—After the Minister and consultants reviewed the nature, scope and success of the process, the Minister expressed interest in fast-tracking the initiative. Environmental Commands—Issues relating to the structure and location of DRCs, reporting relationships, accountabilities, equitable treatment and resource implications were of particular concern. Base Commanders—The Base Commanders Forum reviewed approaches relating to the organization, structure, function and reporting of the DRCs. CMP Steering/Advisory Committee—The purpose of these meetings was to report on the status of the Project, to review Ajilon’s evaluations and recommendations and to consider national rollout options. Pilot Site DRC Coordinators—to review structural and logistical requirements for the national rollout. Senior Human Resources Management Committee—to review human resource implications before proceeding. Defence Management Committee—In December 2000, EDCM made a presentation to DMC outlining the recommended national program and related resource requirements. The elements of this key presentation included: the background and genesis-Why a CMP? the response of DND project mandate the ADR continuum key features of a DND/CF conflict management system the DND/CF integrated CM system the project overview the pilot sites

SUMMARIES AND APPENDICES This report summarized the three previous reports, highlighting their issues and recommendations. It evaluated interview questions and indicated benchmarks and guidelines (SPIDR) for the design of integrated CMSs.
These four reports are described in greater detail in a subsequent chapter on evaluation. The overall results of the Ajilon evaluation as described in report 3 were as follows: ADR was working within DND/CF, and there was clear evidence it was efficient and effective. The introduction of an integrated CMS within DND/CF had strong potential to foster positive culture change. The design process was consistent with industry standards and in many aspects had provided groundbreaking enhancements to those standards. All the key features and components of an integrated system existed at least at the planning stage or beyond. The strength of individual features and components varied with each stage of development and with the resources available. EDMC was fulfilling its mandate extremely well and was on plan to meet its objectives.

KEY LEARNING

ANY BROADLY BASED PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION SHOULD BE BASED ON A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE PILOT SITES AND ALL RELATED ACTIVITIES TO THAT POINT
Before implementing an organization-wide system, use pilot project initiatives to test and evaluate preferred models. Have an external independent organization evaluate both the system design process and the pilot projects. Seek recommendations. Be open to learning and prepared for surprises.

C H A P T E R 1 2 NATIONAL ROLLOUT: ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

131

functions of DRCs what we learned from the pilot sites anecdotal comments from senior officials who had used the system results of the consultations held to date the national rollout options considered national rollout recommendations number and location of DRCs core DRCs’ resourcing and region of responsibility satellite DRCs’ resourcing the DMC decisions requested the distribution of resources among environmental commands

CMP MANAGEMENT CONTROLS Consistent with the DMC directive, EDCM presented the CMP management controls to DMC in May 2001. The management controls were divided into four main categories: evaluation, reporting, performance measures and criteria for managing and administering the CMP.
The following is an outline of that presentation: Evaluation—is ongoing in four main areas. They are: The mediation process (mediators) DND/CF mediators are evaluated to ensure they meet the standard to which they were trained. As well, the mediation process is monitored and amended as required. ADR interventions (DRCs) The overall activities of DRCs in the conduct of interestbased ADR interventions are evaluated. This ensures that DRC activities are conducted in a manner consistent with national program objectives. ADR training

KEY LEARNING

CONSULT WITH STAKEHOLDERS IN A MEANINGFUL WAY BEFORE MAKING NATIONAL ROLLOUT DECISION
Ensure all stakeholders are fully informed about all options—and that they support the initiative. If they don’t, take all precautions to ensure that they won’t oppose it in decision-making and resource-allocation forums.

This process involves the evaluation of the core ADR courses to ensure standards are being maintained and are consistent with national objectives. Communications Communications activities are reviewed quarterly to ensure they are in line with the departmental communications approach. DRCs may opt for communications tools not outlined in that approach provided they receive prior approval from EDCM. Each domain is evaluated for effectiveness and efficiency. Evaluations are done annually (except where indicated), and where there are deficiencies EDCM provides corrective guidance until a broader evaluation capacity can be developed. EDCM staff evaluates mediators, while EDCM retains the evaluation responsibility for interventions and training. Reporting requirements—are managed on an ongoing basis in four main areas: DRC reporting lines–operational and functional reporting Each core DRC reports operationally to the highest level in its respective area. For example, the Halifax DRC reports directly to the Commander MARLANT. The Edmonton DRC reports directly to the Commander of Land Force Western Area. Satellite DRCs report directly to their respective Base Commanders. DRCs also have an ongoing technical and functional reporting requirement to EDCM.

THE DEFENCE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE RESPONSE DMC, which is made up of the most senior departmental officials, is a key player in the decision-making process.
While DMC supported the national rollout project as presented by EDCM, it requested that the resource requirements for full implementation be further scoped out in the business planning process. As well, DMC asked that the Program’s staffing plan and management controls be outlined at a subsequent DMC meeting.

132

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Operational reporting ensures that ADR services are being provided to client organizations and that day-to-day DRC operations are effective and efficient. To this end, the local Commander writes annual evaluations on DRC staff, with input from EDCM. Functional reporting ensures that the overarching national DRC principles and practices are being met and that DRC linkages with national program objectives are achieved. Funding allocations Based on the annual review of DRC business plans, EDCM distributes the funds as required. Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Military) may, pending the results of evaluations, distribute resources from its annual operating budget as baseline funding. DRC quarterly reports to EDCM include: – the number of mediations and other interventions and their results – the extent and nature of training – the challenges and recommended solutions The DRC submits business plans to EDCM for review before final submission. The review entails an assessment of how appropriately national resources are allocated. Where necessary, EDCM will redistribute resources. EDCM reporting activities include: – EDCM reviews DRCs’ business plans, and if these reveal inconsistencies with program objectives and principles, EDCM will direct corrective action. – EDCM convenes an annual DRC Coordinators’ Workshop to ensure that all DRCs are in alignment with program objectives and to provide professional development opportunities to the DRC Coordinators. – EDCM convenes the Conflict Management Steering Committee annually. – EDCM provides input to local Commanding Officers on writing performance appraisals of DRC staff. – EDCM reports to ADM (HR - Mil) and ADM (HR Civ) quarterly. – EDCM reports to Defence Management Committee/ Armed Forces Council annually or as directed, on behalf of ADM (HR - Mil) and ADM (HR - Civ). – EDCM promotes alignment and consistency of related DND/CF policies and procedures.

Performance measures and standards—are a key component of a unit’s business plan. The use of performance measures assists EDCM in determining how a unit is performing in relation to program objectives. To facilitate this measurement the following indicators apply: – DRCs report operationally to highest level in region; – DRCs report functionally and technically to EDCM; – business plan submitted; – resources allocated; – regional provision of ADR services; – development of comprehensive training, communications and mediation strategies; – provision of ADR services as they relate to workplace disputes; – alignment with program objectives; – delivery of Conflict Management and ADR Processes (one day) and Interest-Based Negotiation and ADR Processes (two days) courses; – conduct of briefings as identified in strategies; – ADR coaching services; and – referral of cases to appropriate agencies (i.e. harassment/grievance cells, Director General Employee Relations, regional service centres, chain of command, unions, EAP/MAP). Training Standard Training is an essential component of the CMP. EDCM has developed three core courses that form the basis of ADR training for DND/CF. They were designed as either stand-alone courses or to be given in a modular format. They form the minimum required standard and should be augmented where necessary to address specific local needs. The courses are: – Conflict Management and ADR Processes – Interest-Based Negotiation and ADR Processes – Mediator Qualification Program The Conflict Management and ADR Processes Course and the Interest-Based Negotiation and ADR Processes Course may be delivered locally and are subject to regular audits by EDCM staff to promote consistency and compliance with the standard. EDCM staff organize the Mediator Qualification Program. EDCM maintains and amends the standards for all three courses.

C H A P T E R 1 2 NATIONAL ROLLOUT: ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

133

Mediation Standard Mediation forms the cornerstone of the CMP. It is crucial for consistency of service and protection of departmental and individual liabilities that mediations be conducted within guidelines and adhere to an appropriate standard. EDCM has adopted a five-stage mediation model. The MQP, or EDCM-endorsed equivalent, ensures the standard outlined below is maintained. All mediators must: – meet the MQP standard – have the appropriate training – have conducted co-mediations – have completed a research project/activity – have completed a skills assessment by EDCM or delegated authority

– maintaining a functional and technical relationship with DRCs – developing inter-Environmental Command/Area/Formation/Base memoranda of understanding – training DND/CF mediators – maintaining DND/CF mediation training and procedural standards – providing input on DRC staff performance reviews – ensuring that interest-based processes are conducted in such a way that they do not interfere with rightsbased processes

KEY LEARNING – conduct two mediations over a two-year period to maintain the qualification standard – use the DND/CF five-stage mediation model – use approved DND/CF agreement-to-mediate and terms-of-settlement frameworks Criteria for managing and administering the CMP This criteria relates to EDCM’s fulfillment of its ongoing responsibilities. The selection of appropriate staff for DRCs is paramount. EDCM developed a national staffing strategy for civilians and coordinates it centrally for all positions. Military staffing, however, is particularly challenging because of posting cycle requirements. The role of a mediator or DRC Coordinator is outside the normally defined boundaries of known military occupations. To facilitate the career management posting process, EDCM developed criteria for military staff selection that take into account personal attributes and skill sets as part of the selection protocol. EDCM’s ongoing roles and responsibilities: – assuming departmental authority for ADR – monitoring and maintaining the CMP – reviewing and commenting on DRC business plans – conducting evaluations – amending program components as necessary – allocating resources – ensuring that ADR services are being provided regionally

HAVE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CONTROLS CLEARLY DEFINED AND INCLUDED AS PART OF THE PROGRAM APPROVAL PROCESS
It is useful to have the management controls associated with program delivery clearly specified before seeking program approval or resources from decision-making authorities.

RESOURCE TENSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE NATIONAL ROLLOUT
The success of the initial five pilot DRC sites led to requests for the establishment of two other DRCs (Valcartier and Esquimalt) before full national rollout—a request the Armed Forces Council approved in September 1999. Although EDCM had been providing some funding assistance until fiscal year 1999/2000, the Armed Forces Council further directed that starting in 2000/2001, DRCs would obtain funding through the normal business planning process. This meant that each environmental command would provide the resources for its own DRCs, at least until the pilot project phase was completed. Since EDCM had been providing additional assistance with this up to 1999/2000, this resource issue would relate to subsequent national rollout proposals.

134

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

All environmental commands wanted to ensure that they would benefit from the ADR initiative and national rollout plans in a fair and equitable manner. They were particularly interested in the initiative if this involved new resources from the centre (Defence Services Program Vote 1). They were concerned that the resources (particularly Regular Force military personnel requiring position offsets) might have to be found from within their own organizations. In the end, the DMC decision to provide new funding from the “centre,” while requiring environmental commands to contribute military personnel (at least one Regular Force officer for each DRC) to the DRCs they would be operating, was considered appropriate.

the provision of ADR services from a large single national central office (EDCM); the creation of a new arm’s-length external agency with separate employer status; the establishment of DRCs on Bases reporting through the regular chain of command; and the establishment of DRCs on Bases reporting through EDCM. The option of having core DRCs serving a broad geographic area was deemed most suitable. Core pilot site DRCs that had been established in Halifax, Valcartier, Borden, the National Capital Region, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Esquimalt remained in place. New core DRCs were added in: Gagetown, New Brunswick Saint-Jean/Montreal, Quebec Petawawa, Ontario Trenton, Ontario New “satellite” DRCs were created in: Greenwood, Nova Scotia Kingston, Ontario Cold Lake, Alberta Wainwright, Alberta Comox, British Columbia As well, because of the unique characteristics and requirements of the reserves and cadets, resources were provided for ADR services specifically for these groups.

KEY LEARNING

SOME SEED FUNDING WILL LIKELY HAVE TO COME FROM THE CENTRE OF AN ORGANIZATION IN ORDER FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM TO BE INITIATED
The decision to allocate new funding for the initiative was critical in ensuring acceptance and support for it. The fact that senior management considered the Program important enough to find new funding sent an important signal to other levels within the organization. As well, the model where DRCs would support geographic regions and serve environmental commands which may not be “their own” would have been extremely difficult to implement. This helped create a situation where greater co-operation and highly effective horizontal management among the commands became evident.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE PROGRAM
EDCM assessed several options before structuring the national program. These included: the establishment of core DRCs at larger Bases to provide services on a geographic basis (smaller satellite centres would receive services from the core centres); these would be linked functionally to EDCM;

C H A P T E R 1 2 NATIONAL ROLLOUT: ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

135

C O R E D R C S TA F F I N G P E R S O N Y E A R S A N D GEOGRAPHIC SUPPORT RESPONSIBILITY The number of persons (PYs or person years) dedicated to each geographic site are shown below. The letters
Halifax Gagetown Valcartier Saint-Jean NCR Petawawa Trenton Borden Winnipeg Edmonton Esquimalt (CAS) (CLS) (CMS) (CLS) (CAS) (CMS) (CLS) (CLS) (CLS) 5 PY 4 PY 4 PY 4 PY 5 PY 4 PY 4 PY 5 PY 5 PY 5 PY 4 PY

in brackets after each city indicate the responsible environmental command: CMS is navy, or maritime; CLS is army, or land; and CAS is air force.

NS, Nfld & Labrador, PEI, (Greenwood) NB Valcartier, Bagotville, East Quebec Montreal, West Quebec National Defence Headquarters, international sites Petawawa, North Bay, Northeast Ontario Initially supported Kingston (now core DRC) Toronto, Southwest Ontario Northwest Ontario, Sask, Man Alta, NWT, Yukon, Nunavut (Cold Lake/Wainwright) BC (Comox)

Each of the five satellite sites was initially allocated one person (PY): Greenwood Kingston Wainwright Cold Lake Comox (CAS) (CLS) (CLS) (CAS) (CAS) 1PY 1 PY 1 PY 1 PY 1 PY supported by Halifax initially supported by Trenton (later a core DRC) supported by Edmonton supported by Edmonton supported by Esquimalt

Director General Reserves and Cadets was assigned 2 PYs. EDCM was allocated 12 PYs.

R E S O U R C E U S E B Y E N V I R O N M E N TA L C O M M A N D A balancing of resources among the various environmental commands was completed with the following allocation:
CLS CAS CMS CFRETS NCR DGCR EDCM 23 PY 12 PY 9 PY 5 PY 2 PY 2 PY 12 PY (5 military) (2 military) (2 military) (1 military) (1 military) (0 military) (3 military) $2.3 million $1.2 million $860 thousand $471 thousand $470 thousand $219 thousand $1.5 million

In summary, the national program was established with 68 persons and a budget of $6.7 million per year.

136

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

FUNDING ALLOCATIONS CAN OFTEN BE AN ISSUE; HAVE PARTIES AGREE ON THE CRITERIA TO BE USED FOR ALLOCATIONS (RATHER THAN THE ACTUAL ALLOCATIONS) BEFOREHAND
In large multi-functional, regionally dispersed organizations, where there are resource implications attached to a proposed program, it is important to form a consensus among the key stakeholders regarding what, where, who, and how the program will be put into place. Stakeholders need to understand what resources will flow to (or be contributed by) each organizational unit before going forward for full program approval. There should be very little room for ambiguity. If the parties do not understand who gets (or gives up) what, they are unlikely to support the decision-making process of the program as a whole.

Manager, Evaluation (EDCM 2)—is responsible for developing the methodology and the tools used to assess the success of the CMP. Such tools include means of evaluating organizations (DGCMP and DRC), individuals (mediators) and processes (mediation), as well as the impact of ADR services in DND/CF. This person works closely with stakeholders to validate the integration of the CMP within DND/CF. Executive Assistant to DGCMP (EDCM 3)—assists DGCMP in the day-to-day program management functions, including the coordination of activities within DGCMP to meet objectives, such as business planning, budgeting and allocation of funds to DRCs. This person also prepares quarterly and end-of-year reports on the activities of the Conflict Management Program. Manager, Select Case Mediation (EDCM 4)—is responsible for the integrity of all mediations and interventions conducted within the context of the Conflict Management Program. There is a close relationship with the Office of the DND/CF Legal Advisor and the Judge Advocate General in providing recommendations on various legal issues related to ADR interventions. Administrative Assistant (EDCM 5)—reports to DGCMP and provides business services, advice and recommendations in areas such as human resources, training and finance. This person is responsible for preparing budget forecasts, administering budgets and coordinating all other financial activities, such as contracts, invoices, salary, operations and maintenance. The Administrative Assistant supervises the military clerk. Clerk (EDCM 5-2)—supports the Administrative Assistant in providing business services to DGCMP staff. Activities include making travel arrangements and processing claims, maintaining the filing system, ensuring the protection of sensitive documents, ordering and keeping track of supplies and maintaining the library. Director, National Operations (EDCM 6)—is responsible for the initial staffing of all DRC positions and for coordinating the operations of the DRCs. The Director is also responsible for convening the DRC Coordinators’ meeting on a regular basis. As well, the Director is responsible for developing tools used to monitor DRC activities to ensure that a standardized level of service is maintained nationally. The Director liaises with the DRCs and DGCMP so that DGCMP can provide important materials, such as guidelines and manuals, to the DRCs.

PROGRAM GOVERNANCE
EDCM/DGCM STRUCTURE As noted early in this book, the skills and responsibilities required at the inception of an initiative may well be different from those required for its maintenance. This understanding was recognized and built into the design of DND/CF’s CMP. As we moved to an organization-wide program, we introduced the position of Director General Conflict Management Program. The following describes the initial EDCM and subsequent DGCMP organizations.
Executive Director Conflict Management (EDCM)—is recognized as the departmental authority for all aspects of ADR, including mediations and ADR training in DND/CF. EDCM provides expertise on conflict management in the workplace and advice on select interventions. Director General Conflict Management Program (DGCMP)—ensures the CMP is managed within the boundaries of its mandate, monitors the delivery of ADR services, evaluates the Program regularly and modifies the Program where necessary. DGCMP also coordinates the staffing of DRCs and the distribution of funds to DRCs through the business planning process. As required, DGCMP is responsible for providing appropriate responses where new or unusual circumstances persist (e.g. a question on ethics or confidentiality).

C H A P T E R 1 2 NATIONAL ROLLOUT: ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

137

Manager, Special Projects (EDCM 7)—manages unique projects not directly related to any of the other functions within DGCMP, but necessitating close attention to advance the Conflict Management Program. Some projects are based on research and development; others are large in scope and require full-time attention for periods of several months. Manager, Training (EDCM 8)—evaluates and amends existing ADR training, reviews needs assessments to determine additional training needs and monitors the qualification of DND/CF mediators through the Mediator Qualification Program. The Manager helps integrate ADR training with other military and civilian courses and provides linkages with database input in PeopleSoft and the Individual Training Management Information System (ITMIS). Manager, Communications (EDCM 9)—develops comprehensive communications strategies and operational plans to support the CMP and to coordinate all communications products. The Communications Manager works closely with DGCMP, the DGCMP team and the regional and local DRC Coordinators to assess the CMP’s communications needs and deliver the appropriate tools.

EDCM Team Charter As professionals we are self-motivated, supportive of each other, and committed to the success of team goals. We will: Respect each other’s values, differences, ideas and goals; Strive to demonstrate respect by: – using appropriate language, – valuing each other’s concerns and opinions, – demonstrating active listening behaviour, and – being patient with one another; Exchange appropriate information in a timely fashion; Model the principles and practices of ADR practitioners in our behaviour; Contribute to the DND/CF community of ADR practitioners; Strive for excellence as individuals and as a team, in a continuous learning environment; Commit to getting to know each other better as people on a social level; Be open to opportunities for developing the team; Provide and seek out constructive feedback on a regular basis, as individuals and as a team; Foster an environment that is supportive of professional and personal aspects of our lives; If there is a perception or feeling of conflict with someone, take the initiative and commit to resolving the conflict early, seeking the help of others as necessary; and Maintain a positive attitude. We will review our performance as it relates to this charter on a quarterly basis.

THE EDCM TEAM CHARTER In designing the CMS and preparing for the national program rollout, the EDCM team realized that although this was a particularly exhilarating task, it would be logical to expect some tensions within our own work environment. At the same time, the task presented a unique opportunity to create a workplace that reflected the values and beliefs we were advocating in our program.
This led to discussions around the ways we wanted to work together. In effect, it was a discussion of our organizational culture and our behavioural norms. We decided to prepare a “team charter” outlining these norms. We reached consensus and all members of EDCM signed the following “charter”:

138

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

A TEAM CHARTER OR OTHER INSTRUMENT, WHICH ENCOURAGES DIALOGUE AMONG MEMBERS OF YOUR DESIGN TEAM, CAN HELP CREATE A “CONFLICT COMPETENT” TEAM
A process that allows a working group to discuss behavioural norms in a transparent and safe manner can be very useful. It promotes a culture of dialogue and conflict competency. It’s not so much the outcome or product emerging from the process that creates value, but the process itself. EDCM’s team charter helped establish a common understanding; however, the discussion, clarification and frank communications that were necessary to draft the charter were useful and enduring. This approach also has practical applications in group interventions dealing with dysfunctional behaviour.

In general terms, DRCs are the primary access points for ADR services across the country. ADR services include providing interest-based options such as self-help, coaching, negotiating and arranging for the services of impartial third party neutrals and mediators to help resolve disputes. Its function as well is to train appropriate personnel in interest-based techniques. DRCs do not replace any rights-based custodians such as those associated with grievances, harassment or collective agreements, nor are they mandated to provide advice or guidance on rights-based processes. They may, however, provide general information on rights-based mechanisms and refer clients to related advisors such as union representatives and HR advisors.

D R C O R G A N I Z AT I O N A L S T R U C T U R E S AND POSITIONS

Sample Organizational Chart
Coordinator AS-07/Major (Res./Reg. Force)

DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTRES The composition of the DND/CF population was a key factor in defining the structure of DRCs. The aim was to have a balance of military (both Regular and Reserve Force) and civilian staff.
Each regional DRC is provided with a Regular Force PY at the major/lieutenant-commander or captain/lieutenant(N) rank. DRCs with a regional responsibility have a minimum of three staff and a maximum of five. DRCs with a local responsibility (satellite centres) are staffed by one major (Reserve Force) or an AS-06. Normally each regional DRC has a major/lieutenantcommander or AS-07 as the Coordinator, an AS-06 or captain/lieutenant(N) as Senior Mediator, one or two AS-05s or captains/lieutenants(N) as Mediator and a clerk at the CR-04 or master corporal level. The actual filling of the positions depends on how the Coordinator position is filled. If the Coordinator is a major/lieutenant-commander, then the Senior Mediator should normally be an AS-06. Conversely, if the Coordinator is an AS-07, then the Senior Mediator should normally be a captain/lieutenant(N). The Regular Force PY offset can be used in either the Coordinator, Senior Mediator or Mediator role.

