In many spheres of life, mediation is being utilized more and more to settle conflicts. Organizations and policymakers are becoming more aware of the unique resonance that mediation has in the workplace in the UK. Positive disagreement between people or groups of individuals may seriously impede an organization’s quest for competitive advantage and harm employee well-being (Report 2020, 2020). People are the key to organizational success and productivity. It seems sensible to encourage the application of mediation in personal workplace conflicts more frequently. The benefit of employing an informal method is that it may be utilized more adaptable to fit certain situations, and the anonymity of the procedure can provide breathing room for more candid and open discussion (Saundry et al. 2013). Mediation is very successful when employed early in a dispute before tensions erupt in the workplace. Early involvement can stop the conflict from escalating and both sides from firmly entrenched (Podro & Suff, 2013). There is less likelihood of the professional relationship irreparably failing if the dispute is settled quickly (Saundry et al., 2017). The possibility of preserving positive and beneficial working relationships over time increases. Thus, the essay aims to evaluate mediation as a way of solving all forms of workplace issues and determine the role of fairness and equity in the UK.
Mediation as a Form of Conflict Resolution
Through mediation, problems may be resolved more quickly and prevented from spiraling out of control. This approach has been demonstrated to lower the number of grievances filed and in cases where a tribunal would have been necessary (Podro & Suff, 2013). It offers a much more affordable alternative to the employment discrimination process, which can result in immediate financial costs for the organization and the claimant and non-financial hardships in the UK.
Moreover, employment tribunals do not resolve structural issues at work that can be at the root of a particular disagreement. Through mediation, the employer is much more likely to address the issue’s core and adjust working procedures that will ultimately benefit both the employees and the organization as a whole (Saundry et al., 2019). Mediation, in particular, helps treat stress-related problems, preventing extended absence.
Therefore, UK organizations should assist workplaces in developing the necessary conflict-management skills to preserve the employment relationship. When appropriately implemented, mediation might provide organizations trying to prevent the potentially negative consequences of a protracted dispute with a novel strategy (Saundry et al., 2018). Although promoted as a solution to all conflicts, there are some for which mediation is inappropriate. The ideal mediation technique varies depending on the situation: different mediation strategies may be effective depending on the organizational needs. Modern organizations are dynamic and complicated, consisting of individuals with a wide range of experiences, perspectives, beliefs, and expectations for the workplace (Blyton et al., 2010). Thus, professional relationships inevitably involve conflict, a common phenomenon in organizations.
UK organizations, for their part, are always under pressure to produce more or provide customers with high-quality services. Conflict may arise due to the ongoing change that many organizations endure (Discipline, grievance and mediation, 2009). Healthy disagreements, to a certain extent, such as fair rivalry among people to succeed in their positions, may be advantageous and even foster creativity within teams (Saundry et al., 2020). However, tension frequently sparks discontent and the beginning of the unproductive confrontation. The problem can persist, and the dispute can spiral whenever the original disagreement is ignored and improperly handled.
Mediator’s Role in Fairness and Equity of Resolution
Fairness and equity are fundamental in solving the conflict and dealing with both sides’ interests. In mediation, a mediator serves as an unbiased third person who assists two or more parties to a dispute in making an effort to come to a resolution. The parties reach any agreement on the conflict, not the mediator. The mediator’s role is not to pass judgment, declare one party to be fair and the other to be wrong or instruct the parties to the mediation on what to do (Bennett, 2017). The mediator controls the problem-solving procedure but not the final resolution. Employees of an external mediation agency who have undergone training and accreditation may serve as inside mediators additionally to the basic duties. Alternatively, they can come from a third-party mediator and serve as co-mediators alone or in pairs.
Purpose of Mediation
There are several ways in which mediation differs from other methods of resolving disputes, such as grievance processes and the employment discrimination system. Mediation is less formal, flexible, voluntary, and morally binding but often without legal standing; it is private, typically conducted alone and controlled by the parties. Workplace conflict may be resolved amicably and quickly through mediation, which can be employed at any stage of the conflict cycle (Saundry & Wibberley, 2015). The approach provides a secure and private environment for individuals to conclude. It accomplishes it in various ways, enabling those involved to comprehend and empathize with whom they are in dispute (Fisher et al., 2017). Additionally, providing participants with ideas about their behavior and others opens opportunities for change and assists participants in building the knowledge to resolve workplace conflicts for themselves in the future (Saundry et al., 2018). Finally, one efficient method is fostering communication and aiding the parties involved in reaching an amicable and agreeable solution.
