<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Blog Feed</title>
	<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog</link>
	<atom:link href="https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description></description>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>


<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-results-are-in-2019-2023-117s30</link>
<title><![CDATA[The results are in 2019-2023]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The results of our most recent surveys highlight the transformative potential of restorative mediation.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Restorative mediation has emerged as a powerful conflict resolution approach that prioritises dialogue, empathy, and healing. 

Recently, we collated the answers from our comprehensive survey among restorative mediation participants to gain valuable insights into their experiences. These survey results uncover the impact of restorative mediation on individuals and communities.

The Power of Restorative Mediation

Restorative mediation is a process that brings together individuals involved in a conflict, allowing them to discuss their grievances, share their perspectives, and work together towards a resolution that focuses on repairing harm and fostering understanding. This approach has gained recognition for its potential to transform conflicts into opportunities for growth and reconciliation.

The results of our survey highlight the transformative potential of restorative mediation. Not only does it provide a platform for resolving conflicts, but it also fosters healing, empathy, and empowerment among participants. 
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-results-are-in-2019-2023-117s30</guid>
<pubDate>23 Jan 2024 02:03:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/30/med-blog-post-survey-results-are-in-2023.jpg' length='67360' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-field-of-grace-in-restorative-mediations-117s31</link>
<title><![CDATA[The Field of Grace in Restorative Mediations]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[How to get to this field when the parties in a mediation are embedded to their stories and to being right?
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[How to get to this field when the parties in a mediation are embedded to their stories and to being right?

Through restorative mediations, we explore:


	the wrongdoing - no-blame/all-accountable &ndash; everyone had a role to play in the escalated conflict (no matter how small they may perceive this role to be)
	the right-doing - re-connecting to each other&rsquo;s value and a willingness to see the larger inter-subjective context.


The process is emotional and requires great courage. But out of this emerges palpable relief and compassion - the field of grace.
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-field-of-grace-in-restorative-mediations-117s31</guid>
<pubDate>16 Oct 2019 03:14:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/31/med-blog-beyondideas.jpg' length='60493' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-survey-results-are-in-the-impact-of-restorative-mediations-117s39</link>
<title><![CDATA[The Survey Results are in!  The Impact of Restorative Mediations]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[As a result of attending and presenting at recent conferences, I have been encouraged to quantify the impact of my Restorative Mediations. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[As a result of attending and presenting at recent conferences, I have been encouraged to quantify the impact of my Restorative Mediations. 

Uncut and anonymous feedback is so incredibly valuable.  The data has provided me invaluable quantitative and qualitative feedback necessary to finetune and develop my restorative mediation model further to ensure I meet and exceed client and participant expectations in resolving workplace conflict. 

Thank you to all clients and participants who completed the survey and continue to support my work!
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-survey-results-are-in-the-impact-of-restorative-mediations-117s39</guid>
<pubDate>13 May 2019 03:54:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/39/med-Blog-Post-Survey-1.jpg' length='152089' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-art-of-possibility-in-restorative-mediations-117s40</link>
<title><![CDATA[The Art of Possibility in Restorative Mediations]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[I&#39;m often asked to conduct a restorative mediation after a formal complaint has been lodged and the organisation elects to mediate, rather than investigate.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[The Art of Possibility

&ldquo;Time and time again, conflicts are resolved through shifts that are unimaginable at the start&rdquo;.  Nelson Mandela

The Nature of the Shift

To transition people who are steeped in the need to blame or who have a need for vindication, a shift is required. This is a shift which:


	is not shallow &ndash; it needs to go to the root cause of the conflict;
	is radical &ndash; it requires an &lsquo;inside-out&rsquo; transformation;
	involves an acknowledgement of past and present behaviour in order to build a new foundation of trust;
	is only possible between equals, irrespective of reporting lines; and
	is transitional &ndash; it lays a realistic foundation for human behaviour to gradually change over time.


Barriers to the Shift

People feel resistant to the shift due to:


	feeling unsafe to speak up or preferring to maintain (and endure) the status quo;
	fearing the consequences or repercussions of speaking up;
	being too attached to their versions and perspectives;  and/or
	being too attached to being right or a need for vindication.


What is needed to overcome the Resistance to the Shift?

To overcome resistance to the shift, people need to:


	feel safe to speak up;
	feel heard and supported in their emotionality;
	be willing to explore the subjectivity of their assumptions and perspectives;
	be willing to reflect on their contribution to the escalation of the co-created conflict; and
	trust the boundaries prescribed for the &lsquo;no fault/no blame&rsquo; combined process &ndash; to know that they will not feel attacked or blamed during the process, and nor can they attack or blame the other.


The Art of Possibility in Restorative Mediations

The restorative mediation process involves a shift from an instinctual need to blame to self-reflection, empathy and compassion.