Admin. Support CR-07

Senior Mediator AS-06

Mediator Capt. (Res./Reg. Force)

Mediator AS-05

DRC Coordinator—is responsible for ensuring that the Centre provides appropriate and timely ADR services to its clients. The Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that: financial and human resources (regional) are planned and managed; the use of interest-based processes in the resolution of disputes at the earliest stage and the lowest level of the dispute is being promoted at the DRC; confidential and impartial assistance to stakeholders, regardless of position, rank or role, is being provided;

C H A P T E R 1 2 NATIONAL ROLLOUT: ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

139

ADR training is both adequately and appropriately facilitated and coordinated; ADR services are monitored and reported to the Base Commander and DGCMP as required; communications strategies, plans and products are developed and implemented; and complex, sensitive cases with legal or political ramifications are brought to the attention of DGCMP. Senior Mediator and DR Specialist—is responsible for: encouraging the use of interest-based processes in the resolution of disputes at the earliest stage and the lowest level of the dispute; providing confidential and impartial assistance and advice to stakeholders, regardless of position, rank or role; providing ADR services, in particular for complex and sensitive cases; coaching mediators in dispute resolution skills; facilitating and coordinating ADR training and delivering briefings and information sessions; and conducting trends analyses on internal disputes and identifying potential areas of conflict. Mediator and DR Specialist—assumes responsibilities similar to but somewhat less complex than the issues handled by the Senior Mediator. The Mediator would: encourage the use of interest-based processes in the resolution of disputes at the earliest stage and the lowest level of the dispute; provide confidential and impartial assistance and advice to stakeholders regardless of position, rank or role; provide ADR services; facilitate and coordinate ADR training; and deliver briefings and information sessions.

AUTHORITIES
In any national rollout process it is important to ensure that the appropriate authorities are clear. The DND/CF conflict management system is governed by three main authorities: Operational Authority—oversees the provision of ADR services to client organizations. Base, Wing and Formation Commanders have operational authority for the DRCs. Functional Authority—ensures that the overarching national DRC principles and practices are met and that the DRC linkages with national program objectives are achieved. Functional authority rests with EDCM/DGCMP. Technical Authority—provides subject matter expertise and guidance in ADR-related activities. Technical authority rests with EDCM/DGCMP.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL: TRAINING AND INTERVENTIONS
N AT I O N A L R O L L O U T A S S I S TA N C E I N TRAINING AND THE CONDUCT OF ADR INTERVENTIONS In planning for the national rollout we anticipated that there would be a substantial requirement for training and mediation services. A request for proposal was issued to acquire these services from external service providers.
We put forth the following requirements: preparing and delivering training programs optimizing program delivery processes assessing and testing of participants preparing manuals mentoring developing training materials such as case studies and role plays anticipating delivery and set-up requirements for each process element providing assistance and support to other team members to ensure that all elements are delivered at the optimum level

140

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

preparing the delivery team to ensure common focus, clarity of roles and expectations, agreements for working together, clarity of assignments and facilitation of the team’s daily feedback and orientation sessions recording and summarizing feedback and insights evaluating program effectiveness and providing advice on desirable changes designing and conducting train-the-trainer sessions related to the learning program (as required) The RFP also requested submissions for services dealing with dispute resolution interventions as follows: organizational diagnosis, action planning, implementation and evaluation of interventions gathering and analysis of data about an organization to help identify symptoms, problems and possible solutions defining the nature, scope and impact of problems facing organizations joint planning with the client to determine specific prescriptions for action, including the appropriate change method and schedule for those actions conducting interventions such as focus groups, facilitating workshops and groups, team-building workshops and exercises, business simulations (experiential learning), surveys, questionnaires, workplace assessments, coaching, mentoring and mediation, early neutral evaluation and other ADR initiatives Note: While the RFP in the CMS Tool Kit (Tool 1) was created for a different purpose, layout and wording may be relevant to the writing of any RFP.

KEY LEARNING

ORGANIZATIONS IMPLEMENTING CMSS WILL BENEFIT FROM EXTERNAL ASSISTANCE FROM ADR SPECIALISTS; IF RFPS ARE GOING TO BE USED, START THE PROCESS EARLY
Start the RFP process early and be as broad in scope as possible to permit maximum flexibility.

C H A P T E R 1 2 NATIONAL ROLLOUT: ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE

141

THE NUTS AND BOLTS

C H A P T E R

13

WHY BOTHER? Organizations evaluate conflict management systems for one or more of the following reasons:
to ensure things are working as they should

EVALUATION AND MONITORING

to establish measures of impact to continually improve to be administratively accountable to determine, assess or justify resource levels to increase awareness and support

T Y P E S O F E VA L UAT I O N S There are generally three types of evaluations:
quantitative

DID WE GET IT RIGHT?
Energy, money, time, commitment and a sincere desire to improve conflict competence in the workplace are all key ingredients in creating an effective integrated CMS. But how do you know if all that effort has paid off? You and your team have been working full tilt, carefully piecing together the many elements that go into the system. For many months you’ve been eating, drinking and breathing this. Do you really have enough perspective to assess what you’ve achieved and have yet to achieve? Evaluation and monitoring mechanisms that provide ongoing, relevant, accurate and timely feedback are crucial to determining the effectiveness of a system. They need to be transparent, appropriate and neutral and should be introduced into the system from its inception. In fact, they should be considered an essential and integral component of the CMS plan. Instituting evaluation and monitoring mechanisms directly into the CMS can mitigate the frustration of backtracking to retrieve data that may now be lost or obscure, as well as concerns over perspective. The evaluation process can serve several objectives and take many forms. Methodologies will vary, depending on what is being evaluated and when. No single approach or template fits all circumstances. There are, however, some basic frameworks that apply.

qualitative anecdotal

Q UA N T I TAT I V E E VA L UAT I O N S Quantitative evaluation is the approach most commonly used. It deals with elements that can be counted or measured. It is straightforward, easily understood and easily presented. Quantitative data is usually seen as neutral and irrefutable and, therefore, is also seen as credible. Results are often depicted using graphs, statistical data or numbers.
Quantitative evaluations are particularly useful for costbenefit analyses and for building strong arguments for funding. Senior officials will often require a strong business case and a clearly identified return on investment before authorizing further funding. In the context of CMSs, quantitative evaluations often address efficiency issues and cover: the cost factor—which measures the costs to the organization (and disputants) of using ADR to resolve disputes instead of the traditional rights-based processes. These costs may be measured in dollars, lost productivity, absenteeism and legal fees.

142

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

the time factor—which measures the time taken to deal with the issue using ADR as opposed to rights-based processes such as investigations, hearings, inquiries and litigation. the satisfaction factor—which measures the extent to which the parties are satisfied with final outcomes and the degree to which agreements tend to “hold” or remain intact. Once again, these measures are normally based on a comparison of interest- and rights-based processes.

To address these questions, qualitative evaluations will often use: document reviews, such as reports, minutes and correspondence to access information about the chronology of decisions and actions or the response and opinions of individuals affected by the system; expert opinion, by seeking the views of outside experts on various initiatives; and case studies which focus on representative or similar situations.

Q UA L I TAT I V E E VA L UAT I O N S Qualitative evaluations are more descriptive. They assess what has taken place in relation to industry standards, guidelines or other benchmarks. The DND/CF project was evaluated in relation to the standards for designing integrated conflict management systems established by SPIDR.
While the quantitative approach normally focuses on gathering and analyzing data to determine efficiencies, qualitative evaluations tend to find answers to questions about the effectiveness of a system or its components. As such, qualitative evaluations are often a matter of asking the right questions. Qualitative evaluations frequently deal with concerns such as: the suitability factor—wherein pertinent questions might include: Is the system effective in this particular organization? Is it appropriate? the structural factor—wherein relevant questions might include: Does the system cover all people and all types of workplace problems? Does it focus on conflict resolution at the lowest possible level? Does it provide multiple access points? Are there multiple interest- and rights-based options for employees? Are there effective support structures within the organization? the fairness factor—to which designers might ask: Does the system ensure fairness through the inclusion of voluntary participation, confidentiality, privacy, accessibility and impartial, well-trained neutrals? Does it respect collective bargaining agreements and rights? Does it respect the diversity of individuals? Does it serve the needs of individuals from both official language groups? Does it permit access to rights-based processes if requested by disputants?

A N E C D OTA L E VA L UAT I O N S Although not widely acknowledged as an evaluation tool, anecdotes are one of the most important feedback mechanisms—particularly in the very early stages of a system design exercise. Anecdotes are the stories people tell about their experience with, or understanding of, the initiative. They can take the form of comments in public forums, discussions around the water cooler, person-to-person comments and correspondence.
There is very little structure to such “evaluations”; however, these anecdotes can have a profound impact on stakeholders’ acceptance of the program—particularly when they come from people whose views are well respected. To understand the impact of this approach, think for a moment about movie ads or book jackets where quotes from highly respected critics and authors are displayed. These testimonials can be quite powerful, particularly when the source is an impartial authority. The stamp of approval from a recognized expert carries a lot of weight. If many experts reiterate this approval, the overall effect is cumulative. Anecdotal “evidence” is not restricted to expert testimonials. Anecdotes often come from people who have had personal experience with the system. Their observations are therefore extremely valuable—not just as a selling tool, but as a learning tool. Their comments will help designers understand the experience of clients, which can help to direct modifications to the system.

C H A P T E R 1 3 EVALUATION AND MONITORING

143

Over the course of the DND/CF project implementation phase, I kept a record of some of these comments, particularly those that were unsolicited. Sample comments, which on occasion I incorporated into some strategic briefings and presentations to DND/CF officials, are quoted below: “The Centre has had tremendous success mediating throughout (the organization), probably reducing formal investigations by over 95%.”—Base Commander, army “This is a helluva lot better than having a grievance where the employee wins but is not happy and the manager is upset because he lost …or, we lost and the workplace is a shambles.”—union spokesperson “(The) system is a good one ... imperative that it be supported from the top (by people like me who are close to the troops). I’ve used it and I can stand up in front of the troops and categorically state that the process works for the betterment of all.”—senior army officer “If this matter had gone to trial, and whether or not we eventually won the legal fight, the costs to the institution in financial and especially human terms would have been enormous … the settlement allowed us to avoid all of that … a truly good one for the personal defendants as well as for the institution.”—former DND/CF Legal Advisor “These were not easy cases, clearly beyond the point of being solved by traditional administrative processes. (The process) helps find solutions that are positive and work for the institution instead of against it.”—former Chief of the Air Staff “I don’t believe that X and I are operating under any illusions that two strong-willed individuals as passionate about their work as he and I will never disagree with each other in the future, but we now have the tools to ensure that it does not escalate beyond a healthy discussion of differing points of view.”—unsolicited letter to Vice Chief of the Defence Staff “A leading edge system design initiative ... recognized as being among the very best such initiatives in the world. The process is state of the art.”—Ajilon Canada

KEY LEARNING

ANECDOTAL COMMENTS CAN BE VERY USEFUL; CAPTURE THEM IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY
Capture anecdotal comments in a systematic manner early in the project phase. It’s easy for them to get lost or forgotten. Their use in getting program acceptance at a later date can be substantial, sometimes having an even greater impact than what some would consider more scientific, empirical evidence.

THE FOUR STAGES OF EVALUATION: PLANNING, PROJECT, PROGRAM AND PROCESS
Each stage in the CMS development process presents different goals and challenges. Accordingly, the nature and scope of an evaluation process will often shift, depending on where you are in the system design process.

P L A N N I N G S TAG E The planning stage is the period when the system designer has a broad mandate to seek approvals for the testing and implementation of initiatives. During this stage the designer will need to develop an evaluation plan that explains the what-how-when-where-who of a proposed evaluation process.
Early in the planning phase you will want an evaluation plan that addresses: conflict management project goals—Are they being achieved? What is working? What could be improved? How can useful approaches be sustained? dispute resolution system goals—What is effective in enhancing the system? critical system design success factors—What is required for the system design project to be implemented effectively? critical ADR success factors—What is required for the ADR process to work well? What is required for the further development of the evaluation tools?

144

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

In February 2000 the DND/CF Chief Review Services organization helped us prepare an evaluation framework internally. This framework established the parameters within which a more comprehensive evaluation could be conducted. It included three components: conflict management project design pilot project design pilot project performance The framework proposed methodologies, data sources and information that we would need to collect to help us assess how to “do the right thing” and how to “do it right.”

The evaluation at the project phase should address: the return on investment—a cost-benefit analysis; whether the system works and is making a difference; the scope of its impact; the nature and sources of conflict; emerging patterns of workplace conflict and systemic issues; what works particularly well and what needs to be changed; whether to proceed; and how to proceed.

KEY LEARNING

INCLUDE THE EVALUATION PLAN WITH THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT PROJECT PROPOSAL
A comprehensive evaluation plan, presented in concert with the conflict management project proposal, adds clarity on how success is viewed and on how to define accountabilities. It also significantly enhances the comfort level and buy-in of approving authorities. Develop the plan in consultation with key stakeholders.

P R O G R A M S TAG E This is the stage where the full program has been implemented and now requires ongoing assessment and monitoring.
At the program stage, the evaluation should address: program elements that require modification; systemic problems (How can they be corrected?); resource distributions among program components or centres (Should they be shifted?); and efficiency and effectiveness.

P R O J E C T S TAG E The system design process in large organizations normally includes a pilot project or testing phase, which is undertaken before implementing the full program. This enables the organization to make modifications to the proposed model as required. It allows the organization to determine how well ADR processes work within the context of its unique culture, to better assess the costs and benefits, and to better determine the level of investment the organization wishes to make.
The project evaluation normally covers both the broad conflict management project and the individual pilot site initiatives. This is one of the most critical steps in the system design process. It will heavily influence the nature, scope and level of funding for the overall system.

P R O C E S S S TAG E The process stage, from an evaluation perspective, is a subset of the other stages and focuses on the various ADR processes which occur within those stages. These processes include the conduct of mediations, workplace assessments, coaching and facilitation interventions and training.
Evaluation objectives include an enhanced understanding of: client satisfaction levels with regard to mediations and other ADR interventions; quality control of the mediation process, ADR and training; and training and professional development requirements. For example, DND/CF monitors all interventions and evaluates all training programs, each mediation and mediator performance.

C H A P T E R 1 3 EVALUATION AND MONITORING

145

STEPS IN THE EVALUATION PROCESS: A CHECKLIST
An effective evaluation process for an integrated CMS will take into account the procedures identified by groups such as the Association for Conflict Resolution, the Administrative Conference of the United States, and the US Federal InterAgency Working Group, which have published guidelines on this subject. Readers may find the following evaluation checklist useful:

Establish criteria for the selection of an evaluator. Things to consider include: – objectivity (evaluator should normally be external to the organization); – evaluation experience; – technical expertise (with both evaluation and ADR); and – an understanding of organization and context within which the program operates. Determine most relevant timing: – Has the program been operational long enough to provide meaningful data and resolve start-up problems? – What are the decision-making milestones for which information would be most useful? – What stage (planning, pilot, program) of the initiative is being evaluated? Establish the evaluation budget and allocate costs. These will be a function of: – the type of evaluation design used; – the complexity and number of the performance indicators measured; – availability of data; and – the person(s) or organization conducting the evaluation.

I. COMPLETE PRE-DESIGN PLANNING A N D P R E PA R AT I O N Define the conflict management system’s goals and related measures of success:
– What would a successful program “look like”? – What are the measures of success (e.g. program use, cost savings, time savings, user satisfaction and enhanced relationships)? Define the objectives of the evaluation. How will it be used? Evaluation objectives should be consistent with: – the system’s objectives and be able to indicate the degree to which these objectives are being met and what changes should be made; and – the interests and expectations of the audience to whom the evaluation is directed. Define the clientele for the evaluation and their respective interests. Focus on the most “important” audience. These may include: – program champion(s); – program officials and managers; – key stakeholders, including unions, HR professionals, legal services; – program users, clients, disputants; and – other federal agencies (e.g. Treasury Board, the Public Service Commission, the Public Service Staff Relations Board).

I I . P R E PA R E T H E E VA L UAT I O N D E S I G N The evaluation design process may help users gain a thorough understanding of the conflict management program being evaluated by means of:
– document reviews; and – interviews with key mangers and stakeholders. Clarify goals and objectives and establish measurable performance indicators. Depending on the program objectives, these indicators may include: – settlement rates of claims; – reduction of formal complaints; – reduction of time to resolve complaint; – cost savings; and – enhanced relationships.

146

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Establish a research methodology, data collection and analysis plan. Include: – time-cost benefit analysis, comparison group designs, experimental design with control group; and – case studies, status reports, time series collections, surveys, evaluation forms, personal interviews. Clarify program effectiveness measures designed to assess the impact of the program on users and on the attainment of goals. These indicators can be broken down into three categories: Efficiency (ADR as compared to traditional dispute resolution processes) – cost to government; – costs to disputants; and – time required. Effectiveness (ADR versus traditional dispute resolution methods) – number of settlements; – nature of the outcomes; – durability of the outcomes (compliance); – rate of dispute recurrence; – size of caseload inventory; – level at which disputes are resolved; – the stage at which disputes are resolved; and – public/management perceptions. User satisfaction – perceptions of fairness, appropriateness and usefulness; – perceptions of participants’ control over their own decisions; – satisfaction with outcomes; – impact on relationship between parties; and – willingness to use ADR again.

Consider other program design and administration (structure and process) indicators, including: Program organization: – program structure and processes—consistent with laws, departmental policies, regulations; – directives, guidelines and standards—sufficient to allow proper program administration; – staff and user responsibilities—well delineated; – sufficient and appropriate staff; and – coordination with key external and internal organizations and individuals. Program quality: – appropriateness of staff and user training; – relationship between training and dispute outcomes; and – neutrals—user perceptions concerning selection process, competence, objectivity. Service delivery: – user access to ADR—awareness of program, availability, ease of use; – user understanding of procedural requirements, how the program works; and – case selection criteria and participants’ perceptions of appropriateness and fairness. Consult with and confirm approach with stakeholders.

I I I . I M P L E M E N T T H E E VA L UAT I O N D E S I G N Collect the data from:
– case files, archival data, databases; – mail surveys; – telephone surveys and interviews; – personal interviews; – evaluation forms; – expert opinion; and – anecdotal testimonials.

C H A P T E R 1 3 EVALUATION AND MONITORING

147

Analyze and interpret the data using: – descriptive statistics—percentages and frequencies; and – analytical statistics—measurement to explain significant differences in a given comparison factor.

KEY LEARNING

AN EFFECTIVE EVALUATION PROCESS DOES NOT HIDE DEFICIENCIES
In the presentation of evaluation findings, be clear, honest and direct. Do not attempt to hide deficiencies. The credibility of the program will be enhanced if the principles of openness and transparency are reflected in the evaluation reporting process.

I V. W R I T E T H E R E P O R T The report will normally include:
– a description of the conflict management program, including background, goals and objectives, how it works and current status; – the goals and objectives of the evaluation; – a description of the methodology that was used and why it was used; – an outline of evaluation findings; – a description of program strengths and where improvements must/should be made; – a discussion of program administration implications; – recommendations and follow-up requirements; and – an executive summary.

THE DND/CF EXPERIENCE
In March 2001 Ajilon Canada reported on three evaluations that PDG Inc. had conducted on its behalf over the previous several months. These three reports were: The Dispute Resolution System and the Design Process Launching the Dispute Resolution System: The Pilot Sites Recommendations for the DND/CF-Wide Rollout

V. D I S S E M I N A T E R E S U LT S It is important to have a communication strategy addressing the dissemination of evaluation results. This will identify:
– to whom the results will be disseminated: Who will make this decision? The continuous oversight body or program steering committee will need to be informed early and throughout the process. Ongoing feedback to key stakeholders is very important. – how widely results should be disseminated: This will be a function of level of interest and costs. Normally the policy of transparency, and therefore broad distribution, will serve the program well. – how the results will be disseminated: This could include memorandum, CANFORGEN, presentations, reports, publication in the organization’s newsletter and electronic distribution.

METHODOLOGY FOR CONDUCTING T H E T H R E E E VA L UAT I O N R E P O RT S All work was conducted externally, at arm’s length.
Interpretive research techniques formed the base of data gathering for these reports and were used to collect qualitative information regarding the meaning and perceptions of the individuals involved. Where possible, empirical research techniques were used to discern objective and quantifiable facts and to relate them to the author’s experience and knowledge of external best practices. The evaluation process focused on three data-gathering techniques: 1. interviews 2. data review 3. case studies I have included the comprehensive list of questions the evaluator used both to demonstrate the type and depth of the inquiries and to provide a template for evaluation queries that designers may wish to employ within their own organizations.

148

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

1. INTERVIEWS The core data-gathering technique consisted of individual interviews with some 60 stakeholders representing a broad range of interests and involvement in the system design process and pilot sites. They provided factual data, perceptions and opinions. They included:
EDCM staff; members of the Conflict Management Steering Committee, Pilot Site Dispute Resolution Coordinators, staff and some former staff, and superiors in all pilot sites; union representatives; mediators; individuals involved in related human resources or grievance initiatives; and members and employees who had been users of the new system.

Does the DRC add value or have the potential to be good value? Explain. Is it being used and do people find it is working? Is the Program changing people’s behaviour? Is the establishment of a conflict management system across DND/CF still relevant to meeting the needs of the organization? Are there procedural, administrative, financial or other factors beyond the Project’s or pilot site’s control that influence it, and to what extent do they support or hinder the Project? How should the system be implemented? Regionally? By command? Taking postings into account, do you have any recommendations on how to establish and maintain ADR capacity (finding, qualifying and retaining the appropriate human resources)? Do you have any concerns about service level gaps? Are the mission, vision and values within DND/CF supported by the conflict management processes?

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS Questions were grouped by topic and posed by the evaluator as follows:
Design Process What is your role and experience? What was the design process? What stakeholder groups were actively involved? Were there any stakeholders absent during any key decision making? Was there sufficient follow-up and feedback to participants? To what extent has the design from the facilitated design workshop been implemented? What framework for conducting interventions has been established? What is your opinion of how the pilot site has developed? Where have you excelled? What have been the challenges? What is your perception of Base/Wing reaction to the DRC?

PROJECT MANAGEMENT How is the Project managed at your site?
Is there a critical path that outlines budget and resources? Do you have adequate resources (trained staff, funding, infrastructure) to fulfill your mission? Is there a link with stakeholders to promote trust and buy-in? Is there sincere and visible championship by senior managers? Is there sincere and visible championship by labour leaders? Is there an advisory or steering group overseeing the system? In what areas is the Project excelling? What lessons have you learned? What recommendations would you make for rollout?

C H A P T E R 1 3 EVALUATION AND MONITORING

149

NEEDS ASSESSMENT What diagnostic tools were developed to assess CMP needs?
What workplace assessment was conducted? What lessons have you learned? What recommendations would you make for rollout?

P R O B L E M S O LV I N G : S E L E C T C A S E M E D I AT I O N Have you selected deadlocked and backlogged cases for mediation?
What degree of satisfaction has there been with the process? What degree of satisfaction has there been with the outcomes? What effect has the process had on relationships? How durable are the results? Are other problem-solving mechanisms emphasized, such as coaching, listening and referral? Do you have any recommendations for moving from third party interventions (such as mediation) to conflict prevention and self-resolution initiatives? Is there any evidence of conflict prevention?

O R G A N I Z AT I O N A L A L I G N M E N T What steps did you take to identify systemic issues and problems?
What, if any, policy changes occurred? What were the institutionalized incentives? What lessons have you learned? What recommendations would you make for rollout?

C O M M U N I C AT I O N What communication strategy was developed?
What examples can you provide of how you implemented this strategy? What lessons have you learned? What recommendations would you make for rollout?

What lessons have you learned? What recommendations would you make for rollout?

D O C U M E N TAT I O N Have you developed policies, guidelines and reports? BEST PRACTICES Are you staying abreast of external and internal best practices? How?
Do you have any best-practice innovations to share? Is there an effective mechanism in place for sharing best practices with all stakeholders, among pilot sites and EDCM? How?