Models of Mediation
Depending on the specific mediation style, a mediator will conduct the mediation process in a certain way. There are several models, but it is typical for mediators to use a combination of them or utilize an informal approach to prevent escalations. This manual is mostly based on the facilitative mediation approach. Evaluative, transformational, transactional, and directive techniques are further paradigms (Podro & Suff, 2013). Facilitative mediation provides the most productive path forward due to the opportunity to meet both sides’ requests. Generally, the mediator actively directs the process. The mediator helps the parties find and assess possibilities for negotiation and settlement by using cooperative problem-solving techniques to elicit the parties’ interests and the core problems at stake (Podro & Suff, 2013). The mediator may float ideas, but they may not offer suggestions for solutions.
The Process of Mediation
The process requires certain steps to achieve the final goal of resolution. Usually, it consists of several stages: individual meetings, joint meetings, explorations of the topic, creation and documentation of agreement, and conclusion of mediation. The parties will be addressed in the first phase by examining the thoughts, feelings, and challenges shared by each member and mending connections via cooperative problem-solving (TS15: What forms of mediation and conciliation are available, 2015). Firstly, the mediator would meet with each party separately during the initial meetings. This initial meeting’s goal is to provide everyone participating with a chance to share their experiences and determine what they hope to gain from the procedure. At the joint meeting, the main goal is to hear the issues from the perspectives of both sides. Typically, the mediator will gather the parties and ask them to each tell their version of events over a quiet period of time. At this point, the mediator will start summarizing the key common points and disagreements and work with the parties to create a schedule for the remaining mediation sessions.
After determining the concerns to investigate, the mediation now focuses on fostering dialogue between the parties, developing empathy and understanding, and altering views. The purpose of this section of the session is to start looking for workable answers and to start moving the conversation away from the past. Creating and documenting an agreement – as the process progresses, the mediator will assist and encourage the parties’ cooperative problem-solving, ensuring that the solutions and arrangements are feasible and documenting any agreements achieved (Podro & Suff, 2013). After a deal is reached, the mediator will call it a wrap, give all parties involved copies of the agreement, and outline their roles in carrying it out.
Sometimes no agreement is achieved, and further methods of dispute resolution may be employed. Nothing that was mentioned during the mediation, however, may be utilized in court (Podro & Suff, 2013). If there seems to be a stalemate or the mediator thinks that one party is hesitant to provide the necessary information, it is essential to speak to each party alone. Sometimes it is required to utilize shuttle mediation, in which the mediator moves between the parties to hear each one’s perspective (Podro & Suff, 2013). Since the parties will not sit together in the same room or because doing so is sometimes more efficient and bringing them together is the goal.
Conclusion
When settling disagreements at work, mediation is frequently more effective than more formal procedures. It can assist in strengthening trust and team relationships to resolve issues quickly and when they emerge. It must be conducted confidently, and a manager or other team member that both parties can rely on to be neutral, unbiased, and non-judgmental must enable it. However, mediation is inappropriate when a more severe issue, like bullying or harassment, is at stake. Still, its role in fairness and equity in the judgment is crucial and provides an effective resolution of the conflict.
References
Bennett, A. (2017). Reflections on the role of a workplace mediator. Journal of Mediation and Applied Conflict Analysis, 4(1), 117-130.
Blyton, P., Heery, E., & Turnbull, P. (Eds.). (2010). Reassessing the employment relationship. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Discipline, grievance and mediation. (2009). IDS HR Studies.
Fisher, V., Kinsey, S., & Saundry, R. (2017). The myth of devolution? The role of HR practitioners in the management of workplace conflict. In CIPD Applied Research Conference 2017.
Podro, S., & Suff, R. (2013). Mediation: An approach to resolving workplace issues. London: ACAS (Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service). Schmuecker, K. (2014). Future of the UK labour market. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Saundry, R., McArdle, L., & Thomas, P. (2013). Reframing workplace relations? Conflict resolution and mediation in a primary care trust. Work, Employment and Society, 27(2), 213-231.
Saundry, R., & Wibberley, G. (2015). Workplace Mediation – Transforming the Culture of Conflict Management? CIPD Applied Research Conference.
Saundry, R., Fisher, V., & Kinsey, S. (2017). HR structures and the management of conflict: ghettoising employment relations? Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Saundry, R., Bennett, T., & Wibberley, G. (2018). Inside the mediation room-efficiency, voice and equity in workplace mediation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(6), 1157-1177. Web.
Saundry, R., & Kinsey, S. (2019). Managing workplace conflict. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Saundry, R., Bennet, T., & Fisher, V. (2020). Time to get serious about managing conflict. KoganPage.
TS15: What forms of mediation and conciliation are available to employers to help prevent employment tribunal proceedings? (March 15, 2015). CIPD.