The process asks people to:


	let go of the need to shun, ignore or shame the other and to let go of the need for revenge or retribution;
	recognise or remember the positive attributes and value of the other person;
	accept that there is no need to hide their weaknesses or mistakes;
	realise that there is no need to put on airs or pretend to be someone they&rsquo;re not;
	know that it&rsquo;s safe to abandon pride and ego in the interests of moving forward; and
	realise that they are being provided a remarkable opportunity to self-correct, without any repercussions.


As a mediator, the individual sessions of a restorative mediation are by far the most challenging part of the process for me.  Because of the radical shift I am asking people to make, each individual session can take up to 3 hours.  I also only put people together in the combined process the following day as the opportunity to reflect overnight is crucial.

This shift is obtained through a therapeutic approach which, at its core, involves the Art of Possibility.  The underlying questions which enable this are:


	will the outcome of an investigation really bring them long-term relief? (Irrespective of whether the allegations are substantiated or not)
	what is getting in the way of their ability to move forward?
	do they really want the mediation to succeed?
	are they able to &lsquo;bracket&rsquo;/suspend their cynicism/scepticism to give the mediation process a fair go?


Often I am met with resistance by participants to this approach, and on occasion I have needed to suggest to a participant that they are most welcome to tell me at the end of the process that it was an absolute waste of their time.  Until then, I ask them to engage completely with the process and be willing to be surprised!

Almost always the combined process results in feelings of softness and compassion towards the other.  There are often tears and hugs during the process and tremendous feelings of relief once behaviour is acknowledged and gratitude expressed.  For me, I am mostly left feeling in awe of our seemingly unlimited capacity and courage to be vulnerable and forgive.

https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/workplace-mediations
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-art-of-possibility-in-restorative-mediations-117s40</guid>
<pubDate>07 Mar 2019 03:56:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/40/med-What-if.jpg' length='74099' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/is-conflict-enjoyable-117s45</link>
<title><![CDATA[Is Conflict Enjoyable?]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[Recently I came across an advertisement for conflict management and mediation training which described the training as entertaining and funny and the trainer described conflict as &ldquo;enjoyable&rdquo;.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[Recently I came across an advertisement for conflict management and mediation training which described the training as entertaining and funny and the trainer described conflict as &ldquo;enjoyable&rdquo;.

My experience when mediating to resolve a conflict is that most participants who are steeped in conflict are not having fun! More likely they feel traumatised by overwhelming feelings of anxiety, hurt, anger and grief.

Such was the case in the restorative mediation I conducted this week between 2 medical clinicians. This mediation was one of the longest one&rsquo;s I&rsquo;ve done so far, with the individual sessions on Day 1 taking 7 hours (4 + 3 hours) and the combined process on Day 2 taking 4 hours.

The conflict was due to a protracted inter-personal conflict. The participants had been through a previous unsuccessful mediation by a different mediator and as a result, one of the participants was highly anxious and emotional and terrified to be in the same room with the other participant. The process was not superficial or formulaic. It involved traversing a complex and winding road using intuition and therapeutic skill by:

&bull; being comfortable in myself for the participants to express a range of heightened emotions &ndash; through waves of trauma, anger, hurt, confusion, grief and pain;

&bull; being intently present and closely tracking every detail of their different stories &ndash; every turn, nuance, incident, assumption and interpretation;

&bull; slowly earning their trust and respect (and tacit permission) to work more interactively with them by compassionately inquiring into their perspectives and assumptions and what&rsquo;s getting in the way of their re-connection to the other person; and

&bull; gaining their trust that they would both feel 100% safe throughout the combined process, or I will stop the process.

During restorative mediations, the combined session on Day 2 often results in feelings of relief, lightness and even laughter. But this can only happen after a shift through painful disconnection.

Although humour and fun makes training sessions more enjoyable, when training on conflict management and mediation it is also important to convey:

&bull; that trauma ought not to be trivialised as conflict is not necessarily fun or enjoyable for those stuck in it;

&bull; the importance of the mediator&rsquo;s ability to be grounded amidst strong emotions. As Michelle Phaneuf so aptly put it in her article &lsquo;Learning from Conflict&rsquo; &ndash; to be able to &lsquo;stay in the messy&rsquo;; and

&bull; that effectively resolving conflict requires an ability to work fluidly and intuitively with people. A formulaic approach is simplistic as every conflict is different, as are the different personalities and levels of emotionality of participants.

https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/workplace-mediation
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/is-conflict-enjoyable-117s45</guid>
<pubDate>30 Dec 2018 04:04:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/45/med-Enjoyable.jpg' length='104269' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/a-context-for-providing-feedback-117s44</link>
<title><![CDATA[A Context for Providing Feedback]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[This week I conducted a restorative mediation involving a staff member who has worked in the same profession (albeit in different organisations) for nearly 50 years.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[This week I conducted a restorative mediation involving a staff member who has worked in the same profession (albeit in different organisations) for nearly 50 years. He was provided feedback by a relatively new manager in their current organisation. Perhaps the staff member had received similar feedback over the course of his career and this was the first time he had really &lsquo;heard&rsquo; it; or perhaps the feedback had never been given to him before. Either way, he was devastated and bewildered by the feedback. He told me he felt &ldquo;broken&rdquo; and &ldquo;kicked in the guts&rdquo;.