TRAINING What training needs have you identified?
What training standards have been developed? How did you develop your confidential neutrals? How many people were trained and in what capacity? Evaluation: Did you notice any changes in behaviour because of training? Do you have recommendations for establishing and maintaining national standards (e.g. mediator qualifications, training)? In what areas have personnel working within EDCM or DRCs received training and advanced training? What lessons have you learned? What recommendations would you make for rollout?

E VA L UAT I O N Have you developed an evaluation process?
Is the evaluation process being implemented? Do you have any recommendations on how to evaluate intangibles such as prevention?

150

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

SAFEGUARDS Have you ensured that participation is voluntary?
Have you ensured the protection of privacy and confidentiality? Have you ensured the qualifications and training of neutrals? Has your process respected and reflected diversity? Have you instituted safeguards against reprisal and retaliation? Have you respected collective bargaining agreement? Have you respected statutory and workplace rights? Have you respected need for accompaniment or representation? Have you provided the opportunity to request information? Is your method for selecting a mediator fair?

What access points are provided? Are you providing access points for persons in conflict? Are persons who are access points trained in conflict management? Do you have internal, independent, confidential neutrals? Is there a central coordinating office?

2 . DATA R E V I E W The consultant reviewed the available data and documentation provided by DND/CF relating to:
the design process and planning undertaken to date and related documentation from EDCM and pilot sites; and the facilitated design workshops held in each pilot site.

3. CASE STUDIES The consultant examined case studies of ADR interventions and of the pilot sites and presented preliminary findings and recommendations to the Conflict Management Steering Committee on November 21, 2000.
In relation to the standards against which the Project was evaluated, the evaluator concluded: The Conflict Management Project within the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces is a leading-edge system design initiative, and the largest in North America. It has begun to receive deserved recognition as being amongst the very best such initiatives in the world, and as having long-term immense potential to influence significant organizational, and perhaps societal, change. The process being used is state of the art, and those who are championing and implementing it deserve enormous credit for having included every key feature, safeguard and component in the design process.

F I V E F E AT U R E S F O U N D I N I N T E G R AT E D C M S S Is your system broad enough in scope for all problems and people?
Does it foster a positive culture for raising conflict? Can you give examples? Does it provide an opportunity for these options and functions: – listening; – referral; – giving and receiving information; – coaching, reframing and developing options; – someone to act as informal go-between; – classical mediation; – ad hoc generic training; – systems change; – support of all parties during conflict, including co-workers; – rewarding good behaviour (and bad behaviour is not rewarded); and – upward feedback?

REPORT 1—THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM AND THE DESIGN PROCESS This report evaluated the dispute resolution system and the process that was used for its design, comparing it against industry standards in three areas:
1. features; 2. safeguards; and 3. design components.

C H A P T E R 1 3 EVALUATION AND MONITORING

151

The report findings were articulated as follows:

1 . F E AT U R E S all encompassing. All people, regardless of their role within the organization, will be able to access the system for all types of problems.
a culture of “conflict competency,” in which all conflict can be safely raised and support will be provided. The “default reaction” changes from one of shrugging off or escalating conflict to accepting it positively and encouraging early, low-level solutions. multiple access points. The organization will ensure that there are knowledgeable people in the system to approach for help. multiple options—rights- and interest-based. Interestbased options are expanded well beyond mediation to include many prevention processes and providing skilled people, including confidential neutrals, to listen, to coach for the direct approach and to refer, as well as conducting traditional processes such as mediation. supporting processes (critical-mass training, communications, sincere and visible internal championship, institutionalized incentives, resources, alignment initiatives) and structures (coordinating office, oversight group, independent confidential neutrals, policies, feedback, monitoring and evaluation mechanisms).

3. DESIGN COMPONENTS Design components are the initiatives launched to put in place a complete and integrated CMS. Once launched, seven of the 10 components, marked by asterisks (*) below, become permanent features of an integrated CMS. The 10 components are:
assessing the need and will for change project management* best practices* system design through pilot projects alignment and integration initiatives* evaluation* communications* critical-mass training* problem resolution processes, e.g. “select case mediation”* transition In summary, this report examined the key elements that went into the design of an integrated CMS and compared the overall DND/CF Conflict Management Project’s design process and the product it developed against industry standards. It identified where the DND/CF system excelled and where it needed strengthening. The report focused on the centre—the activities of the Office of EDCM—addressing questions related to the system, the process and the mandate and objectives. The questions included: Does the Project have, or propose to introduce, the key features of a healthy system? Does it incorporate essential safeguards (voluntary participation, confidentiality, etc.)? Is each of the 10 key design components in place? Does the process itself model the “interest-based” principles it espouses? Has the EDCM met its mandate and objectives?

2. SAFEGUARDS voluntary participation
privacy and confidentiality neutrals: impartial, qualified, fairly selected and reflecting diversity respect for collective agreements and other rights respect for diversity protection against reprisal access to disclosure/information the right of accompaniment/representation

152

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

REPORT 2—LAUNCHING THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM: THE PILOT SITES This report evaluated the pilot sites and ADR usage within DND/CF. Its focus was on the status of the DND/CF Conflict Management Project as of autumn 2000 in five pilot sites: Canadian Forces Recruiting, Education and Training System at Borden; Land Force Western Area in Edmonton; 17 Wing in Winnipeg; the National Capital Region in Ottawa; and Maritime Forces Atlantic in Halifax.
Recognizing that the pilot sites were experimental, the evaluation was not a “pass/fail report card.” Rather, it served to support the rollout by: providing a basic status report on ADR implementation in each pilot site, its design process and the extent to which each incorporated the features, safeguards and components of a system; identifying innovations and internal best practices; identifying the usage of interest-based dispute resolution options in the pilot sites with comments and observations of the consultant; surfacing lessons learned—areas to be strengthened and issues that arose and needed to be dealt with in the rollout; and providing a summary of the consultant’s conclusions: Was ADR being used within DND/CF? Was it working? What was its potential? Could it foster positive cultural change? The overall conclusions of this evaluation were that: the two-year pilot of the CMP was an outstanding success; the Dispute Resolution Centre concept is suitable as a structure in the future; ADR works; and the system can foster positive cultural change.

All the key features and components of an integrated system exist at least at the planning stage or beyond. The strength of individual features and components naturally varies due to the stage of development and resource issues. EDMC is fulfilling its mandate extremely well and is on plan to meet its objectives. Six possible rollout structure options were examined: 1. EDCM as a central organization providing all ADR services across the country 2. all services provided by an external neutral agency, either a new committee or a contracted alternative service delivery provider 3. EDCM as a central control organization with services provided by regional DRCs 4. DRCs established with normal chain-of-command responsibilities and controls 5. DRCs reporting to EDCM for a transition period and then transferred to the normal chain of command in the regions 6. DRCs reporting to the chain of command with a strong functional reporting relationship to EDCM These options were reviewed in the context of stakeholder interests and it was determined that the initiative should: have a positive impact on the chain of command’s requirement to lead and manage; recognize environmental needs, differences and cultures; respect collective agreements and the union role; be flexible and sensitive, responding to local realities and existing capabilities; take permanent root to foster a culture change that improves workplace wellness, morale and productivity; provide consistent service, access and standards for all members and employees; be trusted to be neutral and confidential and to ensure no reprisals; be understood; and offer early solutions and ensure they are fair.

REPORT 3—THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT P R O J E C T: R E C O M M E N D AT I O N S F O R DND/CF-WIDE ROLLOUT The overall results of the Project and pilot site evaluation concluded that:
Alternative Dispute Resolution does work within DND/CF, and there is clear evidence that it is efficient and effective. The introduction of an integrated CMS within DND/CF has strong potential to foster positive culture change. The design process is consistent with industry standards and in many aspects has been groundbreaking.

C H A P T E R 1 3 EVALUATION AND MONITORING

153

The consultant’s recommendation of option 6, wherein DRCs would report to the chain of command with a strong functional reporting relationship to EDCM, was subsequently accepted with minor modifications. (For more on this see Chapter 14.)

Do DRCs have access to qualified mediators as required by the demand for services? Have awareness-building activities been undertaken as required? Have communications activities been undertaken as planned?

EVALUATION FRAMEWORK: ISSUES AND QUESTIONS
In April 2002 the consulting group Beals, Lalonde and Associates suggested that an evaluation framework should address key questions related to the following areas: relevance; progress (implementation and operations); success (achievement of objectives); and cost-effectiveness.

Have coordination mechanisms been put in place? Do DRCs provide appropriate, timely and effective ADR services?

SUCCESS (ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES) Has ADR become the preferred approach to resolving workplace disputes?
Are DND/CF staff aware of the CMP and of its relationship to rights-based dispute resolution processes? Do DND/CF staff know how to access the ADR services offered through the CMP? Do DND/CF staff have the skills required to participate effectively in the ADR methods championed by and/or offered through the CMP? Do DND/CF staff have access to a full range of expertly delivered services, including mediation, consultation, coaching and training? Are conflicts settled as early and as close to source as possible? Have innovative approaches to conflict management been explored and developed? Has morale improved as a result of the implementation of the CMP? Has systemic integration of ADR approaches been achieved in: – institutions; – policies, programs and processes; and – behaviours? Has DND/CF capacity to deal constructively with conflict increased? Have the direct costs of conflicts been reduced? Have the indirect costs of conflicts been reduced?

RELEVANCE Does the Program continue to be consistent with departmental and government-wide priorities, and does it realistically address an actual need?
Does the CMP respond to an identified need within DND/CF? Does the CMP duplicate activities of other programs?

P R O G R E S S ( I M P L E M E N TAT I O N A N D O P E R AT I O N S ) Is the Program making progress toward the achievement of the final results?
Is the Program effective in meeting its intended outcomes, within budget and without unwanted negative outcomes? Are plans/policies/procedures in place? Has appropriate, timely and effective training been developed and delivered? Are mechanisms in place to monitor the need for additional training for mediators and to provide that training? Are mechanisms in place to monitor, amend and adapt the CMP? Have DRCs been established to serve appropriate geographic areas and numbers of member/civilian staff?

154

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S Are the most appropriate and efficient means being used to achieve outcomes, relative to alternative design and delivery approaches?
Was the budget for the Program appropriate to achieve its objectives? Has the Program been implemented and operated using the most cost-effective means? Two types of evaluations—formative and summative—were recommended for the CMP:

assessing the scope of ADR incorporated into Canadian Forces leadership training. The methodology used was opinion sampling.

F O R M AT I V E The focus would be almost solely on the issues identified under Progress (Implementation and Operations) and it would consist of a mid-term evaluation to examine:
how the Program was being implemented; whether adjustments are necessary; and whether progress toward the achievement of the results was occurring. An RFP was issued for this.

BASELINE SURVEY To get a profile of the general levels of awareness, individual training, and opinions regarding the services provided by EDCM through its network of DRCs, a baseline survey was transmitted to a sample of 7,000 military members and civilians across DND/CF in November 2002. Findings of this survey were to be used to guide EDCM in the development of future policies and training strategies. The survey was also meant to be a monitoring instrument that could be applied in future to measure progress. The survey received a response rate of almost 40 per cent.
The survey posed questions covering the following topics: How familiar were respondents with rights-based processes for resolving workplace disputes (e.g. grievances, harassment complaints)? Were they aware of the DND/CF Dispute Resolution Centres? How did they first learn of the existence of the DRCs? How familiar were they with ADR processes (coaching, negotiation, mediation)? Did they know who was entitled to use the services of the DRCs? Of which DND/CF ADR services were they aware? Of which ADR training courses were individuals aware? Which internal courses had they attended? Which external courses had they attended?

S U M M AT I V E This final evaluation would include a strong focus on all issues identified above, except those identified under Progress (Implementation and Operations). It would examine the degree to which the intended results have been achieved and determine how much the Program contributed to those achieved results.

INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF ADR IN DND/CF
An evaluation was conducted on March 31, 2003, to determine the extent to which ADR was being institutionalized in the Canadian Forces, particularly in relation to how it was being reflected in the broad array of Canadian Forces training programs for officers and members. Specifically, its focus was on: assessing the general awareness of ADR in the Canadian Forces defining the leadership challenge in having ADR accepted as a leadership tool and institutionalized in the Canadian Forces

Who paid for the ADR training courses? When they had an issue, had they contacted a DRC? If so, for what purpose? If not, why not? To what extent were they satisfied with the level of service received from the DRC? How did they think their supervisors reacted to their use of a DRC? How effective were DRCs in providing ADR services? To what extent did respondents support the ADR system at DND/CF? What were the respondents’ location, first language, gender, rank and position?

C H A P T E R 1 3 EVALUATION AND MONITORING

155

The survey indicated that approximately one-half of the respondents were aware of the DRC in their region, that twothirds were supportive of the ADR system and that two-thirds of users were generally or very satisfied with the services they had received from the DRCs.

The most commonly used techniques were (1) coaching, which accounted for 61 per cent of interventions and (2) mediation with a neutral third party, which accounted for 31 per cent of interventions. Group interventions and workplace assessments were also carried out, but with much less frequency (accounting for 5 per cent and 3 per cent respectively).

KEY LEARNING

BEHAVIOURAL AND ATTITUDINAL CHANGE IS DIFFICULT TO MEASURE; CONSIDER THE USE OF BASELINE SURVEYS
A baseline survey of an organization’s conflict management program should be implemented to monitor program progress and attitudinal change over time. The timing is important. It is best initiated after the program is up and running, but before it has had the opportunity to become “entrenched.”

A D R I N T E R V E N T I O N S DATA COLLECTION FORMS We captured information on the nature and scope of the interventions through the use of ADR Interventions Data Collection Forms and Information About the Parties Involved Forms. The responsible DRC official completed these forms, which also provided the following information:
Method by which the initial contact was made (e-mail, in person, telephone) Dates (contact, intervention, completion) Organization where individual works

I N T E R V E N T I O N S A N D N AT U R E O F I S S U E S In 2002/2003, 643 interventions were conducted by DRCs. The types of interventions are indicated in the following graph:

How person became aware of DRC (Web site, briefing, advertising/promotion referral) Nature of the issue (working relationship, performance evaluation, discipline, grievance, harassment) Type of intervention (coaching, group intervention, mediation, workplace assessment); Mediator (name[s]) Language of intervention

Types of Interventions For the 643 Interventions Conducted Apr 02–Mar 03
450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 394

Agreement to Mediate (usage) Minutes of Settlement (completed or not completed) 202 Outcome (issue fully resolved, partially resolved, not resolved) 31

16

Coaching Mediation Group Intervention WCA

156

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

The resulting broad array of information was collected and analyzed as follows:

M E D I AT I O N R E S U LT S :

TRAINING: Evaluation processes are applied to the various training initiatives undertaken by EDCM. The strengths and weaknesses of all training courses are reviewed at the conclusion of each course.
As well, information on the type of ADR course offerings and the number of participants attending each is collected on an ongoing basis. The chart below outlines this:

Results of Mediations Apr 02–Mar 03
180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 169

Total of 3750 Personnel Received ADR Related Training Apr 02–Mar 03
20 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0

13
Fully Resolved Partially Resolved Not Resolved

1327 751 503 262
Customized

546
CM/ADR

361
IBN

PA R T I E S I N V O LV E D :

Parties to the 643 Interventions Apr 02–Mar 03
400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 338 Total of 643 interventions were conducted

Civilians Military

The chart shows that courses were delivered to target groups in three different ways: Conflict management/ADR courses (one day), which were provided to 546 employees and 751 members (total 1,297) and served to provide participants with a better understanding of the ADR approach and encourage them to tap into the DRCs’ services;

153

143

5
Mil-Mil Civ-Civ Mil-Civ Cadet Other

4

Interest-based negotiation courses (two days), which were offered to 503 members and 361 employees (total 864) interested in developing greater competencies in communications and problem-solving techniques; and Customized ADR courses that were tailored to accommodate 1,327 members and 262 employees (total 1,589) with specific requirements.

C H A P T E R 1 3 EVALUATION AND MONITORING

157

KEY LEARNING

EVALUATION IS A CONTINUOUS PROCESS; IT NEVER STOPS!
In a well-designed conflict management program, evaluation is an ongoing activity. Too often evaluation is viewed as a periodic program used to justify resource requirements, rather than as a process of continuous review leading to ongoing refinement and renewal.

158

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TRENDS

C H A P T E R

14

SYSTEMS DESIGN: TRENDS, INNOVATIONS AND THE FUTURE

THE MARRIAGE OF SYSTEMS DESIGN A N D O R G A N I Z AT I O N D E V E L O P M E N T Early forms of conflict management systems often had one or two rather straightforward objectives at their core. For example, an organization might have offered mediation as an option to resolve disputes. This was the organization’s “system” and the objective was singular—to lower transactional costs as compared to other redress processes. Its orientation was that of problem solving. Mediation practitioners in this context tended to be people with legal backgrounds.
Systems using mediation models that focus on changing the behaviour of individuals involved in conflict—often referred to as transformative mediation (as described by Bush and Folger in The Promise of Mediation)—have more ambitious objectives. These often entail a “personal transformation” approach. Practitioners frequently include individuals with a background in law and the behavioural sciences. When organizations look to conflict management and interest-based processes as instruments for bringing about large-scale cultural change in organizations, we move closer to the domain of organization development (OD). The language of OD uses terms such as “cultural change,” “conflict-competent organizations” and “integrated systems.” The term “systems design” itself has a greater comfort level among OD professionals than among many ADR lawyers. In fact, many of the diagnostic tools and processes used for the conduct of workplace assessments emanated from OD practices. As well, instruments such as the Myers-Briggs Type Inventory, the Thomas-Kilmann Instrument and 360-degree feedback instruments, used for many years by OD practitioners, are increasingly being used in the field of conflict management. Group interventions, and related facilitation processes concerned with conflict in groups, bring the fields of conflict management and OD closer together. Systems design practitioners may now include those who serve as management consultants to organizations and are involved in broad change-management or other OD initiatives. Even in the early stages of its Conflict Management Project, DND/CF characterized the Project as an organizationdevelopment, change-management initiative. The goal was much broader than simply initiating a more effective way of dealing with specific disputes.

WHERE WE ARE
CMS design is a relatively new field of practice and it continues to evolve at a very rapid rate. The conceptual underpinnings have developed substantially over the past 10 years as more and more organizations have experimented with different approaches. They have shared their experiences and learnings with other ADR practitioners. The Federal Inter-Agency Working Group in the United States is a prime example of how government organizations have been able to explore approaches and share their knowledge about system design issues. In Canada the federal government’s informal Federal Coordinating Committee has, to a more modest degree, performed a similar function. Reports published by the Association for Conflict Resolution provide guidelines for designing integrated conflict management systems. These are very useful and are constantly being refined by practitioners. As the practice of systems design evolves, the best practices of today will serve as the foundation of those of tomorrow.

C H A P T E R 1 4 SYSTEMS DESIGN: TRENDS, INNOVATIONS AND THE FUTURE

159

KEY LEARNING

SYSTEMS DESIGN REQUIRES A MULTI-DISCIPLINARY APPROACH
Workplace system design processes benefit from input from various professional, ideological and practical perspectives. In the future we will likely see a greater use of multi-disciplinary teams, made up of individuals with a variety of backgrounds. These might include, among others, legal, organization-development, industrial-psychology and labour-relations professionals.

Collaborative Design Processes—ensure that stakeholders have a direct role in the design of the system and its associated policies and practices. The stakeholders participate in initiatives, such as facilitated design workshops, from which recommendations for the system emerge. This was the process used by DND/CF. Partnership—is where all directly affected stakeholders have an equal say in the design of the system and related policies and procedures. This implies a more collective ownership of the system than earlier models. The Parks Canada conflict management program has elements of this.

KEY LEARNING

NEW MODELS OF OWNERSHIP When organizations raise the possibility of implementing a CMS (and related systems design undertakings), “stakeholders” sometimes get a little nervous. This is normal. They’re not yet sure what impact this will have on them and the work they do.
Parties will want to understand where this new system “fits” in the organization: “Who will be designing the system?” and “ Who owns it? Where does it fit within the organization’s structure?”

THERE IS A TREND TOWARDS DEVELOPING SYSTEMS IN A TRANSPARENT AND COLLABORATIVE MANNER
“Co-development” leads to greater acceptance and use of such systems by stakeholders.

WHO DESIGNS THE SYSTEM? System designs normally come into being in one of four approaches:
imposition; consultation; collaborative design processes; or partnership. Imposition—is where management imposes a process, which is usually based on research it has conducted and an understanding, from its perspective, of what would be most appropriate for the organization. Consultation—occurs when key stakeholders are consulted about their views regarding the options under consideration. Stakeholders may include unions, managers, legal counsel and human resources personnel.

WHO OWNS THE SYSTEM? Legal counsel/legal services units and the human resources units generally take a very strong leadership interest in managing the system. The legal unit sees the initiative in the context of ADR and its relationship to legal redress processes. The human resources group sees it as a workplace employer-employee relations concern.
Responsibility for the conflict management programs varies by organization. Many government agencies in Canada link such initiatives to the human resources function. In the United States and Australia, organizations have tended to affiliate their programs more closely with the legal-services function. Future ownership models, in my view, are those in which a CMS is seen as being “owned” by everyone in the organization. It may be “housed” in a particular organizational unit in order to meet operational and administrative requirements; however, there is a general understanding that this is a corporate-owned initiative. Such programs tend to be more “organic” to the organization, thus generating higher levels of buy-in from employees.

Some organizations will arrange for the delivery of services

160

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

through external service providers to minimize internal ownership issues and maximize the neutrality and impartiality of service delivery. Some departmental employee-assistance programs have these characteristics. DND/CF involved all stakeholders throughout the design and implementation of its program, through formal committees and informal processes. We established a dual reporting relationship for the Conflict Management Program, with the Executive Director Conflict Management reporting jointly to two Assistant Deputy Ministers responsible for Human Resources—one civilian, the other military. This sent a strong signal about the broadly based nature of the program’s ownership. At the same time, we agreed on an arm’s-length, independent operational approach.

1. Personal Mastery—learning to expand our personal capacity to create results we most desire and to create an organizational environment which encourages this growth. CMSs should facilitate the continuous enhancement of the conflict competencies of individual employees and of organizations as a whole. Mediators, for example, will be in a continuous learning mode and will share that learning with each other. 2. Mental Models—reflecting upon, continually clarifying, and improving our internal pictures of the world and seeing how they shape our actions and decisions. Conflict-management interventions continually test the validity of mental models of disputants. 3. Shared Vision—building a sense of group commitment by developing shared images of the future we seek to create, and the principles and guiding practices by which we hope to get there. The system design process will help build consensus around the nature of the system and what it will look like in the future. Facilitated design workshops play an important role in this. 4. Team Learning—transforming conversational and collective thinking skills, so that groups of people can reliably develop intelligence and ability greater than the sum of individual members’ talents. This is particularly useful in the development of mediators and other practitioners. The mediators at DND/CF refer to themselves as a “community of practitioners.” 5. Systems Thinking—a way of thinking about, and a language for describing and understanding, the forces and interrelationships that shape the behaviour of systems. Systems thinking is at the core of CMS design. It requires that the interrelationships among all parts of the system be defined and well understood. There should be alignment among organizational units, policies and behaviours, so they operate in a comprehensive manner.

