Mediative Facilitation Improves One Public Org’s Procurement Processes
Kindness Isn’t Easy - But Kind & Empathetic Feedback Is Best
How a single conflict-focused facilitated session, inspired by a typical facilitative mediation process, got leaders to clear the air, increase empathy and understanding, and create more effective & efficient inter-team dynamics.
Earlier this year, I was called on by a public entity to rebuild broken trust between a purchasing officer and the internal department they serve. The highest-ranking career employee recognized the value of a mediator’s approach to a conflict, even though the conflict itself was hard to define. In some respects, the conflict had already been resolved - yet trust was still broken.
While many mediators would consider the issue closed because the procurement process had been resolved through its usual procedures, our approach to conflict in professional settings is different - we bring a mediative approach to enhancing team dynamics.
What is “mediative?” There are several kinds of mediation. In Virginia, court-certified mediators must use facilitative mediation. This means we serve as neutral facilitators of a specific four-step process designed to resolve even the toughest conflicts. When I bring that process and mediation skills like reflective listening to professional meetings, I call it a “mediative facilitation.”
In this case, the contract in question had been awarded. Theoretically, the conflict was resolved. Yet, two leaders in two important, public-facing roles just did not trust each other anymore. And, they would have to continue working together on future procurements. Some consultants or facilitators would create team-building retreats in this situation. At CM&F, our mediation focus means we bring a mediation framework to other settings. This provides the professionals experiencing broken trust an opportunity to talk about precisely what it was that led to the break.
The Mediation Framework
First, talk about what happened, in the past.
Yes, you also include feelings here - not just the facts. Some folks tell me this is why it feels like therapy to them. However, mediators are not therapists! We never diagnose.
Next, talk about how working together feels, now.
What’s hard?
Next, discuss how you’d like to be working together in the future.
This is the imaginative part - in most cases, I’m inviting people to brainstorm. This is the section where confidentiality is important, not in a legal sense, but in the sense of having the freedom to think aloud, talk about ideas, consider how something might work - before deciding whether to commit to any changes.
Finally, find agreements.
This is the commitment section. Out of everything the group has discussed, what - if anything - do people really want to commit to?
In this recent case, when they were given the safety and space to talk it out, each leader shared the various pressures they were under during the big project. They spoke in a more personal way, while also talking about process and facts. Saying out loud what they each had assumed about the other, and what was actually true for themselves, helped them air out issues that had been festering for years.
Understanding led to empathy which led to connection. Feeling a positive connection - and being aligned to providing the best service to the community they serve - led to each leader committing to certain changes in how they work together. Creating space for them to talk it out helped them to commit to being kinder to each other - and also to adding a new step to an existing process that would help the entire process flow more smoothly and efficiently. Importantly, each leader stated that they felt they could trust the other at the end of a single, half-day meeting.
These are often difficult conversations that no one looks forward to. The role we play in designing and facilitating these sessions is to provide a specific structure and guidelines that offer participants the safety to be honest. While participants make their own individual choices about how to speak and whether to do so respectfully, we work hard to create space for being kinder.
Kind is different than nice. Nice is polite, nice doesn’t make waves, nice has few opinions. Nice doesn’t speak up when they get frustrated or worried. Kind helps you grow, kind knows when to speak up, kind tells it like it is - with the intention of helping someone grow and better understand themselves, not to insult. Kim Scott’s Radical Candor approach is very similar to this framework.
But being kind in this manner often requires a level of safety and confidence that may be lacking in settings like the typical organizational hierarchy that government agencies and many nonprofits have. It can also be difficult to provide candid feedback if trust has been broken - there winds up being a belief that one’s feedback will not be received well, or, there may be a belief that one is unable to offer the candid feedback in a respectful way. While emotional regulation tools are helpful in cases like this, creating the time and space for an external facilitator or mediator to intentionally ask people to share candid feedback will provide a higher level of discussion and more robust outcomes.
If you’re part of a team that’s having trouble connecting due to a past incident, contact us - we can help.