This article is not about how to have difficult conversations (language, tone, etc). Rather these are five suggestions to support difficult discussions:

1. Have regular ongoing dialogues with staff: If feedback is given as a once-off isolated event, it is unlikely to be well received. Weekly &lsquo;check-ins&rsquo; with staff (particularly with staff you get on with the least) starts to build resilience in working relationships. I appreciate most managers may already feel overwhelmed by the number of meetings they have each week, but I&rsquo;m talking about a ten minute &lsquo;check-in&rsquo; each week &ndash; &ldquo;Are you okay?&rdquo; &ldquo;How are things going?&rdquo;

 I often refer to the concept of an &lsquo;emotional bank account&rsquo; in relationships. When the emotional bank account is high, a difficult conversation may result in a tiny withdrawal which doesn&rsquo;t necessarily dent the overall relationship balance and may even improve it. When the emotional bank account is low, a difficult conversation (even about a relatively insignificant issue) can feel like a major withdrawal, causing the relationship to go into overdraft and lead to fragmentation and conflict. 

2. Raise issues within 24 hours of the issue arising (or as soon as possible): This is a common inclusion in almost all of my mediation agreements. To avoid carrying grudges and making incorrect assumptions, discuss an incident as soon as possible after it occurs. There are often many sides to a story and the longer it takes to discuss an incident, the more likely the story will become inflamed and distorted.

3. Don&rsquo;t assume people in meetings actually &lsquo;hear&rsquo; the feedback: My experience as an HR Manager is that most people are in shock when they are given negative feedback or when performance or conduct issues are raised for the first time, no matter how well it is done. Our natural instinct is to shut down and become defensive and very little is actually heard during these types of discussions. When the person receives written confirmation of the discussion (via letter, email, file notes, etc) &lsquo;the penny finally drops&rsquo;, enabling them to properly comprehend and process the information. This also starts an important paper trail in the event that the behaviour continues.

4. Provide written confirmation of the issues on the same or next day: I often suggest to clients and HR Managers to prepare the draft confirmation of the issues prior to the meeting. This helps the managers to clarify their thoughts and approaches for the meeting. Obviously the draft needs to be amended depending on what is actually discussed at the meeting before being provided to the person, but the person needs to receive the written confirmation as soon as possible after the meeting. 

I recall as an HR Manager during a performance management process that the written confirmation was only finalised by the line managers a week later. As it happened, the staff member denied that certain things in the written document were stated at the meeting. We needed to immediately call a further meeting to repeat exactly what was said at the former meeting.

5. Feedback is more likely to be heard if a person feels intrinsically valued: Building value is not about simply stating (or clicking the reply button on an email saying) &ldquo;thanks, you&rsquo;ve done a great job.&rdquo; 

We all know how important it is to show gratitude and provide positive feedback to people, yet how many of us actually take the time to do this properly and at length? What I&rsquo;m proposing is spending 5 minutes or longer describing in detail to the person what you value about them. The humanistic psychologist Carl Rogers described the concept as &lsquo;Unconditional Positive Regard&rdquo; which creates the best possible conditions for personal growth.

Another agreement I include in most restorative mediations is the following agenda item to commence each weekly &lsquo;check-in&rsquo;: &ldquo;Acknowledge appreciation of each other for something you may have heard or observed about the other during the past week.&rdquo; This enables people to shift their focus to start gradually noticing and observing positive things about the other during the week. In Gestalt theory this is called shifting our attention from our Field (Periphery) into our Focus.

https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/workplace-mediations
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/a-context-for-providing-feedback-117s44</guid>
<pubDate>30 Dec 2018 04:02:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/44/med-Feedback.jpg' length='81541' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/how-do-you-know-if-you-might-offend-someone-117s43</link>
<title><![CDATA[How do you know if you might offend someone?]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[To make sense of our experience, it is human nature to think in polarities &ndash; right/wrong, good/bad, yes/no, night/day, sharp/blunt, close/far, scarcity/abundance, and so on. However this penchant to polarised thinking also limits our perceptions.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[To make sense of our experience, it is human nature to think in polarities &ndash; right/wrong, good/bad, yes/no, night/day, sharp/blunt, close/far, scarcity/abundance, and so on. However this penchant to polarised thinking also limits our perceptions.

Unless something directly and personally impacts people, it is often harder for them to empathise with other people&rsquo;s experiences.