KEY LEARNING

AN EFFECTIVE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IS NOT “OWNED” BY ANY PARTICULAR ORGANIZATIONAL ENTITY; EVERYONE WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION OWNS IT
When the CMS is meant to change the way people relate to each other and how they deal with conflict in the organization, employees are more receptive to system designs that have been inclusive and are not seen as the domain of any single organizational unit. Everybody in the organization owns the system.

SYSTEM DESIGN AND THE L E A R N I N G O R G A N I Z AT I O N Just as the system design process adopts many organization development approaches, it also often embraces many of the principles of what is commonly referred to as the “learning organization.” Peter Senge describes these in his book The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Senge suggests that there are five “learning disciplines” that are at the core of a learning organization. In fact, a good CMS adopts approaches and behaviours that complement and promote Senge’s learning disciplines. If we examine these, we can see the strong parallels.

C H A P T E R 1 4 SYSTEMS DESIGN: TRENDS, INNOVATIONS AND THE FUTURE

161

KEY LEARNING

CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATIONS ARE LEARNING ORGANIZATIONS
Continuous learning becomes the norm in organizations that deal with conflict effectively.

MODEL 2: BASIC PLUS Purpose: to resolve specific disputes and address broader organizational issues
Organization ombudsperson or a similar Office Suasion and informal processes prevail; there may also be an array of ADR processes chosen, depending on the situation Broader scope of conflict and more users; concerned with broad organization-wide systemic issues

INTEGRATED CMS MODELS AS A COST-RELATED CONTINUUM
With the advent of the Public Service Modernization Act we are likely to see an array of informal CMSs with different configurations. One might envision these configurations as a continuum in relation to the breadth of the program’s objectives and its cost. As a general rule, the more ambitious and complete the system, the greater the cost; however, if you were to put it on a graph, the line would not necessarily be straight. Below are five system models. The descriptions are not written in stone, and there are likely areas of overlap and elements that may be transferred from one to another to form a model that suits the specific requirements of different organizations. That said, these models present a systems spectrum—from basic to comprehensive—that may help clarify choices. Collaboration with stakeholders and decision makers is critical in determining the model best suited to your organization’s needs.

Centralized, “powerful” single-access point Small Office; contracts out for most third party neutral services Low-moderate costs

MODEL 3: CONVENTIONAL Purpose: to resolve disputes and develop capacity for self-resolution
Multiple access points: interest- and rights-based, with “loop-backs” Several options: conciliation, interest-based negotiation, coaching, mediation, early neutral evaluation, mediation-arbitration Comprehensive: all conflicts, all employees Three or four small Offices with basic technical capacity Decentralized capacity (some select centralized services) Contract externally for most services Moderate costs

MODEL 1: BASIC Purpose: to resolve specific dispute(s) only
Limited categories of disputes and client groups Limited number of interest-based options such as conciliation/mediation Limited number of access points, such as one redress official Centralized (services from the “centre”) ADR coordinator administers process Mediators and interveners sourced externally Limited infrastructure and support mechanisms Low costs

MODEL 4: CONVENTIONAL PLUS Purpose: includes prevention and identification of systemic issues
Multi-option/multi-access Training (skill-based) is more prevalent Central direction and coordination, e.g. standards of practice Decentralized service delivery Internal and external provision of services Significant costs

162

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

MODEL 5: COMPREHENSIVE Purpose: includes broadly based cultural/behavioural change
Incorporates group and OD processes Fully integrated Alignment of institutions, processes, policies, behaviours Extensive training/internal capacity building All employees, all issues Internal (with some external) service provision Full range of decentralized as well as centralized services Substantial costs

INNOVATIVE TOOLS
MAPPING SYMBOLS System designers are becoming more creative in the development and use of innovative tools to enhance the system design process and make it more user-friendly for clients. The use of “mapping symbols” is an example of this.
For several years I have used symbols, representing both interest- and rights-based processes, that parties can arrange to visually demonstrate the structure of their systems as they design them. Symbols can be very useful in presenting a picture of various design options and can highlight structural interfaces. For example, I use sharp-cornered symbols (a triangle or square) to represent rights-based processes such as litigation. Soft-cornered symbols (an oval or circle) represent interestbased processes such a conciliation or mediation. A whole array of symbols can be used, depending upon the scope of the system. I refer to this as the “sharp-soft corner” mapping symbol process.

NEW APPROACHES TO TRAINING
Off-the-shelf training provided by various external training organizations often does not meet the unique needs of organizations. Custom training programs will become more prevalent. To leverage resources, train-the-trainer programs will be in greater demand. Mediator training will likely become more rigorous, with more comprehensive standards of practice put into place. Training will take many different forms, including selfdirected distance-learning processes, practicum, mentoring, coaching and e-learning, as well as some of the more traditional processes. Coaching will continue to evolve and be used more frequently in the development of mediators. This will assume many of the characteristics of executive coaching, but will be more directive and task-specific. Variations of peer coaching circles, communities of practice and virtual networks will become more prevalent. Because training will require more time, system designers will need to be aware of potential capacity deficiencies if the system is based exclusively on internal interveners. The training of system designers is continuing to develop at a rapid pace. A few years ago very few conflict-management or ADR programs in universities or other learning institutions included comprehensive systems design components. Now most programs have this as a key curriculum element.

The use of mapping symbols has been refined by organizations such as the Personnel Direction Group. The Lynch Mapping Symbols system uses colour-coded symbols in an innovative and effective way to assist in the system design process.

MAPPING SOFTWARE New computer software programs that can map conflict management processes and portray them in a clear, visual manner will continue to make the system designer’s task easier. When charting the various options and related loop-back processes with stakeholders, I often use a laptop and projector.

C H A P T E R 1 4 SYSTEMS DESIGN: TRENDS, INNOVATIONS AND THE FUTURE

163

GROUP DECISION SOFTWARE Organizations such as DND/CF have group decision centres, which can assist greatly in consensus-building processes. Group decision centres may take a number of different forms, but they generally employ large rooms with computer stations for each participant. Participants can input their ideas and opinions simultaneously, and these are shown on a large screen at the front of the room. Participants can rate, score, rank, consolidate or vote on the various options before them.
Group decision software can be used in a number of ways, including brainstorming to determine the critical principles of an effective system, deciding who should be involved, looking at training options and preferences, and forming consensus around the most appropriate model. The software can be especially useful if there is a large number of participants who need to convey their views in a short time frame. As well, it is useful when anonymity is important, particularly for those who want to put forward an unpopular opinion. Because everyone has an equal say, it also encourages diverse points of view, reducing the tendency of people to defer to the most senior person in the room. For those comfortable with the use of technology, it can speed up the system design review process by up to 50 percent.

ALIGNMENT
Early integrated systems often focused on the relationships and linkages between interest- and rights-based processes and related organizational structures. These organizations were conveyed in the context of a system with clearly understood mandates and roles. Alignment in the future will focus on more holistic approaches, with a broader perspective of what the system should embody. The system needs to ensure that there is alignment with corporate values and that policies and behaviours are consistent with the processes and structures being put into place. In some instances policies will need to be rewritten. Modifying behaviours will take more time!

I T E R AT I V E C O N F L I C T M A N AG E M E N T SYSTEMS CMSs of the future will be iterative in nature. They may, in fact, be referred to as iterative (rather than integrated) conflict management systems.
Continuous change is a reality of today’s organizations. To reflect changing realities and circumstances, CMSs need to be flexible and adaptable and have the capacity to change as required. Change processes should be viewed as a core element of the system. If the organization is a “learning organization,” this will not pose a challenge. Many organizations, however, after institutionalizing a suitable CMS are reluctant to change what they perceive as a good thing. As a result, the system will not be responsive to changing circumstances and will slowly die. If, however, the organization recognizes that a system is supposed to change to accommodate evolving needs and attitudes, this expectation creates a climate where change and innovation can flourish. The system designer must recognize this need for change and build it into the system.

INTERNET The Internet is having as much impact on system-design processes as it has had on so much else. It can help in areas such as:
benchmarking best practices; providing background research in all of the domains of systems design; system design templates; presenting evaluation methodologies; providing information on service providers; and training. Expect more ADR interventions to be conducted through the Internet and video conferencing in the future. On-line mediation services today are common and will be more prevalent for certain types of disputes. New systems will take into consideration the role the Internet can play.

164

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

KEY LEARNING

PROGRESSIVE SYSTEM DESIGNERS WILL UNDERSTAND THAT EMERGING TRENDS WILL CONTINUE TO INNOVATE AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE BODY OF KNOWLEDGE IN THE FIELD
Systems design is a relatively new domain. There is much room for creativity and innovation.

The “pathways” to high performing conflict management systems are not well-trodden roads. They are like narrow, winding footpaths through forests, swamps and underbrush. Sometimes parties need to “hold hands” to get through to the desired end point without getting lost. This publication is not a prescriptive road map. My objective was to provide something more like a topographical map, to show the lay of the land and offer readers the opportunity to choose from the many different paths that can lead to the destination of their choice. Understanding the “terrain” of conflict management systems design will enable you to forge your way through the inherent hazards in a more effective and certainly more pleasant manner. Enjoy the trip!

CONCLUSION
As a discipline, the design of informal or integrated conflict management systems will continue to evolve. System designers will need to be “reflective practitioners,” to build upon their learning and to share their knowledge with colleagues. It will indeed be an exhilarating time for those in the field. I have seen many exciting advancements in this discipline and have been grateful for the opportunity to make a small contribution and help advance some of the thinking that is shaping its future direction. And the journey continues…

C H A P T E R 1 4 SYSTEMS DESIGN: TRENDS, INNOVATIONS AND THE FUTURE

165

V O L U M E
THE CMS TOOL KIT

I I

TOOL 1
THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
1. The Department of National Defence reserves the right not to award a contract, regardless of the responses received. Current plans are to award a contract for a period of 12 months. It is estimated that the level of effort will be in excess of 175 person days but it is the bidder’s responsibility to make a more accurate determination. A contract, if awarded, will be awarded at $250,000 to the bidder who achieves the highest number of points in the evaluation. 2. The General Conditions for Services used by Public Works and Government Services Canada known as 9676 19960501 will form part of the resultant contract, with the only modification being the definition of “Minister” which will be the Minister of National Defence. 3. Bidders must provide 3 hard copies of their technical proposal and, in a separate document, one copy of their financial proposal. 4. It is the bidder’s responsibility to ensure the response fully addresses all mandatory and evaluated criteria. The basic response must meet all conditions specified. Options within the proposal will not be evaluated. 5. Responses must be delivered and received at the following location by 02 Nov 98, 1400 hours, Eastern Standard Time. Bidders, please instruct couriers and/or your firm delivery personnel to contact the DMGCP Bid Drop Off Unit at 293-0400, once at one of the points of entry, to arrange for the proposals to be picked up. If contacting the DMGCP Bid Drop Off Unit from a telephone at one of the points of entry, please dial 8-293-0400. The suggested point of entry for delivering proposals is the lower level North End Entrance (lower level from the MacKenzie King Bridge (across from the Rideau Centre)): DMGCP Bid Drop Off Unit National Defence Headquarters MGeneral George R. Pearkes Building 101 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, Ontario

6. Proposals mailed via Canada Post must be POST MARKED by midnight the day prior to closing to be considered. The mailing address is: Directorate Materiel Group Corporate Policy 6 Department of National Defence MGen George R. Pearkes Building 101 Colonel By Drive Ottawa ON K1A 0K2 7. Responses received after the closing date/time will be returned unopened. 8. Bidders are to ensure that the solicitation number (DND-98/0198), closing date (02/11/98) and time (1400 hours) are clearly marked on their envelopes or parcels. 9. Proposals may be submitted in either English or French. 10. Proposals will not be returned. 11. Contractors will have an opportunity to ask for clarification at a Bidders’ Conference to be held 08 Oct 98 at National Defence Headquarters, 101 Colonel By Drive. Please confirm your attendance by fax. Time and specific location will be announced at a later date. Contractors are requested to submit questions in writing prior to the date of the Bidders’ Conference. Questions may be mailed to the above address or faxed to (613) 992-1463. All questions and answers will be provided to all contractors who have requested a bid set via MERX. 12. The Department of National Defence reserves the right to negotiate with suppliers on any procurement. 13. Any proposal must remain open for acceptance for a period of not less than 60 days after the closing date of the RFP. After the RFP closing date, no amendments to the proposal will be accepted. 14. All contractors submitting bids will be advised of the outcome of the evaluation process as soon as completed. Contractors should allow at least 30 days after bid closing for results to be known. Requests for information on the status of the evaluation will not normally be provided until process completion. 15. This procurement is subject to the Procurement Chapter of the Agreement on Internal Trade. 16. Treasury Board Policy prohibits contracting with individuals or individuals who have incorporated themselves where the contract duration exceeds 20 weeks.

168

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

BACKGROUND
17. The Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces (DND/CF) is a large federal government department with a mandate to protect Canada and its citizens from challenges to their security. It is comprised of three Environmental Commands: Chief of Maritime Staff (Navy), Chief of Land Staff (Army) and Chief of Air Staff (Air Force), and a fourth Command structure, the Canadian Forces Recruiting, Education and Training System (CFRETS). Each of these organizations contains a reserve and regular force component. The Commanders of these organizations are located centrally at National Defence Headquarters in Ottawa, Ont, with the exception of the Commander CFRETS who is located at CFB Borden, Ont. The CF currently totals approximately 61,000 regular force and 53,000 reserve force members based across the country and overseas. Civilian employees total approximately 20,000, are mostly unionized and are also located across the country and overseas. 18. The DND/CF has several methods available to its members and employees to air grievances and complaints. For military members, the redress of grievance procedure is a formal process members may use if they feel they have been wronged in any way. It is a cumbersome, timeconsuming process that has many levels of review. Another process is the formal harassment complaint process. This mechanism deals with all forms of harassment and is guided by a harassment policy. The chain of command is also an effective tool for raising issues, but all military personnel have the right to seek assistance and guidance outside the chain of command. 19. The civilian component also has access to the same types of mechanisms, but is guided by different policies with minor differences from the military component. In addition, civilian employees have access to Employee Assistance Programmes, third party review processes such as the Public Service Staff Relations Board and union assistance. There are other mechanisms of voice available, but they shall not be discussed in this document. 20. Over the past several years it has become obvious to senior management that the existing mechanisms are no longer adequate to meet the needs of the DND/CF’s members and employees. The grievance systems are far too cumbersome and often escalate minor issues to a senior level. In addition, the introduction of the Standards for Harassment and Racism Prevention (SHARP) programme in 1996 brought about a dramatic

increase in the number of formal and informal harassment complaints, which placed a significant burden on the existing processes (see Annex A for additional information on the SHARP programme). While it is recognized that the formal systems are still effective and necessary, there is a need to make every effort to resolve issues at the lowest possible level before they escalate to the formal process level. To help mitigate the problem, the Minister announced that the DND/CF would implement an Office of the Organizational Ombudsman as well as streamlining the redress of grievance system. 21. To assist in these initiatives, in June 1997, the Armed Forces Council gave its support to the development of a Conflict Management system for the DND/CF. While conflict management techniques are used widely in the private and judicial sectors, they are still relatively new to the department. The system that will be used must be tailored to meet DND/CF’s unique and diverse mandates. While a Conflict Management system may be conceptually simple, it must be understood that the implementation of such a programme would result in a fundamental cultural transformation to the DND/CF’s traditional, hierarchical structure. The aims of a Conflict Management system will include, but are not limited to the following key points: a. the system must be perceived as impartial and not as another “management initiative.” To foster this perception, a private sector contractor will be selected to assist with programme design and an implementation plan. It is expected that the system will be planned and developed in partnership with the successful Contractor and the DND/CF; b. the system must respect the concepts and beliefs of the military and civilian components within the DND/CF; c. the system must lead to a clear case advantage over existing methods of dispute resolution. Results must show a reduction in time spent on dispute resolution, resolution of previously deadlocked cases, or a reduction in formal grievances/complaints being submitted; d. the system would be assessed through four pilot projects and if successful, would be implemented across the DND/CF; e. the system must be capable of being monitored, evaluated and improved and permit intervention when required by the Steering Committee, to ensure DND/CF objectives are met;

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

169

f. the system must be adaptable to current processes as well as easily adaptable to any new initiatives that may be implemented; and g. the system must eventually become an accepted and ongoing part of DND/CF training and day-to-day activities.

also intended to continue that policy when the pilot projects and the Conflict Management System are developed and implemented. 25. DND/CF conflict management training courses that are or have been presented are listed below. With the exception of (d, f), most are conducted out of service: a. Interest Based Negotiation;

PROJECT OBJECTIVE
22. The primary objective of the project is to design a conflict management system for the DND/CF.

b. Mediation Skills; c. Labour Relations; d. Some environmental commands have developed their own non-accredited mediation courses; e. Third Party Neutral Skills; and f. Conflict Resolution Course and Labour Management Relations Enhancement Course.

PILOT PROJECTS AND EXISTING ACTIVITIES 23. Each environmental command has implemented or will implement a pilot project. The sites were selected by the environmental commanders to ensure that as major stakeholders, their needs would be met. The Navy has implemented a programme in Halifax and CFRETS has a Conflict Resolution Centre in place at CFB Borden, Ont. For the purposes of this proposal, it must be understood that these pilot projects must in no way be undermined, and a DND/CF Conflict Management System must endeavour to support existing and future initiatives. These initiatives include but are not limited to, the military and civilian grievance systems, harassment complaint systems, the SHARP programme, chains of command, the Employee Assistance Programme, the Defence Ethics Programme and the Office of the Organizational Ombudsman. The contractor will be required to understand and adapt to the wide variety of needs that will be found throughout the DND/CF to prepare a corporate conflict management framework.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT OF THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
26. The Conflict Management System will be set up under a separate project management office (PMO) that will receive direction from a National Steering Committee that will be formed. The Executive Director for Conflict Management (EDCM) from the DND/CF will supervise day-to-day operations. The PMO will remain in place until such time as the Conflict Management System is in place and functioning, at which time the day-to-day operations will be devolved to the environmental commands. The successful contractor will work with the DND/CF PMO in planning and developing a Conflict Management System. 27. The PMO will be staffed and structured to meet the following requirements: a. Financial Management—the DND/CF has a requirement to monitor, manage and control any funds that are allocated to the use of the PMO. This process includes status reports and expenditure forecast plans that are submitted on a regular basis to the DND/CF Project Manager. The PMO is responsible for managing funds that include, but are not limited to, travel, salaries, communications and miscellaneous equipment, not including capital equipment purchases. A financial management plan is important because it will ensure that there will not be any non-approved

TRAINING FOR THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
24. The SHARP programme and the DND/CF harassment policies directed that the resolution of disputes should be conducted at the lowest possible levels whenever possible. As a result, the DND/CF have a number of members and employees who have undergone formal conflict management training from recognized private sector organizations. Although no concrete statistics are available, it is believed that the department has approximately 100-200 trained negotiators/mediators. This training is managed at local levels and while it is intended to develop a national standard for conflict management training, it is

170

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

expenditure of funds and close control can be maintained over current and forecast expenditures to ensure that the project remains within budget. Normally, requests for funds will be submitted to the PMO well in advance of the activity. In some cases approval is required from the Steering Committee or higher authority and will be sought through a formal presentation to the appropriate authority; b. Project Administration—the PMO contains a small staff dedicated to the administration of the Conflict Management project. It is expected that the PMO will be a small, multi-skilled organization; c. PMO Duties—the PMO will be structured to perform the following specific functions: i) clerical assistance to the office in arranging and coordinating program activities. This will include filing, correspondence control, preparation of correspondence, completion of travel arrangements and other administrative matters as they arise;

STATEMENT OF WORK
28. The contractor will be expected to clearly demonstrate in the proposal the approach, including, timelines resources, and concepts, that are proposed for the following areas of work: a. Overall Approach—this description must demonstrate a logical understanding of the objectives of the work and the intended end product and an understanding of the role of the system designer. It must also demonstrate in detail, a current approach that clearly demonstrates an understanding of the innovative approaches necessary to facilitate a systematic, effective and efficient conflict management system. The Contractor must demonstrate a willingness to work in a cooperative and collaborative manner with stakeholders in the DND/CF; b. Design of Pilot Projects—pilot projects for the navy and CFRETS will be designed to work within existing conflict management structures in Halifax and Borden. New pilot programs will be designed for the army and air force with possible sites in Gagetown and Winnipeg respectively. In general terms (that is, without getting into location-specific scenarios), contractors must outline their philosophy and approach to designing the new, integrated programs and to modifying the existing projects. The contractor should specify how needs assessment will be done and generically describe who should be involved in pilot project design. Annex B contains additional detail; c. Communications and Publicity—it will be necessary for the Contractor to develop a national level communications plan that includes scope, activities and methods to assist in implementing the project while building on successes to date. The Contractor must demonstrate previous experience in communicating programs and issues surrounding conflict management. The Contractor will be required to assist Environmental Commanders in developing their own specific communications plans using existing DND/CF communications tools; d. Select Case Mediations—will be important to the overall success of the system. The Contractor must describe his approach to the conduct of select case mediations and demonstrate an understanding of their role and importance;

ii) a supervisory capability for any staff engaged in office related duties; iii) a communications management capability to meet the requirements of the communications plan; iv) a financial management capability to effect financial management activities; v) a project director (PD) responsible for detailed planning, coordination, liaison and execution of program activities to meet the program’s objectives;

vi) the capability of providing status reports, briefing papers or notes and presentations to various levels of the DND/CF on activities connected with the Conflict Management project; vii) the capability to assist with system design and the implementation of pilot projects; viii) the capability to supervise and conduct training and organizational development functions; and ix) the capability to supervise and research new and existing conflict management systems within the DND/CF.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

171

e. Implementation Plan for the Design of the Conflict Management System—this will involve the complete roll-out of the System across the DND/CF. The proposal must clearly indicate timings, resources required, proposed methods of implementation, follow up activities including select case mediation activities, and a transition plan for hand over of the project to the DND/CF. The proposal should include specifics as to how the Contractor will incorporate the distinct and varying requirements, the different cultures and geographical and structural circumstances of each Environmental Command. The Contractor must demonstrate his understanding of change management and conflict management system design principles; f. Training and Education Plan—conflict management training is an essential component of this project and is applicable across the DND/CF. The Contractor must indicate how training will be conducted and managed in accordance with DND/CF training standards for the pre-implementation phase and pilot projects. This RFP does not include the direct delivery of training programs. When training is developed/delivered, the DND/CF will retain the authority to approve any trainers. Consideration must also be given to the use of internal DND/CF resources currently in place for the training and education of the department in conflict management. This training plan must include the general identification of target populations and the training that may be required for them; g. Transition Plan—for long-term success, it is important that over the term of the contract, the Conflict Management System move from Contractor to full DND/CF management of the initiative. The Contractor must provide a detailed transition plan that will enable the DND/CF to manage the project. This transition plan must include timelines, method of preparation for hand over, communications and proposals for transition or follow-up assistance as required. Understanding that attrition is a reality in any large organization, the plan must also consider the concept of the renewal of conflict management skills and knowledge; h. Best Practices—over the past several years many organizations within and external to the DND/CF have implemented similar initiatives. As part of assessing the need for the DND/CF and each Environmental

Command, the Contractor will be expected to conduct a best practices analysis. As part of the proposal, the Contractor must include a plan for gathering and analyzing relevant best practices. Every effort will be made to keep travel to a minimum; i. Administration and Professional Conduct—the Contractor must demonstrate his ability to meet requirements for the administration and professional conduct necessary for the completion of this project. This will also include the demonstrated reliability and competence of the company overall; and j. Project Evaluation—as with any project, there must be some way of measuring success. The Contractor must demonstrate how he plans to evaluate the success of the conflict management system. This plan must include when the evaluation plan will be developed, a general description of the objectives to be measured and the framework to be used.

DELIVERABLES
29. The Contractor shall provide all deliverables, where applicable, in hard copy and on 3.5-inch diskette in Word 6.0 or WP 6.0 format. Project deliverables will include: a. Implementation Plan—the implementation plan will include a detailed plan that discusses proposals for DND/CF wide implementation of the Conflict Management System. The plan will include timelines, resources and objectives. The implementation plan will include extensive coordination with Environmental Commands and the Steering Committee. The implementation plan will discuss the proposals for including and supporting existing and future pilot projects and related initiatives. The implementation plan will be expected to clearly show the business and cost impacts of the various options; b. Training Plan—the training plan will involve a detailed description of what objectives will be targeted, to what standard they will be achieved and how the training will be conducted. The plan will also be expected to indicate how the training will be designed and developed. For planning purposes, it should be understood that training shall be conducted in both official languages;

172

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

c. Communications Plan—communications will be one of the most crucial elements in the cultural transformation that will occur. The plan will contain detailed methods of publicity, both internal and external to the DND/CF, resources required, schedules and assessment methods to determine the effectiveness of the communications strategy. The contractor will also be expected to prepare some materials for internal and external presentations as required; d. Project Management Plan—the Contractor will be required to submit initial and regular updates to a detailed project management plan that ties all project activities together and permits the monitoring of key milestones and critical activities; e. Best Practices Review Report—the Contractor will be required to submit a report, that meets DND/CF standards for publication, to include a description and an analysis of best practices in the area of conflict management; f. Evaluation Plan—the evaluation plan will include a clear description of measurable objectives to determine the success of the project; g. Select Case Mediation Plan—select case mediations will be crucial to the overall success of the project. The contractor must include a plan that describes the circumstances and how and where these events will occur. These should include case examples that could be used for subsequent training activities; h. Reports—the Contractor will be required to submit regular written status reports, at a minimum of every month, to the EDCM. Other reports may be required from time-to-time in the form of briefing notes, oral presentations or ad hoc narratives. Meetings between the Contractor and the DND/CF will be arranged on a mutually agreeable basis as necessary; and i. Resource Inventory—the contractor will be required to submit an inventory of models and resources, materiel and human, used in conflict management system design and training in negotiation, mediation and conflict management.

REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF DELIVERABLES
30. The Contractor shall provide one hard copy and one electronic copy of each deliverable to the DND/CF Project Manager. The Contractor shall revise all deliverables to incorporate comments and concerns at no cost. Milestones shall be completed in accordance with the approved implementation plan. The Crown retains copyright to all deliverables and intellectual property associated with the contract.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT
31. The Project Manager and Technical Authority (PM/TA) shall: a. liaise with the Contractor to ensure that the project is completed in accordance with the statement of work; b. arrange Contractor visits as required; and c. receive all deliverables on behalf of the department.

GOVERNMENT FURNISHED INFORMATION
32. Upon request, the PM/TA shall provide the Contractor with relevant DND/CF orders, regulations and manuals needed to complete the tasks described in this statement of work.

TIMELINES
33. The following timelines will be adhered to as closely as possible: a. contract award–November 1998; b. submission of proposed work plan to the EDCM within 3 weeks of contract award; c. submission of communications and training plans for pre-implementation phase and pilot projects within 4 weeks of contract award; and d. delivery of an implementation plan within 12 months of contract award.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

173

PROPOSED PAYMENT SCHEDULE
34. The Contractor must propose a payment schedule that is clearly and directly tied to the delivery and acceptance of the deliverables identified at paragraph 29. The schedule must specify payment based on a monthly rate as substantiated and accompanied by a detailed breakdown of per diem charges for project staff. Costs for travel should not be included as these will be billed as approved in advance by the DND/CF in accordance with Treasury Board directives.

g. demonstrated excellence in presentation and communication skills including the capability to address large audiences and groups of very senior military and civilian managers; h. demonstrated experience in the training analysis, design, development, implementation, standards and evaluation and a knowledge of sources of conflict management training across the country and internationally; i. demonstrated capability to provide hands on and detailed administrative support to the project including managing a project management office in partnership with departmental staff, financial and project management; j. availability for travel; k. demonstrated excellent inter-personal and group skills including discussion leader, facilitation skills and consensus decision making; l. demonstrated understanding of the concepts inherent to cultural transformation and organizational learning that would be applicable to assisting with such change in large hierarchical organizations such as the DND/CF; m. demonstrated clear, long-term vision that will assist in formulating both a transition plan and a method to institutionalize the conflict management system within the department; and n. proposals are to include at least three senior level references, of which at least two must be from the public sector, that may be consulted during the evaluation process.

SECURITY
35. All correspondence and documentation associated with this project will be unclassified.

M A N DATO RY R E Q U I R E M E N T S 36. It is the bidder’s responsibility to ensure sufficient information is clearly provided to verify that all mandatory conditions are met. Responses failing to do so will be ruled non-compliant and will not be evaluated further. In order to be compliant, the following mandatory requirements must be met:
a. demonstrated high level of knowledge of the DND/CF, its structure, culture and mandate; b. demonstrated familiarity of problems and pressures facing the department in today’s climate; c. demonstrated capability to work in both official languages. To meet this, the Contractor must have the capability of providing service at a Public Service Commission rating of CCC; d. demonstrated experience in working and implementing conflict management oriented programs in large complex organizations; e. demonstrated knowledge and experience with conflict management techniques and concepts including practical experience of successful problem resolution and case mediations (in military or paramilitary organizations); f. demonstrated professional and personal qualifications that can be applied against the range of job requirements and activities required for this project;

E VA L UAT I O N C R I T E R I A 37. All proposals meeting the mandatory requirements will be further evaluated against a possible score of 100 based on the Contractor’s ability to demonstrate an effective, viable approach that takes into account ALL of the requirements outlined in the Statement of Work. Options within the proposals will not be evaluated. It is important that proposals be detailed enough to allow the evaluation team to be able to determine whether a specific bid can meet departmental needs. For example, when a project evaluation plan is required, it is expected that

174

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

there will be a detailed description of what objectives are to be evaluated and to what standard, as well as what instruments will be used to conduct the evaluation. Proposals must include a chart demonstrating the breakdown of activities and how much time and money will be dedicated to each. 38. The evaluation criteria are attached at Annex A.

PRICE 39. A contract, if awarded, will be awarded at $250,000 to the bidder who has the highest number of points out of 100. It is estimated that the level of effort will be in the 175 to 250 person days but it is the bidder’s responsibility to make a more accurate determination. The financial submission will identify proposed milestone payments relating to the deliverables required.

Mandatory Requirements ITEM A DESCRIPTION Demonstrated level of knowledge of DND/CF structure, culture, mandate. For example, the DND/CF is geographically diverse, hierarchical, contains military/civilian/reserve components, varied mission, and roles, peacekeeping, domestic emergencies. Demonstrated familiarity of pressures and problems in dept. Some examples are, additional missions/fewer resources, low morale, re-organization, low pay, postings, bad publicity CCC rating min Demonstrated experience in working and implementing CM programs in large organizations. Clearly shows where they have done the work, names of companies and type of work done. Must have completed at least 2 projects in last 3 years. Demonstrated knowledge and experience with CM techniques and concepts including practical experience of successful problem resolution and case mediations in military or paramilitary organizations. Must clearly show that they are familiar with ADR spectrum AND show that they have conducted at least 3 mediations in the last year. MET (Y/N) COMMENTS

B

C D

E

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

175

ITEM F

DESCRIPTION Demonstrated professional and personal qualifications as compared to requirements and activities in this project. Must have at least 3 years experience in field and have taken ADR training. Demonstrated excellence in presentation and communication skills to large, senior audiences. Must state that they have delivered briefings/ presentations to large, senior audiences. Demonstrated experience with Systems Approach to Training, and knowledge of CM training sources across country and internationally. Must demonstrate that they understand the concept of a systematic approach to training and quote at least 2 other sources of CM training. Demonstrated capability to provide hands on administrative support to project. Must clearly state that they can support the project administratively. Demonstrated availability for travel. Must clearly state that they are willing and able to travel. Demonstrated excellent inter-personal, facilitation, consensus building skills. Should tie in with item G. Demonstrated understanding of cultural transformation and organizational learning concepts as they apply to large hierarchical organizations. Must clearly show that they are familiar with change management strategies in large organizations. This will be based largely on anecdotal descriptions. Demonstrated clear long term vision to formulate a transition plan to institutionalize the CMS in dept. There should be a clear discussion as to how they propose to transfer the responsibility of managing and maintaining the CMS to the DND/CF. Three senior level references that can be checked.

MET (Y/N)

COMMENTS

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

Were all Mandatory Requirements met? Yes/No If YES move on to Part 2. If NO stop here. The evaluation is complete.

176

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

ANNEX A
APPROACH
ITEM A. DESCRIPTION Is there a demonstrated overall approach indicating a logical understanding of : a. the objectives of the work b. the intended end product c. system designer’s role d. innovative, systematic yet flexible approach to facilitate an effective and efficient CM system e. willingness to work in a collaborative, cooperative manner with stakeholders. Is there a comprehensive demonstration of how the pilot projects will be conducted, to include a. needs assessment b. Philosophy and approach to designing new systems and modifying existing projects c. Who should be involved in pilot project design? SCORE /25 COMMENTS Max 5 points per item. 0 = not demonstrated 1 = vague demonstration 3 = detailed demonstration and basic understanding of what is required 5 = comprehensive demonstration, and a very concrete understanding of what is required.

B.

/9

Max 3 points per item 0 = not demonstrated 1 = vague demonstration 2 = detailed demonstration with some discussion of assessment, philosophy and approach and who should be involved 3 = comprehensive demonstration with very detailed discussion of assessment, philosophy and approach and who should be involved Max 3 points per item 0 = not demonstrated 1 = vague demonstration 2 = detailed discussion 3 = very detailed plan that includes examples

C.

Is there a demonstration of a comprehensive communications and publicity plan to include: a. Scope, activities and methods b. Previous experience in communicating programs and issues surrounding CM c. Willingness to work with Environmental Commanders in developing their own specific communications strategies. Is there a demonstration and understanding of : a. The role and importance of select case mediations b. The approach and conduct of select case mediations. Is the implementation plan for the CMS design complete? Plan must demonstrate: a. Timings b. Resources c. proposed methods of implementation d. follow up activities e. transition plan for hand-over to DND/CF f. understanding of change management and CM system design principles.

/9

D.

/6

Max 3 points per item 0 = no understanding or demonstration 1 = vague understanding 2 = clear understanding and demo

E.

/12

Max 2 pts per item 0 = no demonstration 1 = vague demonstration 2 = comprehensive demonstration that clearly indicates the intentions of the consultant

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

177

ITEM F.

DESCRIPTION Is there a clear demonstration of a training and education plan that includes: a. how training will be conducted and managed clearly demonstrating an understanding of a systems approach to training (SAT) b. An adherence to DND/CF training standards? c. Consideration of the use of internal DND/CF resources d. Identification of target populations and recommended training, to include pre-implementation design workshops. Is a transition plan demonstrated that takes into account: a. Timelines b. method of hand-over preparations c. communications d. follow-up assistance e. skills and knowledge renewal Is the requirement demonstrated for a best practices review that includes: a. plan for gathering and analyzing the data b. current knowledge of best practices

SCORE /8

COMMENTS Max 2 points per item 0 = no demonstration 1 = vague demonstration 2 = detailed demonstration of the use of SAT, DND/CF resources 3 = comprehensive demonstration of how training will be conducted, the use of internal resources, adherence to DND/CF standards, ID of target pops and design workshops

G.

/10

Max 2 points per item 0 = no demonstration 1 = vague demonstration 2 = detailed demonstration that includes a clear understanding of the need for a transition plan

H.

/6

Max 3 points per item 0 = not demonstrated 1 = vague demonstration 2 = detailed demonstration that includes a comprehensive plan Max 3 points per item 0 = not demonstrated 1 = vague demonstration 2 = detailed demonstration 3 = comprehensive demonstration that includes highly qualified people in a well balanced team, supported by references

I.

Does the proposal demonstrate the ability to meet professional and administrative requirements to complete the project that include a. having appropriately qualified people to complete the project b. having a balanced team that can handle the different aspects of the project c. demonstrated reliability and competence of the company by having completed similar work for large organizations Is there a clear demonstration of how the project will be evaluated including: a. when the evaluation plan will be developed b. general description of the objectives to be achieved c. the evaluation framework to be used. Total

/9

J.

/6

Max 2 points per item 0 = not demonstrated 1 = vague demonstration 2 = detailed demonstration clearly showing an understanding of the importance of an evaluation plan

/100

178

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

ANNEX B
Background Information on Conflict Management Projects Underway 1. At present there are several projects relating to conflict management currently in progress or about to be implemented within the DND/CF. These descriptions do not include long-standing mechanisms such as military and civilian grievance systems or the chains of command. It must be remembered that this list is not exhaustive, but will give Contractors an indication of the extent and types of initiatives underway. This annex in no way absolves the successful Contractor from conducting its own research in the area of conflict management in the DND/CF.

one day session either as part of the sensitization or leadership courses. It is intended to complete this initial phase by September 1998. The next phase of the program is to incorporate relevant modules of the sensitization and leadership courses into existing core training. To date the DND/CF has educated approximately 70% of the target population. The Defence Ethics Program advocates a strong process of expectations, leadership, dialogue and a broad and flexible range of voice and compliance mechanisms as part of its program. Improvements in conflict management capabilities will greatly contribute to the aims of the program. 4. The policy stated that each unit was responsible for creating its own harassment advisor or HA organization. The role of the HA is to advise Commanding Officers and potential complainants regarding the harassment policies and possible courses of action. At present some environmental commands are in the process of formalizing the harassment complaints resolution process within their organizations. In fact some are extending the areas of responsibilities of their organizations to include all forms of conflict, not just harassment.

HARASSMENT PREVENTION 2. In 1993, the DND/CF undertook an unprecedented initiative to stem the number of harassment complaints. This enterprise began with the development of a comprehensive harassment prevention policy. This policy, while based on Treasury Board guidelines, was amplified to take into account the special requirements of the DND/CF brought about by its mission and role in Canadian society and the impact the DND/CF has on Canadian Foreign policies. Because of the mix of civilian and military components and the different legal implications, each component has its own policy. One of the common elements of the two policies is the emphasis placed on the need to make every effort to resolve conflict, regardless of the type, at the lowest possible level.
3. At the same time as the policy was being developed, the DND/CF contracted to design and implement an education program to augment the policy. This program was called the Standards for Harassment and Racism Prevention or SHARP program. Its purpose was not necessarily to train the contents of the harassment policy, but rather to act as a catalyst to begin attitudinal and behavioral change throughout the DND/CF. It is a videobased, modularized program conducted in groups of 12-15 participants using the guided discussion methodology. The program was developed centrally with input from each of the major stakeholders and subsequently devolved to each of the environmental commands and CFRETS for implementation. CFRETS was designated as the lead managing authority for the maintenance of the training standards and amendments of the SHARP program. The intent of the program was to have each person in the DND/CF (approximately 100,000 people) attend a

ARMY 5. Leadership in a Diverse Army (LDA) Program. The Army is presently developing a comprehensive program to address leadership issues with an emphasis on issues surrounding a more diverse organization. The program is scheduled for initial delivery in Feb 98 with full scale training to commence in April 98. The LDA encompasses policy changes, consultation support to commanding officers, four targeted leadership two day training sessions, conflict resolution training and ultimately the development and implementation of ADR centres at selected Army bases. AIR FORCE 6. Harassment Elimination Program (HELP). This program was implemented in 1992 by the air force with the intent to provide personnel with:
a. an awareness of harassment issues and air force policy; b. a framework by which they can come forward with issues concerning behaviour in the workplace; and c. a protocol that can be used to ensure that concerns are addressed as quickly and efficiently as possible, in other words, at the lowest level possible.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

179

CFRETS 7. Conflict Resolution Centre (CRC). In CFRETS, the focus of preventative and corrective measures will be broadened to encompass all forms of conflict. When harassment arises, the prescribed harassment policies and investigating practices will be followed to the letter. There are several distinct roles within the CFRETS workplace conflict management structure. Some of these roles include a Unit Workplace Conflict Management Coordinator, a Workplace Conflict Coach as well as investigators and mediators. STREAMLINING OF THE CF REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE PROCESS 8. Although it was mentioned that this document will not discuss long-standing mechanisms of voice, it is important to mention that the military redress of grievance process is undergoing significant change. Primarily, it is being streamlined to attempt to reduce the amount of time it takes to resolve a grievance as well as to keep the level of review at an appropriate level depending on the degree of grievance. There is little additional information available because the legal aspects of amending this process are still under review.

O F F I C E O F T H E O R G A N I Z AT I O N A L OMBUDSMAN 9. This initiative will involve the appointment of an organizational ombudsman. The role of this person has yet to be defined, but the office will act in a neutral, informal and advisory capacity to the complainants and the DND/CF. The actual structure of the organization has yet to be determined. PILOT PROJECTS 10. At present the plan is to implement four pilot projects across the country, representing each environmental command. The likely geographic locations are Halifax, N.S., Gagetown, N.B., Borden, Ont. and Winnipeg, Man. It must be stressed that these pilot sites are subject to change, and it is anticipated that they will be underway in some form, prior to contract award.

180

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 2
STAFFING NOTICE FOR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
Below is a copy of the “required duties and experience” as described in the Competition Notice for the Executive Director Conflict Management (EDCM) at DND/CF. The position was set at the EX-03 level. Duties Accountable for the overall design, implementation, and coordinating function of a conflict resolution system and for coordinating training requirements to provide employees and military personnel (reserve and regular force) with an opportunity to obtain confidential, neutral and informal advice and services in an effort to resolve Human Resource issues in a manner that will benefit both parties. Chair several steering committees and working groups that will analyze, design and develop a comprehensive and effective conflict management system for the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces (DND/CF), while at the same time promulgating training and professional development.

Ensure that all programs and initiatives are coordinated in a fashion that will achieve corporate goals, enhance morale and foster good working relationships within DND/CF. Experience Experience in the design, implementation, and coordination function of a conflict resolution system, and for coordinating associated training requirements Experience in the application of processes such as conflict resolution, interest-based negotiation, mediation and arbitration Experience in the coordination of broad conflict management policy issues and the communication programs associated with those issues Experience in the management of financial, material and human resources

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

181

TOOL 3
CONFLICT MANAGEMENT PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEE—TERMS OF REFERENCE
Purpose This committee has been created to provide strategic guidance to Conflict Management Project (CMP). In addition, the members of the Conflict Management Steering Committee (CMSC) will act as the conduit for the project team into the necessary areas within the Environmental Commands, CFRETS and the NCR as they pertain to the CMP. This committee will serve the needs of the military (regular and reserve forces and CIC) and civilian components. It will be chaired by the Executive Director Conflict Management (EDCM) under the authority of the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) and the Deputy Minister (DM). Mandate The mandate for the CMPSC will be to provide strategic guidance and Environmental Command expertise and advice to EDCM and the chains of command during the design, development and implementation phases of the CMP. Responsible to ADM Human Resources—Military and ADM Human Resources—Civilian through EDCM Responsible for on behalf of the respective pilot sites, the coordination of project activities on behalf of the respective pilot sites, provide a strategic vision consistent with the needs and mission of the organizations

coordinating and participating in facilitated design workshops and other activities related to the pilot projects advising the chain of command on CMSC activities developing dispute resolution and training frameworks and standards where necessary providing advice on the preparation of policies and procedures documents assisting EDCM in formulating a full-scale national implementation plan providing updates to the committee on pilot project activities Duration The CMPSC will be in place until the completion of the CMP. Member Prerequisites must be familiar with dispute resolution processes and techniques must be familiar with respective pilot project must be committed to the initiative must have necessary authority to represent various stakeholders

182

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 4
FAQS ABOUT THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT PROJECT
(I) Frequently Asked Questions About The Conflict Management Project Why does DND/CF need a conflict management project? The existence of the CM Project is a recognition by DND/CF leadership that a spirit of cooperation with respect to workplace conflict leads to a more satisfying and productive workplace environment. When workplace disputes do arise, a collaborative approach is often a more effective and efficient means of dispute resolution than an adversarial approach. In recent years, DND/CF’s emphasis on using traditional, formal methods of dispute resolution has proven to be costly and cumbersome. The growing number of harassment and other workplace complaints has further strengthened the need to design a complementary system for dispute resolution. During the next two years, DND/CF will develop and implement a stakeholder-driven dispute resolution system that: incorporates an interest-based method of dispute resolution (DR) as the preferred course of conflict management; reinforces the authority of the chain of command and the union-employee relationship; and, addresses the unique needs of DND/CF. What is the objective of the conflict management project (CMP)? The objective of the CMP is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of dispute resolution within DND/CF. This would be accomplished by resolving disputes, where possible, through early intervention by using such methods as negotiation and mediation. Disputes can range from interpersonal difficulties with co-workers to problems that sometimes arise with supervisors. Basically, any situation or issue such as harassment complaints and grievances that causes or could lead to disputes should try to be resolved in an informal manner. Who heads the CMP? The CMP is led by the Executive Director Conflict Management, Mr. Peter Sterne, who reports directly to both ADM HR (Mil) and ADM HR (Civ).

What is the mandate of the EDCM? EDCM, through ADM HR (military) and ADM HR (civilian), is the departmental authority for ADR processes and all aspects of mediation. EDCM received its mandate to establish and implement a Conflict Management Project from Armed Forces Council (AFC) and the Defence Management Committee (DMC) in 1998. The mandate is as follows: As an organizational development initiative, design and implement an integrated conflict management system for DND and CF. This includes To establish a framework and standards for the conduct of dispute resolution interventions. To establish DND/CF standards for training and education related to conflict management and dispute resolution (DR). To review new/existing initiatives to ensure consistency, avoid duplication and enhance where appropriate. To ensure consistency across the DND/CF as the departmental authority on Alternative Dispute Resolution. How does EDCM carry out its mandate? The Conflict Management Project is designed around four components: Diagnostic/Situational analysis: This component diagnosed and analyzed the formal and informal systems by gathering data in such areas as the length of time and cost of disputes, and satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the existing processes. System Design — The Pilot Sites: The knowledge gained from the Diagnostic/Situational Analysis will be applied to the system design of the pilot sites. The five pilot sites are representative of DND/CF — Halifax (Maritime Command), Borden (CFRETS), NCR (CFSU), Winnipeg (Air Command) and Edmonton (Land Force Command). The pilot sites have each designed their own dispute resolution systems and will be implementing and testing them over an 18-month period ending in February 2001. Training in DR processes such as negotiation and mediation will take place over the next several years. Department-wide Implementation and Evaluation of the CM Project is planned to begin early in 2001.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

183

How did the pilot sites design their dispute resolution systems? Intensive three-day workshops have been held at each of the pilot sites in which approximately 40 people participated, including representatives from the chain of command, unions, members and civilians. At the workshops, each site designed a DR system that offers a variety of ways to resolve disputes at the earliest stage while respecting the chain of command. What is the mandate of the conflict management steering/working committee? The mandate of the Conflict Management Steering Committee is to provide strategic guidance and EC expertise and advice to EDCM and the chains of command during the design, development and implementation phases of the Conflict Management Project. How can people access the conflict management project? The following are some of the access points: Chain of command, EAP/MAP, Ombudsman, Grievance Process, Harassment process, Regional Service Centres, and the CWO Net. Where are the pilot sites? Halifax (MARLANT) Borden (CFRETS) NCR (CFSU Ottawa) Winnipeg (17 Wing) Edmonton (LFWA) Will the CMP be replacing formal channels? No. The Conflict Management Project does not replace the existing systems. It provides a more informal way of solving problems. For example, if mediation does not succeed, then the case can return to formal channels. Will the use of the conflict management project be mandatory? No. It is voluntary and a complementary system to the formal system. The Conflict Management Project offers other options and the opportunity to resolve disputes at the earliest stage.