25 years&rsquo; ago I started providing workplace training on the topic: Preventing and Responding to Discrimination, Harassment and Bullying. My first audience in those days was a large group of white male professionals between the ages of 50 &ndash; 65 in a male-dominated industry. In those days, I was even asked the question, &ldquo;Why do we need this training?&rdquo; Another comment was, &ldquo;You&rsquo;re just ruining our fun at work.&rdquo;

In response to this, I designed the photo of this article as a slide in my training material and ask &ldquo;Who is the elephant?&rdquo; Of course, I get a number of responses such as, &ldquo;my boss&rdquo;, &ldquo;the bully&rdquo; and sometimes someone jokes and says &ldquo;my wife&rdquo;.

To help people understand the importance of empathising with others, even if not directly impacted by something, I provide a number of scenarios relating to age, sexuality, race, disability, etc. and ask the audience if the comments offend them? And of course, even in a homogenous group, there are always people who are personally impacted by the enormous challenges of supporting a partner of a different race, a child with a disability, a transgender friend &hellip;

Another scenario is asking whether it&rsquo;s okay to ask a work colleague out on a date? Most people&rsquo;s immediate reaction to this is that it&rsquo;s okay, provided the person doesn&rsquo;t keep asking you out once you&rsquo;ve said &ldquo;no&rdquo;. However, when the scenario is changed &ndash; &ldquo;your daughter is 18 years old, has just started her first job and is 6 weeks into her probationary period. She comes home in tears because her boss has just asked her out on a date.&rdquo; Suddenly the perspective changes. The boss is abusing his position of power over a person in a vulnerable position and asking your daughter out, even once, is unacceptable.

When behaviour is not blatantly discriminatory, harassing or bullying, people may struggle to understand &lsquo;where the line is&rsquo; regarding whether they may or may not be offending another. The answer is &ndash; we don&rsquo;t always know.

The point of the powerpoint slide is that in every scenario, the person who is the elephant and the person who is the mouse keeps changing. If people can appreciate that even though they might not be offended by something, someone else could be, the seeds of empathy are planted.

If someone is gutsy enough to speak up and tell you that they are offended by your jokes or behaviour, instead of reacting defensively and responding &ldquo;you&rsquo;re being too sensitive&rdquo;, a far better response is &ldquo;I&rsquo;m sorry, I didn&rsquo;t realise&rdquo; and to then respect their feelings on an ongoing basis
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/how-do-you-know-if-you-might-offend-someone-117s43</guid>
<pubDate>30 Dec 2018 04:01:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/43/med-Elephant-and-Mouse.jpg' length='124844' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/taking-sides-or-not-117s42</link>
<title><![CDATA[Taking Sides (or Not)]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The same experience was the high and low point of my legal career
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[People often remark to me that conducting workplace restorative mediations must be really stressful work. My response is that compared to defending criminal matters as a barrister, mediations are a joy!

I was a litigation lawyer for just short of 10 years throughout my 20s in South Africa, initially as a solicitor and then as a barrister. I don&rsquo;t believe I was ever innately suited to being a litigator. I struggled with having to represent only one party and their version. It felt for me that litigation was about winning at all costs (or shrewdly negotiating the best settlement for my client if I had an &lsquo;unwinnable&rsquo; case). I recall a saying at the Johannesburg Bar: &ldquo;a good settlement is when both parties are unhappy&rdquo;. (Another saying was that &ldquo;On the 8th day, God created Postponements&rdquo;, but let&rsquo;s not go down that rabbit hole!)

As a young and fairly inexperienced barrister, I took on a handful of pro bono criminal defence cases for the State representing black clients who were accused of major crimes (including murder and robbery) and could not afford legal representation. Due to the high crime rate in South Africa, junior counsel could be appointed to take on these types of cases. In those days during apartheid, the death penalty was still being imposed, although thankfully there was a moratorium on its implementation.

The day I knew I had to leave the law and change careers was due to one case which, ironically, was both the high and low point of my legal career:

My client was a 19 year old man who was the second accused in a murder and robbery case. During the consultation with him and his mother prior to the trial, I noticed that he was shy and reluctant to speak to me in front of his mother, or at all. I took his mum aside and implored her to speak to her son overnight to encourage him to tell me what had happened in order to be able to defend him properly. I also expressed to her that I was concerned that he may be reluctant to admit to anything due to feelings of fear or shame. The next day he admitted to me that he had been involved in the robbery, but did not know the first accused had a gun or would use it.

I went to the State Prosecutor and offered her a plea of guilty to robbery on behalf of my client. The first accused had disappeared and was never caught, so the State&rsquo;s case was singularly against my client. The State Prosecutor rejected my client&rsquo;s plea offer and the trial went ahead on both the murder and robbery charges.