(II) Frequently Asked Questions About Alternate Dispute Resolution What does the term “Alternate Dispute Resolution” mean? Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to informal methods used to resolve disputes, such as negotiation and mediation, which are outside of the formal grievance and discipline system. The objective of ADR is to offer a more efficient, effective and friendly way for people to jointly work out a resolution to a dispute at the earliest stage that leaves everyone satisfied with the outcome. What are the features of ADR systems? The major features of ADR systems are as follows: Reinforces authority of chain of command Supports unions’ roles, structures and processes Provides users at all levels with a process to resolve issues at the lowest possible level Resolves complaints in a “safe”, flexible, timely and cost-effective manner Easily accessible with many options to choose from and many access points into the system. What options are available in the Conflict Management Project? Common options in ADR systems include: self-help, coaching, counselling, negotiation, mediation, and neutral evaluation. What are the benefits of ADR systems? Flexible Less formal Voluntary Parties retain decision-making authority More confidential Saves costs Saves time Helps to maintain working relationships Higher compliance rate Agreements are more “win-win” Agreements tend to hold over time

184

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

To what issues can ADR processes be applied? ADR processes, such as negotiation and mediation, are not appropriate in all cases but generally can be applied to: grievance, discipline, performance, harassment complaints, and any other situation of dispute. Won’t ADR processes just add a layer of confusion? ADR processes are proven in the vast majority of cases to be efficient, effective and faster than traditional formal systems. The Conflict Management Project does not replace, nor is it another layer - it is complementary to the formal system. (III) Frequently Asked Questions About Mediation What is mediation? It is a process in which an impartial third party (the mediator) facilitates communication between disputing parties and assists them to voluntarily reach, on their own, a mutually acceptable resolution to the conflict. Who will participate in the mediation session? Usually, the parties that are in conflict will be at the table. Occasionally, other interested parties might also be requested to participate. It is a case by case approach when it comes to decide who should be attending. What types of cases are suitable to mediation? Interpersonal relationship issues, harassment, abuse of authority, discrimination, performance evaluation, discipline and application of various policies are some examples of cases that can be mediated. What is the role of the mediator? The role of the mediator varies depending on the personalities of the people involved, mandate given to the mediator by the parties, and the degree of emotions present at mediation. This results in a spectrum ranging from a mediator who is completely neutral and value-free; to a mediator who takes a more active role in shaping the eventual outcome. The latter borders on a mediator as advisor. Regardless of what techniques are used by the mediator to assist the parties in reaching a solution, the mediator is not empowered to render a decision. In various situations, the mediator may attempt to: Encourage exchanges of information. Help the parties understand each other’s view.

Let the parties know that their concerns are understood. Promote a productive level of emotional expression. Identify and narrow issues. Help parties realistically evaluate alternatives to settlement. Suggest that the parties take breaks when negotiations reach an impasse. Encourage flexibility and creativity. Shift the focus from the past to the future. Shift the focus from one of blame to a creative exchange between the parties. Propose solutions that meet the fundamental interests of all parties. Will mediators come from within DND/CF or from outside (i.e. other government departments, consultants, etc.)? The choice of whether to use external or internal mediators will be determined by the Pilot Projects. Who pays for external mediators? Units and/or pilot project sites pay for external mediators. How is a mediator chosen for a particular case? Mediation is a voluntary process. One of its advantages is the control given to the parties to select the mediator. The choice of a mediator must be mutually agreed upon by all parties based on criteria such as neutrality and level of experience. Will mediation be available in the official language of my choice? Yes. Is mediation confidential? The privacy of individuals involved in mediation will be respected and is subject to the Access to Information Act and Privacy Act. What if mediation is not successful? Then the case could enter the existing formal systems already in place. What is select case mediation? Select Case Mediation is one component of the Conflict Management Project where representative disputes within DND/CF are mediated by experienced mediators to determine the applicability of mediation to DND/CF situations.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

185

What happens during mediation? THE PROCESS OF MEDIATION INVOLVES THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES:

P R E - M E D I AT I O N Prior to the mediation session, the mediator will usually contact the parties on an individual basis. This initial contact can be done either by phone or by a face-to-face meeting. This first contact has different purposes. Initially, it allows for an introduction of the mediator and provides an opportunity for the mediator to explain the mediation process to the parties. Further, it provides an opportunity for the parties to explain to the mediator the dynamics of the conflict. At the end of this initial contact, all parties will agree to mediate to attempt to resolve the outstanding issue(s). JOINT OR INDIVIDUAL SESSION Having had an opportunity to discuss the situation with the parties, the mediator will be in a position to determine with them as to how to proceed. At least three options can be presented to the parties:
1. A joint session which will involve all parties at the table at the same time 2. Separating the parties in different rooms 3. A combination of both The combination is most commonly used. Further, and before proceeding, the parties will be requested to sign a mediation agreement. It is a very simple document that details the rules that will guide the process. Here are some examples: one person will speak at one time; respect and civility; open and honest communications; confidentiality, i.e. what is said during the process remains within the process. Other guidelines can be suggested by the parties. Understanding the Issue(s) Upon the agreement of the parties, the mediator will usually ask the person who requested the mediation or the complainant to open the discussions with a brief description of the issues or a statement. As part of the process, the mediator

has to ensure fairness. Each party will have an opportunity to present their side of the story. During these various presentations, issues will be identified. The parties and the mediator will then be able to ask questions or clarify issues with an objective to identify the needs and interests of each party to resolve the case.

G E N E R AT I N G O P T I O N S The generation of options is usually conducted in two phases. The first phase is a brainstorming session. During this session, all parties are requested to generate as many options as possible with a view to resolve the case. The second phase will be to evaluate these options. Each option submitted will be evaluated by the parties. They will determine which options are viable and which ones meet their needs and interests. Further negotiations may also result in the creation of additional options. REACHING COMMITMENT This task is one of the most critical aspects of the mediation process. From the evaluation of the options, parties will put together the foundation of a potential agreement. They will assess the viability of these options, will determine if they satisfy their needs and meet their interests. Upon a review of the options, the parties will embark on a final negotiation and an agreement will be reached. DRAFTING OF THE TERMS OF SETTLEMENT A N D I T S I M P L E M E N TAT I O N The practice has been that the mediator will draft the terms of settlement unless the parties agree otherwise. While drafting the agreement, the mediator will ensure that the parties identify who is supposed to do what, who needs to be involved in the implementation of the agreement and how it will be done. After careful review of the terms of settlement, the parties will be requested to sign the agreement. Each party will have a copy. The signing of the terms of settlement legally binds the parties. It is considered to be a valid contract between the parties. Each party will receive a copy of the terms of settlement. A copy of the terms of settlement will be kept by the DRC as a “Protected B” document.

186

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 5
DRC BROCHURE: WHAT IS ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)?
A Preventative Approach The Dispute Resolution Centre encourages the use of the ADR approach at any stage in a conflict, starting at the earliest and lowest levels. By producing timely results, ADR can help the parties reach a satisfying solution and move forward. To help personnel improve their conflict management skills, a series of courses have been developed. The Dispute Resolution Centre can also make presentations upon request. One-onone assistance in the form of coaching is available as well. A Collaborative Process The Dispute Resolution Centre facilitates ADR processes that help parties design their own solutions. By resolving their conflict constructively, the parties have the opportunity to rebuild trust and restore their working relationship. Personal commitment to any ADR process is essential and the involvement of all the parties is always on a voluntary basis. By actively generating options, the parties are jointly responsible for the resolution of the conflict.

A complementary Option The Dispute Resolution Centre works alongside rights-based processes, such as grievances. ADR can be considered at any stage in a conflict, even if another process has already been initiated. However, if the conflict cannot be resolved through ADR, the parties retain the option of using relevant rightsbased processes. Whether a situation involves an interpersonal issue or any other type of conflict, the Dispute Resolution Centre can be of assistance as part of a multi-option system.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

187

TOOL 6
DRC BROCHURE: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
What is ADR? Within the DND/CF context, Alternative Dispute Resolution is any voluntary conflict management method where choices are made by the parties themselves and decisions are not imposed by a third party. ADR encourages parties to deal with conflict constructively and to find their own mutually satisfying solutions. Why is ADR an option? By having access to both ADR and rights-based processes, such as grievances, individuals can make the choices that are appropriate for them. What is DND/CF’s ADR policy? Wherever appropriate, ADR is the preferred approach to resolving workplace disputes and should be explored as an option for a wide range of situations. What is the role of the DRC? The key role of the Dispute Resolution Centre is to provide ADR services such as mediation and facilitation. Another important function is training. By helping DND/CF personnel learn more about ADR, the DRC can promote prevention and encourage parties to deal with conflict through open communication. What training is available? A series of introductory courses in ADR, conflict management and interest-based negotiation are available to DND/CF employees and members. The Dispute Resolution Centre can design special presentations that are of particular interest to certain groups and conflict resolution workshops can also be tailored for specific audiences upon request.

What is coaching? Coaching is available to anyone seeking to develop skills to better deal with a conflict. For example, an individual may wish to consult a Dispute Resolution Centre in preparation for a difficult conversation with a colleague. What is mediation? This voluntary ADR process is guided by a mediator who assists parties in reaching a mutually acceptable solution. The mediator remains impartial and does not have any decision-making power. The mediator’s key role is to help the parties focus on generating solutions. Who chooses the mediator? Mediators are assigned on a case-by-case basis and the choice must be acceptable to all the parties. Is ADR a confidential process? Open communication is a fundamental principle of ADR. To ensure ADR is not used as a means to gather facts and information for other processes, confidentiality is agreed upon by the Dispute Resolution Centre and all the parties. Can other processes be explored? ADR can be considered at any stage in a conflict. However, if ADR does not produce the desired results, parties can pursue applicable rights-based processes. How can I contact a DRC? Dispute Resolution Centres have been established to serve members, employees and cadets across Canada and abroad. You may call the DRC nearest you or drop by if convenient.

188

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 7
INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS: GUIDELINES FOR DRC COORDINATORS
Background: A description of – Reasons for the CMP and EDCM mandate Conflict Management Program’s evolution. Diagnostic phase System design phase Project evaluation phase Program status Official rollout phase- awareness campaign carried out to promote DND/CF’s network of Dispute Resolution Centres Communications—a three-phase approach: Phase I. Development and network building (April to September 2002) Build the program’s credibility and get support from stakeholders and access points. Phase II. Rollout promotional campaign (October to December 2002) Promote the Dispute Resolution Centre services and their benefits. Phase III. Expanded outreach initiatives (January to March 2003) Extend the campaign to increase interaction with targeted audiences. Regional communications: Based on this common Communications approach, the Dispute Resolution Centres, as well as the offices of EDCM/DGCMP, will devise a communications plan with specific activities to promote the program to build and maintain strong ties with stakeholders and access points. Branding: The focal point for most communication initiatives will be the Dispute Resolution Centres - the entity that will be branded from a service point of view. The Conflict Management Program as such will be acknowledged in certain communications but will not be targeted for increased awareness by the general DND/CF audience.

Theme: The theme “TALKING solutions”/“PARLER pour s’entendre” will be considered for this year’s campaign. It supports the crucial message that dialogue can help bring about resolution. Graphics: The general look will be a slight departure from the more traditional DND/CF material. The visual feel will strive to capture the “alternative” and “innovative” qualities of the Dispute Resolution Centre services. The word “resolution” will be emphasized. GRAPHICS FROM OPS MAUAL-COMMUNICATIONSANNEX 6 Phase I — Development and network building — April to September 2002 This preliminary phase began when the Conflict Management Project was approved as a Program and will be carried out until the official national rollout. Promotion of the Conflict Management Program has been carried out on a reduced scale to allow for the establishment of the Dispute Resolution Centres and to provide ample opportunities for dialogue with all the stakeholders and access points at the early stages of development. The aim has been to: Demonstrate the value of the Conflict Management Program with the successful results of the pilot project. Inform CF and DND leadership of the program’s rollout and reaffirm the importance of their support. Engage in constructive dialogue with all the stakeholders to build an integrated conflict management system. Liaise with access points across the country to ensure they understand the program’s potential benefits. Audiences (internal only): Senior Management Area/Base/Wing Commanders Union representatives Human Resource Service Centres Human Resource Business Managers Employee Assistance Program Member Assistance Program Chaplains

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

189

Chiefs’ Network Harassment Advisors Ombudsman Military Police Complaints Commission Canadian Forces Grievance Board Products: Customized Powerpoint presentations. Information handouts. Promotional items (posters, post-its, pens, highlighters, mugs and kit folders). Activities: Briefings to Area/Base/Wing Commanders. Meetings with stakeholders. Presentations to access points. Initial presentations to DND/CF members and employees. Phase II — Rollout promotional campaign — October to December 2002 By fall 2002, the network of Dispute Resolution Centres will be operational. By this time, the Centres will be capable of providing Alternative Dispute Resolution services across the country. A promotional campaign will be launched in October to stimulate awareness of this new national service. The aim will be to: Promote the program’s services to members and employees and to the Canadian Cadet Movement. Communicate DND/CF’s commitment to the program’s potential of fostering a healthier workplace. Work with the stakeholders to build on the foundations of a well-integrated conflict management system. Actively demonstrate the program’s benefits to access points. Audiences (internal only): Regular and reserve members; employees of DND and associated agencies; Canadian Cadet Movement Chain of command, management Union representatives, access points, stakeholders HR-Civ, HR-Mil

Products & Activities: Official announcement—One vehicle that could be considered is a CANFORGEN from the DM and CDS. The last CANFORGEN was issued at the project phase. Now that the project has become an operational program, there could be a need for an update. Intranet—A new service-oriented site will provide practical information. There will also be information on training opportunities. The site will be supplemented with articles on Alternative Dispute Resolution, the leadership role being played by the Conflict Management Program in the field of mediation, etc. Email to employees and members—Explore the possibility of sending a general email using the distribution lists for each of the ADM groups; this email would essentially invite civilian and military staff to visit the new Intranet site. To be determined: The ADM (HR-Civ) and ADM (HR-Mil) may wish to send a co-email to Level 1’s informing them in advance of this email distribution initiative. Note: Prior to the general email, the Union representatives will also receive a courtesy copy. Promotional material—The Dispute Resolution Centres, as well as the offices of DGRC and EDCM/DGCMP, will be responsible for distributing the material to their own target audiences. Information packages (poster, both pamphlets and cover letter) should be provided to all access points and stakeholders. Access points will also require additional packages of posters and pamphlets. A poster will serve to stimulate interest and provide basic service information. Two pamphlets will target the employee and member population. The primary pamphlet will focus on the Dispute Resolution Centre services. The complementary pamphlet will include FAQs. Promotional items will include post-its, pens and mugs. Stakeholder/Access Point bulletin — An electronic bulletin will be developed to keep access points and stakeholders well informed. The bulletin will be an attachment in an email and the sender (Dispute Resolution Centres, DGRC or EDCM/DGCMP) will be able to introduce the bulletin with a personal message. The goal is to create quarterly bulletins.

190

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

The HR Civ Source/Le coin des RH-Civ — Inquire about providing input for this bimonthly email bulletin from ADM (HR-Civ). Note: This email vehicle targets HR Civ staff. Phase III—Expanded outreach initiatives— January to March 2003 With new promotional material available, the Dispute Resolution Centres will have more tools to expand their direct contacts with members and employees. Suggestion: At the beginning of the New Year, the theme “a good resolution/une bonne résolution” could be woven into presentations. The aim will be to: Build on the momentum of the fall 2002 rollout promotional campaign. Generate increased awareness of the Dispute Resolution Centres and their services. Target strategic audiences and explore multiple forums for presentations, briefings, meetings, etc. Audiences (internal only): Regular and reserve members; employees of DND and associated agencies; Canadian Cadet Movement Chain of command, management Union representatives, access points, stakeholders HR-Civ, HR-Mil Products: Feature articles will be written for publications such as The Maple Leaf, Civ News, Canadian Forces Personnel Newsletter and Area/Base/Wing newspapers. There has been discussion with DGPA to include an article in Civ News with the theme “a good resolution/une bonne résolution” for the January 2003 issue. Powerpoint presentation templates could be updated to be consistent with the latest promotional material. Kiosk telescopic stands (with pull-up banner) could be ordered for greater visibility at conferences. There will be Intranet updates on a regular basis.

At this point, we could also create a limited-access Intranet site for the DND/CF mediation community. This site would provide a medium for professional development and information sharing (technical bulletins, book reviews, discussions, etc.). Activities: Develop a concept for the first annual report (to be finalized spring 2003). Start exploring ideas for a fall 2003 promotional video. Key messages: Positive and durable—The preferred approach Alternative Dispute Resolution is recognized for providing positive and durable results and, wherever appropriate, it is the preferred DND/CF approach to resolve conflict in the workplace. Supported by the chain of command, management and unions, this initiative reflects a commitment to a process that puts people first and focuses on a healthy and productive work environment. Collaborative and empowering—A voluntary process The Dispute Resolution Centre facilitates voluntary procedures that fully support the participants’ personal choices. These alternatives to third-party decisions empower the parties to reach agreements of their own design through better understanding of each other’s viewpoints. Early and timely—A preventative method The Dispute Resolution Centre encourages conflict management at the earliest stage and strives to avoid lengthy processes, which can sometimes further strain already difficult relationships. By helping parties deal with workplace conflict before it can escalate, the Dispute Resolution Centre promotes early resolution and prevention. Complementary and flexible—An integrated system The Dispute Resolution Centre works alongside the rights-based processes and is part of an integrated conflict management system that provides great flexibility. For example, if a conflict cannot be resolved through Alternative Dispute Resolution, the parties retain the option of using rights-based processes. Similarly, parties have access to Alternative Dispute Resolution at any stage in a conflict, even if another process has already been initiated.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

191

TOOL 8
THE HARASSMENT PREVENTION AND RESOLUTION GUIDELINES
General It is well recognized that early resolution and/or use of ADR techniques usually provide for speedier and more satisfying resolution to conflict situations in general and harassment situations in particular. DND/CF has therefore made a conscious decision to include these mechanisms in its culture and leadership philosophy. In concert with this philosophy, DND/CF has decided to make serious consideration of these techniques and offer their usage, unless there are compelling reasons not to do so, one of the first steps in the resolution of any harassment situation. Additionally, such techniques may become appropriate at any time during the resolution of a complaint and should be utilized. DND employees or CF members who either decide on their own, or request assistance of their RO to resolve a situation using ADR methods, are either: trying to solve the problem on their own through self-help methods; enlisting the help of their supervisor; or seeking mediation or other third party intervention. ADR procedures that are sanctioned by a RO will involve official decisions, and may include written documents such as an Agreement to Mediate and Minutes of Settlement. The use of any ADR process does not preclude seeking advice from a supervisor, or any other trusted person or program within or outside the unit or organization. This includes an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) representative, the Canadian Forces Member Assistance Program (CFMAP) and the DND/CF 1-800 number. Self-Help Early resolution of any harassment situation at the most appropriate level is strongly encouraged. Individuals who experience perceived harassment situations are strongly encouraged to take direct action by communicating with the potential respondent at the earliest time possible. Situations that involve interpretation of interpersonal communications or matters requiring some clarification between persons may be quickly and effectively resolved if the parties take the opportunity to communicate with each other in a confidential setting. If verbal communication is not possible, the potential complainant may then choose to communicate dissatisfaction or concern to the potential respondent in writing. Such communication should describe the incident(s) by relating

facts, not judgements, and relate the impact of the situation experienced by the potential complainant. The letter should mention the conduct expected (i.e., “I would like this behaviour to stop.”). If possible, the letter should be delivered in person and a copy kept by the potential complainant. Persons using the self-help process should keep a record of all the incidents and of the way in which they were handled. This record will help the accurate recollection of events and how they were managed over time. Supervisor Intervention If self-help is unsuccessful or inappropriate, then help in resolving the situation using some other ADR method may be sought from the potential complainant’s immediate supervisor, or someone higher in the chain of command, if the potential respondent is the immediate supervisor. In dealing with harassment situations, supervisors are encouraged to seek the services of their HA. Supervisors can be instrumental in the resolution of alleged harassment situations because of their considerable leadership/managerial experience and their knowledge of the parties. However, because of the requirement for a trained neutral third party in the role of a mediator and the need for the absence of bias, real or perceived, supervisors are not normally in a position to mediate a situation involving their own subordinates (or other persons, as applicable). Supervisors’ ongoing responsibilities provide the following opportunities for coaching aimed at behavioural change: assisting parties in conflict with the identification of the issues and problem-solving approaches; assisting with the development of a resolution plan; and, initiating team development activities. These three processes constitute the main supervisory tools for effective intervention. Supervisory actions may also include initiating dialogue among other supervisors or planning the presentation of an awareness session in the workplace on acceptable workplace behaviours.

M E D I AT I O N Overview
Mediation is a voluntary process in which a trained impartial third party, the mediator, facilitates communication between parties and assists them to reach, on their own, a mutually acceptable resolution to a dispute.

192

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

The use of mediation to resolve harassment situations is strongly encouraged, even after a traditional investigation has been initiated. If mediation is chosen, the parties will be informed by the HA, their Assistants, the appropriate Dispute Resolution Centre, or a mediator as to the mediation procedure. The decision to participate in a mediation process requires that both parties sign an Agreement to Mediate prior to mediation and the Minutes of Settlement at the end of the process. Mediation is a voluntary process and can be terminated by either of the parties at any time. Mediators Once the parties have agreed to mediation, a mutually agreeable mediator will be provided as soon as possible. When necessary, assistance in the selection of a mediator may be obtained from the appropriate Dispute Resolution Centre or the Office of the Executive Director, Conflict Management. The role of the mediator involves keeping the channels of communication open, helping the parties express their needs, identifying issues that need to be addressed, and facilitating problem solving. In some cases, the use of co-mediation or mediation teams is appropriate. Co-mediation occurs when two mediators, often of different gender, culture, professional backgrounds or skills, work together to help negotiations between the parties in conflict. This team approach works best when there are a number of parties involved, the issues are complex, or when it is important to recognize gender, racial or cultural differences in order to inspire confidence in the mediation process. Other Interested Parties Usually it is the parties in conflict that are at the table with the mediator. Occasionally, other interested parties might also be at the table for the purpose of providing moral support to the parties or perhaps, because part of the Minutes of Settlement or Agreement to Mediate requires approval from an official authority. A case-by-case approach is used in deciding who is required at the table. Treatment of Information All information exchanged during this entire procedure shall be regarded as “without prejudice” communications for the purpose of settlement negotiations. Subject to the disclosure requirements of the Queen’s Regulations and Orders, Access to Information Act, Privacy Act, and any other applicable law, the parties agree to keep all information exchanged during the mediation process confidential.