By the close of the State&rsquo;s case, I realised that they had probably not established proof beyond reasonable doubt. Although I had spent considerable time (through a Zulu/English interpreter) preparing my client to give evidence in court in his defence, I now needed to explain to him that I did not want him to give any evidence at all. After much deliberation and consultation with senior mentors at the Bar and a shockingly sleepless night, I opened and immediately closed my case without leading any evidence. My client was acquitted of both charges.

I will never forget that day. I walked down the stairs outside the court building and felt the sunshine on my face. I felt absolutely no remorse that a young offender was free. I had won! I felt exhilarated. But I also realised that this exhilaration came from beating the system, and that to have a successful career as a litigation barrister I would need to get more comfortable with taking sides in order to win! 

On arrival in Australia, I requalified as a lawyer to be admitted to practise here (so that the 10 years counted for something). However I knew I was never going to practise law again. So I elected to not maintain a practising certificate and often need to tell clients that I am unable to give them legal advice for this reason. 

Our Human Inclination to Take Sides

As human beings our penchant to favouritism and to take sides is fairly natural &ndash; we resonate more with some people than with others, and our loved ones, friends and close colleagues expect us to side with them as a demonstration of support.

I acknowledge that I sometimes annoy friends, family and clients because I naturally see situations from a multitude of perspectives and can&rsquo;t simply agree with them out of blind loyalty or because it&rsquo;s what they want to hear.

I also often acknowledge to clients and restorative mediation participants that it is easier to have perspective when it comes to other people&rsquo;s lives but much harder to do in our own lives. This is the value of honest and kind feedback. 

Impartiality in Restorative Mediations

Ten years ago I started a consultancy practice and designed a Restorative Mediation model which gets astonishing results. When I follow up after a restorative mediation, clients are often amused when I tell them that even I am astonished by its results! I have now conducted over 290 restorative workplace mediations.

Being impartial as a workplace mediator is crucial. Clients often offer to brief me on the conflict beforehand. Depending on the circumstances this is sometimes necessary. Mostly I prefer to start a restorative mediation without a briefing to be able to inform both participants that I&rsquo;ve had no briefing so I am not influenced by the organisation&rsquo;s perspectives.

During mediations I can feel that participants want me to take their side. However they gradually come to realise during the process that I won&rsquo;t and can&rsquo;t do this. My compassion for their respective stories or feelings does not mean I&rsquo;ve taken sides as I believe that &lsquo;the truth&rsquo; in most workplace conflicts lies somewhere in the middle of two inter-subjective versions.

I am mostly met with much scepticism at the start of a restorative mediation process, particularly when a participant has been through a previous and unsuccessful different type of mediation. On occasion I have even needed to challenge a participant by inviting them to tell me at the end of a process (or in 6 months&rsquo; time) that it was an absolute waste of time! I will gladly hear this feedback if it&rsquo;s their truth. Until then, I ask them to:

 &middot;       engage with the process 100% as they have everything to gain and nothing to lose

&middot;        suspend their cynicism for the duration of the process; and

&middot;        be willing to be surprised!

The Restorative Mediation Approach Embodies Impartiality

Unlike an adversarial litigious approach, a restorative mediation embodies impartiality because:

1.    It&rsquo;s based on the premise that conflict is co-created: Irrespective of either party believing at the start of the process that the other person is completely to blame, both people participate in the conflict to some degree, even if it&rsquo;s to &lsquo;shut down&rsquo; or withdraw from the other person and completely ignore them.

2.    It&rsquo;s not about being right or wrong: As humans we recall facts and incidents through our subjective filters and our assumptions can often be wrong. To organise our experience we &lsquo;build cases in our heads&rsquo; about others. Metaphorically, we have filing cabinets in our minds with folders about others. When others say or do something/anything in a certain way, this becomes additional evidence of our existing believe system about them. I appreciate that the participants&rsquo; respective subjective versions are real for each of them, however letting go of needing to be right is an important component of the process.

3.    Its focus is not on the facts: Although I hear the participants&rsquo; respective stories and versions at great length during the individual sessions on Day 1, the combined session on Day 2 does not require an arduous unpacking and examination of the facts to determine &lsquo;the truth&rsquo; as it is not an investigation. Instead I commence the combined session by carefully and neutrally briefly summarising (in front of them both) what they shared with me on Day 1 - their respective stories, versions, experiences and feelings. 

4.    It&rsquo;s relational in nature: Essentially the process involves a lateral healing of inter-personal working relationships, irrespective of reporting lines. It is less effective if the cause of the conflict is under-performance by one of the participants and the organisation is unwilling to address this. Further, if a participant is not directly impacted by the other&rsquo;s behaviour but has taken on the matter as an advocate for other staff, their motivation to genuinely resolve relational issues directly between them might feel like a betrayal of the other staff.

5.    It&rsquo;s a &#39;no blame&#39; process: The combined session is framed around a &ldquo;no-blame&rdquo; safety rule so it is not an opportunity to blame the other as I believe that real resolution comes from looking at our own behavior, rather than persistently blaming another. 

6.    It&rsquo;s restorative in nature: It requires self-reflection, accountability and acknowledgement of the value for the other and how both participants may have let the other down. When we have been in protracted conflict with another, hearing how they value you and how they might have let you down creates a space for softening and compassion towards the other. This is the most dignified and graceful way to resolve conflict.

Not a day goes past when I regret my decision to change careers. I am so grateful for the work that I do and I am deeply committed to it. As a participant in one of my restorative mediations recently described it: &ldquo;healing the world, one conflict at a time&rdquo;.

Workplace Mediations
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/taking-sides-or-not-117s42</guid>
<pubDate>30 Dec 2018 03:59:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/42/med-Version.jpg' length='94383' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/authenticity-at-work-our-humanness-in-the-workplace-117s41</link>
<title><![CDATA[Authenticity at work - Our humanness in the workplace]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[In a restorative mediation process, people will often describe some of the challenges they have recently faced in their personal lives. They then might explain to me that they don&rsquo;t let who they are at home affect who they are at work.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[In a restorative mediation process, people will often describe some of the challenges they have recently faced in their personal lives. They then might explain to me that they don&rsquo;t let who they are at home affect who they are at work.

The notion of being two different people; one person at work and another at home, is outdated as organisations increasingly embrace the view that it is our very humanness and authenticity that really counts in the workforce.

There remains a line between behaving professionally at work and not letting our personal problems impact our work environment too much, and conversely not offloading our frustrations from work too much onto our loved ones at home. However, this is a soft line. It does not mean being two different people. The person we are at home is the same person we are at work.

Our humanness in the workplace gives others permission to embrace and display human qualities such as compassion, empathy, fallibility and an acknowledgement that we need support.

I often say in restorative mediations that &ldquo;trust and respect is not an &lsquo;on-off switch&rsquo;&rdquo; - it has to gradually be re-earned by continually demonstrating to each other our willingness and ability to care and support each another.

In the context of resolving conflict, Michael Leunig, an Australian cartoonist, poet and cultural commentator poignantly describes this as the &ldquo;fragile ecology of the heart and mind&quot; in the following poem&hellip;.

&quot;We pray for the fragile ecology of the heart and mind. The sense of meaning. So finely assembled and balanced and so easily overturned. The careful, ongoing construction of love. As painful and exhausting as the struggle for truth and as easily abandoned. 

Hard fought and won are the shifting sands of this sacred ground, this ecology. Easy to desecrate and difficult to defend, this vulnerable joy, this exposed faith, this precious order. This sanity.

We shall be careful. With others and with ourselves.&rdquo; Michael Leunig

Workplace mediations
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/authenticity-at-work-our-humanness-in-the-workplace-117s41</guid>
<pubDate>30 Dec 2018 03:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/41/med-Authenticity.jpg' length='66410' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/such-is-the-nature-of-restorative-mediations-117s46</link>
<title><![CDATA[Such is the nature of Restorative Mediations]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/such-is-the-nature-of-restorative-mediations-117s46</guid>
<pubDate>18 Dec 2018 04:05:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/46/med-Unimaginable.jpg' length='129771' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-risks-of-speaking-up-117s65</link>
<title><![CDATA[The Risks of Speaking Up]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[The phrase &lsquo;Disrupt HR&rsquo; (or being employed as a &lsquo;Disruptor&rsquo;) is becoming increasingly trendy these days. But what does this mean for you?
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[The phrase &lsquo;Disrupt HR&rsquo; (or being employed as a &lsquo;Disruptor&rsquo;) is becoming increasingly trendy these days. But what does this mean for you?

Human Resources titles are gradually changing to &lsquo;People and Culture&rsquo;, placing enormous responsibility on the HR function to take ownership of the cultural climate within organisations. However, changing an organisation&rsquo;s culture is ultimately everyone&rsquo;s responsibility and is easier said than done. 

If an organisation does not have inspiring and emotionally intelligent leadership, HR may struggle to even have a voice to influence change. In toxic workplace cultures, where CEOs are part of the problem, and HR is either not heard or unwilling to recognise the magnitude of the issues (or their responsibility in dealing with these), the result is often a ground-swell of disengaged staff who regard HR as ultimately ineffectual and part of the problem. 

Staff who survive in these kinds of workplace cultures prefer to &ldquo;keep their heads down&rdquo; and succumb to being &ldquo;non-disruptive&rdquo; in order to endure.

Here are a few subtle ways in which HR and Managers are discouraged from speaking up, although there are many more:

Gradual marginalisation

After speaking up, slowly being isolated and excluded from important meetings and events or being overlooked for career development/progression opportunities. This is called &lsquo;white-anting&rsquo; in Australia. From an HR point of view, this would involve not being provided relevant information or being excluded from key meetings which have workplace relations implications. 