Any notes or records created during the mediation process must be secured as Protected B material and retained in accordance with the provisions of the Access to Information Act and Privacy Act. Resolution Procedures Where a complaint has been submitted to the RO, the mediator shall expeditiously forward a report to the RO stating that the mediation between the parties has been resolved/ not resolved, and that there is no further involvement of the mediator necessary. The report shall identify the parties to the mediation, and state the issues resolved by the mediation. It must also include a signed statement from the Complainant and the Respondent that the complaint has been resolved and closed. There may be instances where the potential Minutes of Settlement could include issues over which the parties to the complaint have little or no authority. In such a case the RO should ensure that someone with the requisite authority and mandate participates during the mediation process, usually the RO personally. Where this is not possible, a tentative settlement can be reached, subject to the approval of the RO or other requisite authority. In such a case, if the RO believes that the Minutes of Settlement are not satisfactory, the matter may be sent back for further mediation or, the RO may direct that the matter be resolved by administrative investigation. Where a complaint has not been submitted, but the parties, through self-help or supervisor intervention, have decided that mediation would be suitable, these requirements may not be present. Administrative Closure Closure is an important part of any ADR resolution process. In cases where supervisor intervention is utilized, closure may include any appropriate administrative or disciplinary action deemed necessary by the supervisor or the RO. If mediation results in resolution of the complaint, the signed Minutes of Settlement will constitute administrative closure of the complaint for all parties. If an agreement is reached between the parties, the Minutes of Settlement will constitute full and final settlement of the complaint. If an agreement is not reached, all parties have the right to pursue the appropriate administrative investigation, or other resolution mechanism. A copy of the report from the mediator, and the withdrawal of the complaint, where applicable, will be placed on the complaint file. The parties and the RO, where required, will ensure that the Minutes of Settlement are followed.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

193

TOOL 9
INTERNAL DEFENCE ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PRACTITIONER’S CODE OF ETHICS
Ensuring effective participation by parties. Depending upon the ADR process used, the practitioner may need to ensure that the parties are given the opportunity to have their say, make decisions about time frames and venues, and understand the issues and the implications of choosing one outcome over another. In facilitative ADR, it is important that the practitioner be aware of the criteria which suggest that it would not be appropriate for the parties to participate in an ADR process, or to do so only with special adaptations to the process. The ADR practitioner should ensure that the parties are fully informed of the possible legal implications of ADR and where necessary refer the parties to DADRCM (Director of ADR and Conflict Management) to coordinate the provision of independent legal advice to the parties. A practitioner may need to consider whether any action is required by them in the following situations: the parties lack an adequate level of understanding of the issues and implications of the possible outcomes the parties lack sufficient time to assess any proposed outcome there is the possibility of undue practitioner influence the process is inappropriate to resolve the parties’ dispute the physical safety of the parties, practitioner or third parties has been or may be at risk strategies that are inconsistent with the ADR process are being pursued by one or other of the parties a party has undertaken the ADR process in order to gather information to be used in furtherance of the dispute one or more parties is unable to participate and negotiate effectively in the process the appropriate parties are not present to explore the issues effectively or to ensure effective negotiation a significant power imbalance between the parties is likely to prejudice the outcome for one of the parties the parties are not willing to participate in good faith

If the practitioner considers that action is warranted, they may then consider implementing one or more of the following: when it is appropriate, include a support person and/ or an adviser; enable the provision of technical assistance, information or expert advice; adjourn the process; and/or terminate the ADR process and refer the parties to a grievance process. Eliciting information Most ADR processes rely on developing a clear understanding of the reasons for the dispute. To achieve this the parties must be encouraged to describe their own perceptions and needs clearly and as completely as possible. ADR practitioners must be aware of the scope of their duties to elicit relevant information, and encourage the parties to obtain, check and share information. Where facilitative ADR processes are being used (mediation, workplace conferencing, facilitated negotiation), the ADR practitioner may need to consider issues such as: whether the ADR practitioner should contradict a party (eg by physical evidence or prior inconsistent statement) whether there is scope for discrediting a party in front of his or her colleagues (on the same side of the dispute) in order to verify the relevant facts the kinds of information that may only be raised for discussion in private sessions whether recommendations or decisions may be restricted to agreed issues in dispute, or may be open to other related issues as well managing continuation or termination of the process. Some ADR processes end with an expert recommendation and not a final decision. In others, the parties or the ADR practitioner make decisions with a view to facilitating an end to the dispute or the process. In all cases the ADR practitioner is expected to perform their duties diligently and within a reasonable time frame. Terminating an ADR process is a responsibility the ADR practitioner has to both parties. Depending on the ADR process involved, the ADR practitioner may need to consider whether to: discourage the parties from abandoning the process when the practitioner believes settlement is possible;

194

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

abandon (or threaten to abandon) the process in order to induce agreement; and try to restrict the number or scope of settlement options by reference to similar case experience, expert intellectual knowledge or legal principles. Exhibiting lack of bias (neutrality and impartiality). ADR practitioners need to demonstrate independence and lack of personal interest in the outcome, and approach the subject matter of the dispute with an open mind, free of preconceptions or predisposition towards either of the parties. The importance of exhibiting lack of bias is that the parties can be satisfied that they can trust the ADR practitioner to conduct the process fairly. This has usually been referred to as a requirement of neutrality. ‘Neutrality’ refers to interest, while ‘impartiality’ refers to behaviour. DADRCM recognizes that absolute neutrality is impossible, since any practitioner has a degree of interest in the outcome of the dispute. However, what is important is that the process is conducted in an impartial manner that ensures that it is fair for the all of the parties. Impartiality requires the ADR practitioner to: conduct the process in a fair and even-handed way generally treat the parties equally give advice and allow representation, support or assistance equally to the parties act in a manner that does not communicate noticeably different degrees of warmth friendliness or acceptance when dealing with individual parties be independent to the process of command/management organize the venue, times and seating in a way that suits all parties not accept advances, offers or gifts from parties Exhibiting lack of bias requires that the ADR practitioner disclose to all parties: any existing or prior relationship or contact between the ADR practitioner and any party; any interest in the outcome of the particular dispute; any likelihood of present or future conflicts of interest; and

personal values, experiences or knowledge that might substantially affect their capacity to act impartially, given the nature of the subject matter and the characteristics of the parties. Having made the disclosure, the practitioner must also decide whether he or she should withdraw, or, with the express permission of all the parties, continue with the ADR process. Maintaining confidentiality It is important that the practitioner and parties in any ADR process have, as far as possible, a clear and common understanding of the extent and limits of confidentiality in accordance with these Instructions. Confidentiality may require an ADR practitioner to: not disclose information provided by one of the parties to the other party (in mediation, information may be conveyed to the practitioner during a separate private session) not disclose information about the dispute to third parties, subject to any Defence regulations, common law, contractual or statutory requirements However, in all cases the ADR practitioner should make clear to the parties the limits on disclosing information that apply to the parties and the practitioner. Compliance with legislative requirements. Depending on the context, the outcome of an ADR process may need to comply with certain requirements, including legislation (for example the Australian Public Service Act 1999, Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and Defence Act 1903) and natural justice. In particular, an ADR practitioner may need to consider or obtain advice on whether: the interests of third parties are appropriately protected, or at least not unnecessarily or unjustifiably threatened the outcome is fair for both of the parties an agreement condones an illegal activity an agreement is legally void or voidable an agreement should be referred to a delegate for a final decision any advice, agreement or decision involves unlawful or unjustifiable discrimination.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

195

TOOL 10
SAMPLE AGREEMENT TO MEDIATE TEMPLATE
PROTECTED B AGREEMENT TO MEDIATE THIS IS AN AGREEMENT TO MEDIATE made on the day of ____________________________________________________, BETWEEN: _______________________________________________ AND _____________________________________________________ The signing of this document is evidence of the agreement of the parties and the mediator to conduct this mediation process in a bona fide and forthright manner and to make a serious attempt to resolve the outstanding matters. The parties wish to mediate these matters in accordance with the following terms: 1. will, with the concurrence of the parties, serve as mediator. 2. The mediator is a neutral facilitator who will assist the parties to reach their own settlement. The mediator does not offer any legal advice. The mediator has no duty to assert or protect the legal rights of any party, to raise any issue not raised by the parties themselves or to determine who should participate in the mediation. 3. The parties agree to mediate the following: 4. The parties attending the mediation will have full, unqualified authority to reach a settlement in this matter or, will have a mutually acceptable and rapid means of obtaining the requisite authorization. 5. All information exchanged during this entire procedure shall be regarded as “without prejudice” communications for the purpose of settlement negotiations. Subject to the disclosure requirements of the Queen’s Regulations and Orders, Access to Information Act, the Privacy Act, and any other applicable law, the parties agree to keep all information exchanged during the mediation process confidential. 6. It is understood that in order for mediation to work, open and honest communications are essential. 7. Participation in the mediation process is voluntary. If either party refuses to mediate in good faith, or fails to comply with the terms of this Agreement, the other party may terminate the mediation. 8. The mediator may terminate the mediation at any time if the mediator determines that it is not possible to resolve

the issues through mediation, or if the mediator has reason to believe the parties are not mediating in good faith. The mediator will convey the reasons for termination to the parties. 9. In the event that no agreement is reached, or an agreement is reached on some issues only, the mediator will provide a report stating that no agreement was reached on some or all of the outstanding issues. 10. The mediator is free to caucus with the parties individually at any time, in order to improve the chances of reaching a mediated settlement. The parties to the mediation may request an individual caucus with the mediator at any time. Any confidential information revealed to the mediator during a caucus may only be disclosed to the other party with the disclosing party’s express consent. 11. It is agreed that the mediator will not disclose the content of the discussions that took place during the mediation in any subsequent proceedings except in accordance with the Queen’s Regulations and Orders, the law or where ordered to do so by judicial authority for research or educational purposes on an anonymous basis to any person designated or retained by any party, as deemed appropriate or necessary by the Mediator. 12. The parties further agree never to sue personally, subpoena or otherwise compel the mediator to testify in any proceeding. 13. During the course of the mediation, the parties agree to take no new steps in any legal action between them, which concerns the same matter, as is subject of the mediation. 14. It is agreed that where a settlement is reached in the dispute, the mediator will draft the terms of the settlement unless the parties agree otherwise. 15. The mediation shall be held in (city), (province) at the premises of the (location). I, ______________________________________________, consent to act as Mediator in accordance with the foregoing agreement. Parties sign here Date PROTECTED B ___________________________________________________________

196

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 11
SAMPLE MINUTES OF SETTLEMENT TEMPLATE
PROTECTED B MINUTES OF SETTLEMENT BETWEEN: _______________________________________________ Captain A Major B, in his Capacity as A’s Assisting Officer AND Lieutenant-Colonel X Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by, Name of Lawyer, Office of the DND/CF Legal Advisor, Claims and Civil Litigation HAVING REGARD TO the decision of the parties to deal, by mediation, with the Grievance presented by Captain A Lieutenant-Colonel X Agrees to: 1. Clause 1 2. Clause 2 3. Clause 3 Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada Agrees to: 4. Provide $1000.00 in the form of general damages to Captain A upon Captain A’s withdrawal of his Redress of Grievance dated __________________________________ 5. It is expressly understood and expressly agreed that Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada does not admit any liability to Captain A by acceptance of these Minutes of Settlement or by payment of the said sum of $1000.00. Captain A Agrees to: 6. Withdraw his Redress of Grievance date _________________, and release and forever discharge Her Majesty the Queen, Her present and former officers, employees, servants and agents from all manner of actions, causes of action, claims, demands, complaints and grievances of whatsoever kind or nature and which Captain A now has, ever had, or may hereafter have against each and every one of them, separately or jointly that originated from the processes and events set out therein.

The Parties: 7. Agree to maintain the Minutes of Settlement confidential except as required on a need-to-know basis, or for administrative purposes, or as required by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the agreement has been executed by their respective signatures.

Dated at _______________________________ this ________ th day of _________________________, ______________________________

___________________________________________________________ Captain A

___________________________________________________________ Major B in his capacity as Assisting Officer to Captain A

___________________________________________________________ Lieutenant-Colonel X

___________________________________________________________ Lawyer, D/Law Claims

PROTECTED B ___________________________________________________________

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

197

TOOL 12
ANNEX TO MINUTES OF SETTLEMENT: FULL SETTLEMENT OF GRIEVANCE
Sample Template—Annex to Minutes of Settlement: Full Settlement of Grievance Subject to receipt of (compensation, revised PER, promotion notification etc), (Party A) agrees to withdraw his/her grievance, DCFGA file 5000-12 TD xxxxxxx, and release and forever discharge Her Majesty the Queen, Her present and former Officers, employees, servants and agents from all manner of actions, causes of action, claims, demands, complaints and grievances of whatsoever kind or nature and which (Party A) now has, ever had, or may hereafter have against each and every one of them, separately or jointly, that originated from the processes and events in the grievance.

___________________________________________________________ (Party A signature) ___________________________________________________________ Dated:

___________________________________________________________ (Party B-Person authorized to take agreed action) ___________________________________________________________ Dated:

198

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 13
ANNEX TO MINUTES OF SETTLEMENT: PARTIAL SETTLEMENT OF GRIEVANCE
Sample Template—Annex to Minutes of Settlement: Partial Settlement of the Grievance Subject to receipt of (compensation, revised PER, promotion notification etc), (Party A) agrees to withdraw those portions of his/her redress application in DCFGA file 5000-12 TD xxxxxxx, that pertain to __________________________________________________, namely: ___________________________________________________________ and __________________________________________________ and agrees to release and forever discharge Her Majesty the Queen, Her present and former Officers, employees, servants and agents from all manner of actions, causes of action, claims, demands, complaints and grievances of whatsoever kind or nature and which (Party A) now has, ever had, or may hereafter have against each and every one of them, separately or jointly, that originated from the processes and events in the grievance. The member undertakes to advise DCFGA (or IA) in writing of outstanding grievance items still sought. Upon receipt, the grievance will be staffed to adjudicate the outstanding items.

___________________________________________________________ Party A signature ___________________________________________________________ (dated)

___________________________________________________________ Party B-Person authorized to take agreed action ___________________________________________________________ Dated:

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

199

TOOL 14
SAMPLE MEDIATION EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE
Sample Mediation Evaluation Questionnaire Evaluation of the Mediation Process and Mediator(s) As part of the ongoing evaluation of Conflict Management across the DND/CF we are seeking your opinions on the mediation process in which you participated and on the quality of service you received from the mediator(s). Only the information you provide in sections C and D will be shared with the mediator(s). Please use the return addressed envelope provided. Section A: To be completed by mediator. 1. The Centre sponsoring the conduct of this mediation2. Lead Mediator: ________________________________________ Other: ________________________________________________ Section B: For statistical purposes only, please complete the following background information. 3. Status—Military or Civilian 4. Gender—Male or Female 5. First Official Language—English or French Section C: The Mediation Process Using the following scale, rate your agreement with each statement. strongly disagree disagree neither disagree nor agree agree strongly agree 6. I received a good explanation about the process before participating in the mediation. 7. Whether the issues were resolved or not, this mediation was worth the time and effort. 8. I understand the other party’s (parties’) perspective better as a result of the mediation. 9. The other party(ies) understand(s) my perspective better as a result of the mediation. 10. The facilities used for the mediation were appropriate.

11. I would recommend mediation to others. 12. Your comments on the mediation process ___________________________________________________________ 13. Was the mediation conducted in your (official) language of choice? Yes or No 14. I decided to participate in this mediation because ___________________________________________________________ 15. Were minutes of settlement signed? (If yes go to question 17.) Yes No

16. If you answered no to question 15, was some progress made that may help lead to an eventual agreement? Yes or No Section D: The Mediator(s) Using the following scale, rate your agreement with each statement. strongly disagree disagree neither disagree nor agree agree strongly agree 17. The mediator(s) was (were) fair and impartial. 18. The mediator(s) provided a good explanation of the process and ground rules. 19. The mediator(s) helped everyone listen, communicate and stay focused on the process. 20. The mediator(s) was (were) able to clarify the important issues and interests of the parties. 21. The mediator(s) helped identify common and compatible interests of the parties. 22. The mediator(s) facilitated the development of realistic options. 23. The mediator(s) dealt respectfully with all parties. 24. I was satisfied with the drafting of the minutes of settlement (if not applicable, leave blank). 25. The mediator(s) acted in accordance with the guidelines supplied in the handout prior to the mediation. 26. Your comments on the mediator(s): THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK

200

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 15
MODEL—MEDIATION FACT SHEET
What is mediation? It is a process in which an impartial third party (the mediator) facilitates communication between disputing parties and assists them to voluntarily reach, on their own, a mutually acceptable resolution to the conflict. Who will choose the Mediator? Mediation is a voluntary process. One of its advantages is the control given to the parties to select the mediator. Who will participate in the mediation session? Usually, the parties that are in conflict will be at the table. Occasionally, other interested parties might also be requested to participate. It is a case-by-case approach when it comes to decide who should be attending. What types of cases are suitable to mediation? Interpersonal relationship issues, personal harassment, abuse of authority, discrimination, sexual harassment, performance evaluation, discipline and application of various policies are some examples of cases that can be mediated. What is the role of a Mediator? The role of the mediator varies depending on the personalities of the people involved, mandate given to the mediator by the parties, and the degree of emotions present at mediation. This results in a spectrum ranging from a mediator who is completely neutral and value-free; to a mediator who takes a more active role in shaping the eventual outcome. The latter borders on mediator as advisor. Regardless of what techniques are used by the mediator to assist the parties in reaching a solution, the mediator is not empowered to render a decision. In various situations, the mediator may attempt to: 1. Encourage exchanges of information 2. Help the parties understand each other’s view 3. Let the parties know that their concerns are understood 4. Promote a productive level of emotional expression 5. Identify and narrow issues 6. Help parties realistically evaluate alternatives to settlement 7. Suggest that the parties take breaks when negotiations reach an impasse 8. Encourage flexibility and creativity

9. Shift the focus from the past to future 10. Shift the focus from one of blame to a creative exchange between the parties 11. Propose solutions that meet the fundamental interests of all parties. What happens during mediation? The process of mediation involves a series of six activities: 1. Pre-mediation Prior to mediation session, the mediator will usually contact the parties on an individual basis. This initial contact can be done either by phone or by a face-to-face meeting. This first contact has different purposes. Initially, it allows for an introduction of the mediator and provides an opportunity for the mediator to explain the mediation process to the parties. Further, it provides an opportunity for the parties to explain to the mediator the dynamics of the conflict. At the end of this initial contact, the mediator will get a commitment from all parties to attempt to resolve the outstanding issue(s) by mediation. 2. Joint or individual session Having had an opportunity to discuss the situation with the parties, the mediator will be in a position to determine with them as to how to proceed. At least three options can be presented to the parties: 1) a joint session which will involve all parties at the table at the same time or; 2) separating the parties in different rooms or; 3) a combination of both. The combination is most commonly used. Further, and before proceeding, the parties will be requested to sign a mediation agreement. It is a very simple document that details the rules which will guide the process. Here are some examples: one person will speak at one time; respect and civility; open and honest communications; confidentiality i.e. what is said during the process remains within the process. Other guidelines can be suggested by the parties. 3. Understanding the issue(s) Upon the agreement of the parties, the mediator will usually ask the person who requested the mediation or the complainant to open the discussions with a brief description of the issues or a statement. As part of the process, the mediator has to ensure fairness. Each party will have an opportunity to present their side of the story. During these various presentations issues will be identified. The parties and the mediator will then be able to ask questions or clarify issues with an objective to identify the needs and interests of each party to resolve the case.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

201

4. Generating options The generation of options is usually conducted in two phases. The first phase is a brainstorming session. During this session, all parties are requested to generate as many options as possible with a view to resolve the case. The second phase will be to evaluate these options. Each option submitted will be evaluated by the parties. They will determine which options are viable and which ones meet their needs and interests. Further negotiations may also result in the creation of additional options. 5. Reaching commitment This task is one of the most critical aspects of the mediation process. From the evaluation of the options, parties will put together the foundation of a potential agreement. They will assess the viability of these options, will determine if they satisfy their needs and meet their interests. Upon a review of the options, the parties will embark on a final negotiation and an agreement will be reached.

6. Drafting an agreement and its implementation The practice has been that the mediator will draft the terms of settlement unless the parties agree otherwise. While drafting the agreement, the mediator will ensure that the parties identify who is suppose to do what, who needs to be involved in the implementation of the agreement and how it will be done. After careful review of the terms of settlement, the parties will be requested to sign the agreement. Each party will have a copy. The signing of the terms of settlement legally binds the parties. It is considered to be a valid contract between the parties. Each party will receive a copy of the terms of settlement. The mediator will keep a copy for the Executive Director Conflict Management Office’s file.