Encouraging submissiveness

Gender issues: If a workplace culture is blokey with a &ldquo;boy&rsquo;s club&rdquo; mentality, it is very challenging for female managers to speak up. In these environments, women can quickly get labelled as &ldquo;opinionated.&rdquo; Have you ever heard of a man with opinions being described as opinionated? Is the adjective &ldquo;opinionated&rdquo; even ascribed to men?

Cultural issues: There may also be a cultural heritage element to encouraging submissiveness as well:

When I first arrived in Australia, I was given feedback by a manager that I was &ldquo;too direct&rdquo;. As a South African, I&rsquo;d never heard this before. In my experience in South Africa, there was no such thing as being &ldquo;too direct&rdquo;. Generally speaking, South Africans are direct.

In order to understand what being &ldquo;too direct&rdquo; means, I tried to understand what being &rdquo;indirect&rdquo; means. I spoke to a few South Africans to check whether I was missing something.  

What I gathered was that being indirect involves gently &ldquo;tiptoeing&rdquo; around issues and using cautious language. So, for example, instead of saying &ldquo;this is what I believe needs to be done&rdquo;, it was preferable to say, &rdquo;I&rsquo;m wondering if, perhaps, we could consider looking at things, I guess, from a different view&hellip;&rdquo;

As one of my influencers, Brene Brown states:

&ldquo;Clear is Kind. Unclear is Unkind.&rdquo; 

From my cultural heritage perspective: 

&ldquo;Direct is clear. Indirect is Unclear&rdquo;. 

Rewarding workplace politics

In a different workplace, a CEO told me that I was not &ldquo;political&rdquo; enough. By this I assumed he meant that I was not manoeuvring and manipulating the power brokers in the organisation to get them on side. I took this feedback as a compliment. 

Being in HR is demanding enough without needing to play the politics. The best workplace cultures have the least politics, encourage input and feedback and transparent and collaborative decision-making. 

Naming &lsquo;the Elephant in the Room&rsquo;

There is one &lsquo;disruptor&rsquo; that HR and all managers/leaders are responsible for at the very least &ndash; to name the &lsquo;elephant in the room&rsquo;. Without doing so, how can anything change? 

During restorative mediations, group mediations, coaching, training or facilitation, I often find myself as the consultant needing to &lsquo;name the elephant in the room&rdquo;. I appreciate that sometimes feedback is more likely to be heard if it is delivered by an external person, rather than internally.

A few examples of reoccurring &lsquo;elephants in the room&rsquo; I have encountered are:


	Not modelling the values of an organisation. These are written on posters placed around the workplace premises which staff either ignore, pay lip-service to or use to simply satisfy accreditation requirements.
	 
	Not encouraging critical thinking or valuing diversity of opinions, preferring to project (and reward) a false sense of optimism or cheerfulness.
	 
	Engendering a lack of safety by not encouraging safe, kind and courageous direct conversations and feedback between people. This results in fragmented workplace cultures with factions and polarised staff whose only outlet is covert gossip and collusion.
	 
	Overlooking inappropriate or unlawful behaviour, such as discrimination, harassment or bullying.
	 
	Promoting workplace politics. This is usually under-pinned by intrinsically insecure managers who promote staff not suitably skilled or qualified for a role in order to surround themselves with &ldquo;yes men&rdquo; who simply make them look good.


How to Name &ldquo;the Elephant in the Room&rdquo;

It goes without saying that speaking up about &lsquo;the elephant in the room&rsquo; is more likely to be heard if:


	feedback is provided in a respectful and diplomatic (but clear and direct) way, using a solution-oriented approach.
	 
	we adjust our communication style depending on who we are talking to - some people hear stats and data better than emotions, for example.
	 
	feedback is corroborated by other credible sources, such as staff surveys, turnover data and the number of complaints and workers compensations claims.
	 
	feedback is corroborated by other managers who are willing to speak up.


If the feedback &ldquo;falls on deaf ears&rdquo;, I recommend the issues are escalated up the line-management chain, including to the Board of Directors if the CEO is part of the problem. If nothing changes, start looking for another job!

I appreciate that it may be risky for HR to speak up, particularly if this puts their jobs at risk. But if HR can&rsquo;t speak up, who can? If HR is not encouraged and empowered to courageously speak up, then expecting them to genuinely be responsible for &lsquo;People and Culture&rsquo; is merely a fancy title. 