202

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 16
THE SKILL SETS OF ADR INSTITUTE CHARTER MEDIATORS
(Note: this is drawn directly from material published by ADR Institute of Canada. See www.adrinstitute.ca) Administrative Organize and conduct the practice of mediation in an efficient and effective manner a. Organize and maintain office systems – appointment system – correspondence system – engagement file system with monitoring feature b. Work within the system/rules governing the accepting and handling of engagements – records details of appointment (terms, conditions and fee) – confirms appointment in writing (engagement letter or contract) – ensures all pertinent correspondence, sent and received, is provided to both parties – demonstrates a clear understanding of the applicable Rules and Ethics c. Allocate time, effort and other resources – expeditiously reviews and deals with documents and information received – develops an overall perspective of the engagement – draws up timetable for dealing with preparatory matters and conduct of the mediation d. Organize the required needs of the mediation – adequacy of session room to accommodate the parties and others – capability to provide privacy for private consultations and caucusing – suitability of the location in terms of minimizing external distractions or interruptions – capability of session accommodation facility to meet special needs of participants

e. Bring the engagement to completion – has a good understanding of closure techniques and the settlement process – understands the importance of working co-operatively to draft the memorandum of understanding/settlement agreement – submits fee billing in accordance with terms of engagement or within a reasonable time Procedural Recognize the nature of the dispute and establish clear understandings, concerning the process, with and between the parties a. Determine legitimacy and jurisdiction – reviews contracts between the parties (if they exist) – ensures the issues in dispute are covered by the mediation clause or are suitable for mediation – determines that he/she possesses adequate knowledge of the business or industry encompassing the dispute – ensures there is no reason for parties to challenge the appointment – ensures that the appointment is not inconsistent with the applicable laws or institutional rules b. Establish clear understandings – clearly explains the role of the mediator – clearly defines and explains the mediation process – emphasizes the “mutually agreed to solution principle” – emphasizes the “rights of the parties to withdraw” – emphasizes the “confidentiality principle” and explains its limitations – determines that those persons, who hold the decision making power, will be at the table – reviews the engagement letter/agreement to mediate – in cooperation with the parties, estimates time that will be required for the mediation – formalizes the engagement in writing

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

203

c. Supervise the preliminary meeting – supervises conduct of the meeting – explains the purpose and content of the meeting – brings the parties to agreement on procedural matters d. Deal with preliminary matters – holds preliminary meeting if required or requested – provides assistance to the parties in preparing for the mediation – determines if legal counsel, witnesses, experts or other parties will be involved – ensures all parties have a clear understanding of how the mediation session will be conducted and settlement effected – ensures all necessary procedural steps have been completed Relationship Instil and maintain a positive relationship and good communication a. Maintain a positive relationship – acts with courtesy, respect and patience and encourages the parties to do the same – separates mediator’s personal values from issues of the mediation – earns trust – builds rapport – compliments progressive behavior – indicates empathy for the issues – does not pre-judge the parties on the issues – is modest in attitude held towards others – exhibits sensitivity to strongly held values of the disputants, including ethnic, gender and cultural differences – devotes appropriate care and attention towards the parties

b. Listen effectively – listens to both parties in a passive and active manner – exhibits an understanding of the importance of body language to the listening process – intervenes selectively to obtain clarification, assist in understanding or maintain order – exhibits patience and does not interrupt except in the most serious circumstances c. Speak effectively – uses clear diction and collateral body language – asks succinct questions when necessary – is direct but not intimidating – speaks in a clear audible voice – uses simple language – utilizes terminology that is common to the parties’ industry d. Maintain a conducive atmosphere during the session – uses civil language – permits humor which is beneficial to the process – displays understanding of the factual material and submissions – puts parties and witnesses/collaborating presenters at ease – avoids distracting body movements or facial expressions – discourages an excessively adversarial climate – shows empathy

204

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

Facilitation Ability to conduct the mediation session using fair, flexible and effective procedures, skills, and techniques a. Conduct a fair session – maintains neutrality and impartiality – understands the nature of power imbalances and how to deal with them – treats parties fairly and equally – preserves parties’ autonomy – allows each party an opportunity to examine witnesses/collaborating presenters – allows parties to make objections and respond fully to objections – allows parties adequate time to deal with surprises – deals expeditiously with parties’ questions on procedural matters – keeps interruptions to a minimum – imparts and encourages courtesy and respect – accepts criticism in a constructive manner b. Promote an assertive tone – speaks in an assertive manner – encourages the parties to conduct themselves in an assertive manner – assists the deliberations by rephrasing accusatory or aggressive statements into an assertive form c. Deal with high emotion – recognizes the need for and advantage of venting – calls a recess to diffuse negative circumstances of high emotion – holds a caucus to deal with severe negative circumstances of high emotion

d. Organize and analyze data – develops an overall perspective of the engagement – understands the sequence and nature of events contributing to the dispute – exhibits the ability to deal with complex factual material – organizes data into a logical library format – determines the most effective and efficient way to utilize the data to complement the mediation process – utilizes ancillary tools such as flip charts and white boards to assist understanding e. Deal with the issues – possesses an adequate knowledge of the business/ industry related to the dispute – assists the parties to clarify and identify the issues – isolates those issues that are of no or little relevance – separates the parties claims and issues – assists the parties to establish an objective methodology to evaluate claims – reconstructs the issues in terms that will assist understanding – screens out non-mediable issues f. Surface needs and interests – exhibits an understanding of the importance of surfacing needs and interest and – conveys this importance to the parties – exhibits an ability to identify symptoms – asks probing questions directed to uncover potential needs and interests – asks open ended questions directed to uncover potential needs and interests – encourages candid responses – holds caucuses focused on uncovering needs and interests

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

205

g. Advance the process – empowers the parties to own and actively participate in the process – separates the people from the problem – assists parties to maintain focus and momentum – assists the parties to evaluate submissions and the relevant material – is open and flexible to suggestions and ideas presented by the parties – assists the parties to generate creative options – assists the parties to evaluate their positions using BATNA’s and Reality Checks – assists parties to make their own informed choices – utilizes appropriate tools and techniques to break impasse, achieve understanding and steer the process to settlement

h. Bring closure and achieve settlement – recognizes the optimum moment when the parties express a desire to deal/compromise – assists the parties to bargain a solution – utilizes appropriate tools and techniques to achieve closure – assists the parties to move from closure to settlement – assists the parties to assess whether their proposed settlement terms can be implemented – assists the parties/their advisors to draft their memorandum of understanding /settlement agreement

206

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 17
SAMPLE: SPEAKING NOTES TO COURSE INSTRUCTORS
An example of the speaking notes provided to course instructors. This example applies to the learning objectives related to conflict theory and the DR spectrum. EXAMPLE: DR Spectrum Overview Time: 30 Min Objective: To provide a refresher on basic conflict theory and the DR spectrum

Related Learning Objectives: LO 401, LO 403 Teaching Points: 1. Response Options 2. Approaches to Conflict 3. Focus on Interests 4. ADR Continuum/Spectrum 5. ADR Toolbox

Speaking Notes SLIDE # 34 SPEAKING POINTS In this segment we will talk about some of the different response options people typically use when dealing with conflict. As well, we will discuss various approaches to conflict and finally revisit the ADR continuum or spectrum. This model is drawn from an instrument developed by Thomas and Kilmann. Speak to slide Interests are the focal point of “Interest Based Negotiation”. Most people will typically start out in a positional approach. The objective in IBN is to get people to consider the interests or the “why” behind positions. In most negotiations there will be some overlap of interests which may serve as a stating point for discussion. So…as shown on this slide, we want to try and focus on the interests. This slide should be familiar to you. As you can see, the self-help bubble is where negotiation is foremost. Notwithstanding, negotiation plays a major role in prevention and mediation functions as well. This slide gets into a little more detail as to what processes are available to ADR practitioners. Speak to slide.

35 – 37 38

39 40

41

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

207

Supplementary information as shown in the example below was also provided as guidance to instructors to indicate key points to be emphasized. DR Spectrum Overview Supplementary Notes Systems Approach Emphasize that in order for a DR initiative to be effective, it must be implemented using a systems approach that aligns with, among other things, the ethics and values of the organization. Discuss multi-option multi access and the follow-on to EDCM. Discuss the features of the DND/CF DRS with a focus on the reinforcement of the chain of command and the supporting of union roles, structures and processes and how the DRS cannot be a stand-alone initiative and must be integrated with new and existing processes. Generic Dispute Walk through the Generic Dispute Resolution System. Take a sample party with concern and show how the party has several options; to approach the other party involved (self help), contact the local DR Centre or to use an existing access point. Other Party If the other party is contacted and the issue was resolved, there is no further need to do anything else. DR Centre If the DR Centre (DRC) is contacted, the person at the DRC will assist the party with the concern to generate a number of options available to them. The DRC will make every effort to try and keep the dispute within the chain of command while at the same time respecting the party’s concerns of confidentiality. IT MUST BE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE DRC IS NOT AN ADVOCATE FOR COMPLAINANTS, THEY ARE THERE TO HELP THEM SELECT THEIR OWN PROCESS. The DRC may offer options in rights-based or interest-based processes. Existing Access Points These are means that may be used by a party to resolve their concerns. Existing rights based processes, such as grievances, harassment complaints etc may be used. Alternatively the party may choose an interest based process such as mediation.

The dotted arrow between the interest and rights based processes means that a party can move between the two processes with their complaint, but not at the same time. Example: A person decides to file a grievance. Once the grievance is in the system it is essentially out of the hands of the party. The party may opt to use mediation as a vehicle to resolve the grievance. In order to do so, the party must agree to hold the grievance in abeyance until the interest based process is complete. Similarly, if a party chooses an interestbased process but finds that it is not working, they may at any time elect to file a grievance. AT NO TIME WILL TWO PROCESSES BE UNDERWAY AT THE SAME TIME FOR THE SAME ISSUE. Integrated CM System The idea of this slide is to show how it all fits together. It is a road map. Walk through it briefly and do not spend a lot of time on it at this point in time. Conflict Theory Discuss the definition of conflict and the difference between conflict and dispute. Discuss what conflict can do and the costs of poorly managed conflict. Briefly mention the 5 response options as they will be discussed in detail with the Kilmann review. Discuss the Power, Rights and Interest Based approaches with the focus on moving to interests. ADR Continuum Note that it is also referred to as a “spectrum.” Begin with the focus on prevention being the preferred option. Given that prevention is not always possible, the next choice would be to encourage people to handle their own issues through the negotiation process. If that fails then a third party neutral (mediator) may be called to assist. Finally if none of the previous options work, then a person with decision-making authority would decide the outcome of the dispute. The “Tools” slide is merely an expansion of the previous slide. In order for DR processes to be successful, they need to include skills, a system within which to practise those skills and then finally the fundamental component of the pillars is leadership, and that means leadership at all levels, and everyone is a leader in some capacity.

208

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

TOOL 18
COURSE OUTLINE: MEDIATOR’S QUALIFICATION PROGRAM, PHASE L
O U T L I N E O F T H E M E D I ATO R ’ S Q UA L I F I C AT I O N P R O G R A M ( M Q P ) C O U R S E — P H A S E 1
LO#* 401 DESCRIPTION Understand relevant Gov’t/DND/CF policies and procedures and legal framework. TEACHING POINTS Treasury Board policies, CFAO 19-34 (harassment), CPAO 7.14, Grievance CFAO/CPAO 7.07, CHRA, ATIP, CBA,MPCC regs, PSP policies. Definitions of Conflict and Dispute, Sources of Conflict (hot 3), Costs of Conflict, Kilman Model (5 types), Positions vs Interests, Rights Based Approach, Power Based Approach, Interest Based Approach, Spectrum to include: Prevention, Self Help, Coaching, Counselling, interest based, Negotiation Mediation. What is Neutrality, Creating a safe, neutral environment, Understand concepts of: impartiality, respect, being impersonal, empathy, Understand open and closed questioning techniques, Give neutral feedback (reflect, correct misunderstandings, identify issues), Understand the effects of body language to include: positive/ negative, own, others, Understand things to avoid: jumping to conclusions, rushing to judgement, giving unwanted advice, changing subject, talking about yourself. Understand Listening Skills, Understand framing/reframing HOURS COMMENTS 1.25 There may be some local policies that apply here and they should be included. Guest lecturers may be used.

402

Understand the DR Spectrum

1.5

Participants should self administer the Kilmann test prior to arrival

403

Understand Effective Communicating Skills

2.75

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

209

LO#* 404

DESCRIPTION Demonstrate Effective Communicating Skills

TEACHING POINTS Create safe environment (introductions, welcome), Demonstrate appropriate body language, use appropriate questioning techniques, Demonstrate respect, empathy, understanding. Demonstrate effective listening skills, Demonstrate framing/ reframing. Describe the main components (prevention, self, other), Describe prevention (defns, trg, education, awareness), Describe Self Help (defns, communication, empathy, collaboration), Describe Coaching (defn, advisory vs reflective, techniques, executive coaching, peer coaching), Describe Counselling (defn, limitations, when to refer to a professional), Describe Negotiation (defn, 7 steps, when to use, difference between negotiation and mediation), Describe Mediation (defn, when to use/not use, principles, conditions for mediation), Describe Arbitration (defn, when to use, principles, difference between arbitration/ mediation) Describe Group process (consensus building) Understand various approaches to negotiation (relationships, problem-solvers, fairness, substantive results, avoiders), Describe negotiation styles (competitive, cooperative, principled), Understand the 7 elements of IBN (alternatives (BATNA), Interests, Options, Legitimacy, Communication, Relationship, Commitment), Understand tactics for dealing with difficult people (steamrolling, assumptions, guilt, emotions, positions), Understand how to move from positions to interests (defns, obtain clarification, look at other points of view)

HOURS COMMENTS This is a practical exercise. Include under LO 403.

405

Describe the Key Processes in the DR Spectrum

1.5

406

Describe the Interest-Based Negotiation Process

3.5

210

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

LO#* 407

DESCRIPTION Conduct Interest-Based Negotiations Understand the Mediation Process

TEACHING POINTS Use 7 Elements, Conduct role plays, Conduct debrief Know the benefits of mediation (parties own solution, parties feel heard, focus on interests, less expensive, fast, confidential). Understand the need for effective communication skills. Know the limitations of mediation (not for all, requires good faith and commitment, unfamiliar to some). Understand the need for pre-mediation assessment (is case appropriate, prepare parties, logistic requirements). Know the mediation process (prep, establish guidelines, define issues, explore interests, generate options, commit, follow up). Understand Ethics and Code of Conduct for Mediators. Understand how to convene a mediation. Understand mediation styles and approaches. Define a successful mediation. Understand power imbalances. Understand how to deal with emotions. Understand how to deal with anger. Understand how to deal with values

HOURS COMMENTS This will be part of LO 406

408

28.5

* LO = Learning Objective

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

211

TOOL 19
MEDIATOR ASSESSMENT FORM
M E D I ATO R A S S E S S M E N T F O R M Individual elements are scored on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being unsatisfactory, 3 being satisfactory and 5 highly satisfactory.
1. Pre-mediation a. explanation of process b. explanation of roles and responsibilities 2. Understanding of 5 stages of mediation 3. Introduction of participants and process 4. Explanation of Confidentiality 5. Confirmation of Authority to Settle 6. Communication Skills a. active listening b. reframing c. paraphrasing d. managing speaking time e. positive and future focused 7. Clarification of Issues 8. Identification of Interests 9. Generate and Explore Options 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5

212

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

10. Effectiveness of Transition between stages 11. Listening Skills 12. Demonstration of Empathy 13. Overall Assessment of Mediator’s Performance

1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5

TOTAL SCORE: /90 Unsatisfactory Highly Sat: 70–90 Unsat: < 54

Satisfactory

Highly Satisfactory (circle one)

To reach the total score out of 90, add the circled scores in each category.

V O L U M E

I I — T H E

C M S

T O O L

K I T

213

TOOL 20
SAMPLE MQP QUALIFICATION MEMORANDUM
Sample copy of the MQP Qualification Memorandum

1000-5 (EDCM 8) Date Distribution List MEDIATOR QUALIFICATION PROGRAM (MQP)—QUALIFICATION AWARD 1. As the Departmental Authority on Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR), it is a pleasure to hereby award you the Mediator Qualification as of XXXXXX . 2. You are invited to work closely with your local Dispute Resolution Centre (DRC) as this organisation provides professional development opportunities, co-mediations and eventually, the opportunity to work more independently. As a qualified mediator of the Conflict Management Program, I invite you to participate fully in promoting ADR as an effective means of resolving our workplace conflicts. As mentioned during the qualification program, you can only carry out ADR interventions when assigned to a case by your DRC. 3. To keep qualification code 07934 active, you must perform a minimum of two DRC-sponsored ADR interventions every two years. 4. Your qualification records will be amended by my office through the Individual Training Management Information System (ITMIS) in order to reflect this qualification. 5. Should you have any questions, please contact the DGCMP Training and Development Manager through your local DRC.

Director General, Conflict Management Program Distribution List Member Member’s CO1000-5 (DEGC 8)

214

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

G L O S S A R Y O F T E R M S A N D A C R O N Y M S
ACR ADF ADM ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution Arbitration Association for Conflict Resolution (formerly Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution [SPIDR]). Australian Defence Force. Assistant Deputy Minister. See alternative dispute resolution. any process used to resolve disputes other than rights-based processes. It includes methods for preventing conflict, coaching, negotiation (self- help), mediation (third party neutral assistance) and neutral evaluation. Arbitration involves a neutral person (or a panel of neutral persons) rendering a decision/opinion after hearing each party’s presentation of evidence and argument. Parties agree in advance whether or not the decision is binding or non-binding. Public Service Administrative Services Group. Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement. Canadian Forces General Message. Chief of the Land Staff. Canadian Centre for Management Development. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. Chief of the Defence Staff. Canadian Forces Grievance Board. Canadian Forces Personnel Support Agency. Canadian Forces Recruiting, Education and Training System. Chief of the Land Staff. Conflict Management Group. conflict management project/program. Chief of the Maritime Staff. See conflict management system. a process designed to provide parties in a dispute with confidential, one-on-one assistance in the resolution of the dispute. A coach is not a representative for the party, but rather a person who helps the party develop skills and confidence to use interest-based approaches such as self-help in the resolution of their dispute. Coaching can occur at different points in a dispute. It can be sought at the beginning to promote a negotiation between the parties or it can be used when a resolution process such as a mediation is underway.

AS BATNA CANFORGEN CAS CCMD CCRA CDS CFGB CFPSA CFRETS CLS CMG CMP CMS CMS Coaching

G L O S S A R Y

O F

T E R M S

A N D

A C R O N Y M S

215

Conflict

the process and condition of dissatisfaction, which is often viewed as a general state of negative feelings. It is broader in nature than a dispute and occurs where two or more individuals perceive that they have competing interests. a comprehensive, broad-based approach to the prevention, identification and resolution of workplace disputes. It is: Integrated: Rights- and interest-based dispute resolution activities and institutions are linked in a coherent, “whole” system, with a logical “flow” or sequencing (like a road map) with loop-back properties. Systematic: A logical and progressive series of steps or stages, each with a clearly defined set of procedures, forms the process. Institutionalized: Processes, practices and support structures are operational. They are known, understood, accepted and used.

Conflict management system

Convening

a process where a neutral person (the convenor or mediator) undertakes to determine if parties have an interest in attempting to resolve their issue(s) by using the most appropriate ADR process. The convenor identifies the issues and parties having an interest in the dispute and often serves to inform/educate parties as to their ADR options. Public Service Clerical and Regulatory Group. Director of Alternative Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management. Defence Administrative Orders and Directives. Director Canadian Forces Grievance Administration. Director General Conflict Management Program. Director General Employee Relations. the outcome of unresolved conflict. It is a manifestation or subset of conflict and requires resolution. It often occurs when people disagree on facts. a systematic approach focusing primarily on the resolution of disputes.

CR DADRCM DAODs DCFGA DGCMP DGER Dispute Dispute resolution system DM DND/CF DR DRC DRS EAP/MAP EDCM EX Facilitation

Deputy Minister. the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces. dispute resolution. dispute resolution centre. See dispute resolution system. Employee Assistance Program/Member Assistance Program. Executive Director Conflict Management (at DND/CF). Public Service Executive Group. procedural assistance to enable participants to communicate more effectively and move towards agreement. The facilitator is an impartial “process manager” and can help parties communicate in a structured way, following an agenda and an agreed-upon process. It can be used in small or large group settings.

216

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

FAQS FDW Grievance Grievance procedure HR IBEW IBN Impartial third party

frequently asked questions. facilitated design workshops. a legislated right available to employees and members that provides them with a redress mechanism to formally resolve complaints. It is considered a rights-based process. a procedure (agreed to by the organization) through which employees seek redress of complaints. human resources. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. See interest-based negotiation. anyone who is external to a dispute and who holds no personal stake in the outcome. The role of the impartial third party is to help the disputants identify issues and enable them to come to a resolution. Mediators, facilitators, arbitrators and judges are examples of impartial third parties.

Interest-based (also known as “principled negotiation”)—a process in which parties focus on their underlying interests negotiation (e.g. concerns, hopes, expectations, assumptions, priorities, beliefs, fears, values) rather than on their positions, in an attempt to understand what is really important to the other party, and propose options to meet as many interests as possible. It is often considered a means of self-help. ITMIS JAG Kilmann MARLANT Mediation Individual Training Management Information System. Judge Advocate General. Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (conflict management assessment/tests). Maritime Forces Atlantic. a voluntary process in which an impartial third party assists disputants to negotiate a mutually acceptable solution to their issue(s). The mediator must be acceptable to all parties and has no decision-making power. In DND/CF, a mediation is defined as a process that involves the signing of an Agreement to Mediate and if a resolution is reached, the signing of Minutes of Settlement. Military Police Complaints Commission. mediator qualification program. National Capital Region anyone who is external to a dispute and who holds no personal stake in the outcome. The role of a neutral third party is to help the disputants identify issues and enable them to come to a resolution. Mediators, facilitators, arbitrators and judges are examples of a neutral third party. Non Public Funds. organization development. Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada. Public Service Staff Relations Board. Public Works and Government Services Canada.

MPCC MQP NCR Neutral third party NPF OD PIPS PSSRB PWGSC

G L O S S A R Y

O F

T E R M S

A N D

A C R O N Y M S

217

Q&As QR&Os RFP Rights-based processes SCONDVA SHARP SPIDR Stakeholder UNDE WATNA

questions and answers. Queen’s Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces. request for proposal. any process for resolving a dispute where control over the outcome is given to a decision maker. Within DND/CF these include such mechanisms as harassment complaints, military and civilian grievances, summary trials and courts martial. Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs. Standards for Harassment and Racism Prevention. Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution (now Association for Conflict Resolution [ACR]). any person or group of persons who have a stake in the outcome of a dispute. They may be directly or indirectly affected. Union of National Defence Employees. Worst Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement.

218

P A T H W A Y S TOWARDS A CONFLICT COMPETENT ORGANIZATION

R E C O M M E N D E D R E F E R E N C E S A N D W E B S I T E S
SELECT SYSTEMS DESIGN REFERENCES Administrative Conference of the United States, (1995), Dispute Systems Design Working Group, Evaluating ADR Programs: A Handbook for Federal Agencies, Washington, DC: Administrative Conference of the United States.
British Columbia Ministry of Attorney General, Justices Services Branch, Reaching Resolution: A Guide to Designing Public Sector Dispute Resolution Systems, Victoria, BC: BC Ministry of Attorney General, Justices Services Branch, 2003. Available online at http://www.ag.gov.bc.ca/dro/publications/guides/design.pdf Costantino, C.A. and C.S. Merchant, Designing Conflict Management Systems: A Guide to Creating Productive and Healthy Organizations, San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers, 1996. Dictionary of Conflict Resolution, compiled and edited by Douglas H. Yarn, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999. Lipsky, David B., Ronald L. Seeber and Richard D. Fincher, Emerging Systems for Managing Workplace Conflict: Lessons from American Corporations for Managers and Dispute Resolution Professionals, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003. Slaikeu, Karl A. and Ralph H. Hasson, Controlling the Costs of Conflict: How to Design a System for Your Organization, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1998. Stitt, Allan J, Alternative Dispute Resolution for Organizations: How to Design a System for Effective Conflict Resolution, Toronto: John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 1998. Ury, William, J.M. Brett and S.B. Goldberg, Getting Disputes Resolved: Designing Systems to Cut the Costs of Conflict, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1988. US General Accounting Office, ADR: Employers’ Experience with ADR in the Workplace, (Report GAO/GGD-97-157), Washington, DC: GAO, 1997. A detailed bibliography can be found at http://www.peacemakers.ca/bibliography/bibintro99.html

SELECT WEB SITES ABA Section of Dispute Resolution http://www.abanet.org/dispute
ADR Institute of Canada http://www.adrcanada.ca/ American Arbitration Association http://www.adr.org/ Association for Conflict Resolution http://www.acresolution.org/ Center for Analysis of ADR Systems http://www.caadrs.org/ Conflict Resolution and Information Network http://www.crinfo.org/ Conflict Resolution Network Canada http://www.crnetwork.ca/ CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution http://www.cpradr.org/ Mediation Information and Resource Center http://www.mediate.com/ National Arbitration Forum http://www.arbitration-forum.com/ National Association For Community Mediation http://www.nafcm.org/ Network of Communities for Peacemaking and Conflict Resolution http://www.apeacemaker.net/ Ombudsman Association http://www.ombuds-toa.org/ Policy Consensus Initiative http://www.policyconsensus.org/ U.S. Department of Justice Office of Dispute Resolution http://www.usdoj.gov/adr/ Victim Offender Mediation Association http://www.voma.org/

R E C O M M E N D E D

R E F E R E N C E S

A N D

W E B

S I T E S

219

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.