I&rsquo;m wondering if, perhaps, this blog post is too direct.

https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/workplace-mediations
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-risks-of-speaking-up-117s65</guid>
<pubDate>01 Nov 2018 06:08:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/65/med-risks-of-speaking-up.jpg' length='98040' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-ultimate-outcome-is-for-inappropriate-behaviour-to-stop-117s66</link>
<title><![CDATA[The ultimate outcome is for inappropriate behaviour to stop]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[I am often approached by HR Managers when a conflict has arisen between staff and the complainant initially indicated that he/she did not want to do anything about it. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[I am often approached by HR Managers when a conflict has arisen between staff and the complainant initially indicated that he/she did not want to do anything about it. 

Often organisations have inflexible Complaints Management Policies which obliges them to quickly escalate the complaint into a formal investigation. The effect of this is that staff may feel reluctant to make a complaint in the first instance. They may feel concern that the Complaints Framework will not provide them with adequate support or they may just not trust the overall process.

I once conducted a mediation between a complainant who had been told by HR that she had to make a formal complaint. She was reluctant to do this. During the mediation, the complainant told the respondent that she had not wanted to make a formal complaint but had been told that she had to. As a result of the mediation, both parties were very relieved and the complainant indicated to me that she wished to withdraw her complaint. I advised the HR Manager of this who responded that the complaint couldn&rsquo;t be withdrawn as the organisation had a legal obligation to investigate it. My response was that an investigation was now unnecessary as the matter had been resolved and a subsequent investigation would re-traumatise both staff.

Having trained as a Contact Officer at the Victorian Equal Opportunity Commission and having worked as an HR Manager for 20 years, there are many ways to respond to a staff member&rsquo;s reluctance to raise issues directly with the other person, or at all. 

The Commission&rsquo;s view was that an effective Complaints Framework should ideally result in approximately 98% of complaints being effectively resolved through informal complaints handling processes which provides an organisation a smorgasbord of options to resolve conflict because the ultimate outcome is for inappropriate behaviour to stop. Ideally, only 2% of complaints ought to be escalated into formal complaints.

Here are some informal complaints handling options:


	Self-management: Encouraging a person to raise their concerns directly with the other person. Sometimes a person may feel that the other person may respect them more if this occurs, particularly if the other person is their Line Manager. As an HR Manager, I would offer to role-play the soon-to-be-had discussion to help the person find the language and confidence for this discussion. If this happens, I would follow-up with the person to see how the discussion went and, if it went well, I would check-in with them from time to time.
	 
	HR Managers/Contact Officers authorised by the person to resolve the matter: This involves speaking to the perpetrator on behalf of the staff member and reiterating that there must be no subsequent negative repercussions towards the complainant as this is &lsquo;victimisation&rsquo; &ndash; treating someone worse for having made a complaint. Victimisation attracts a fine to an organisation in its own right, irrespective of whether allegations might be subsequently upheld or not.
	 
	Anonymous Intervention: As an HR Manager, it is often a highly effective strategy to approach the perpetrator with anonymous feedback, such as: &ldquo;a number of staff are feeling uncomfortable...&rdquo; Usually the perpetrator&rsquo;s immediate response is: &ldquo;Who said that?&rdquo; My response to this is that the feedback is more important than the source.
	 
	Independent Action: As an HR Manager, there may be circumstances when it is necessary to approach a person directly because I have become aware of inappropriate behaviour, irrespective of whether a complaint has been made or not.
	 
	Group Training: I am often asked to provide a training session on Bullying to a large group of staff in response to inappropriate behaviour. The &lsquo;culprits&rsquo; aren&#39;t specifically named during the training session, but everyone in the group knows why this training session is occurring and what needs to change. I call this the &ldquo;I know that you know that I know that you know&rdquo; approach.
	 
	Mediation/Facilitated Discussions: When appropriate, an internal or external mediator or facilitator can effectively resolve a conflict. Having worked internally as an HR Manager, I know that sometimes it takes an outsider to an organisation to resolve a particular conflict. When the story is told to an independent 3rd party, things often get said and heard in different ways.
	 
	 Apology: Often once a perpetrator is made aware that he/she has offended or upset another, they may feel alarmed and wish to apologise immediately. This is to be encouraged. An apology goes a long way to resolving conflict.
	 
	EAP counseling: Having the psychological and emotional support of an EAP counsellor to process the circumstances and impact of another person&rsquo;s behavior goes a long way to determining how to resolve it.


A well written Complaints Management Policy should clearly outline all these informal options and HR Managers should encourage staff to pursue these in the first instance. The smorgasbord of informal options provides an organisation with flexibility to assess, in each and every situation, how to achieve the ultimate outcome &ndash; to get the inappropriate behaviour to stop.

 Furthermore, unlike formal complaints, informal complaints do not have to be put in writing and anonymity may be respected. (Although, file-noting the steps taken in response to an informal complaints process is always advisable).

In my view, formal complaints handling processes involving investigations seldom resolves conflict as:


	 There are limits to what an investigation can achieve
	 
	Allegations are basically substantiated or not
	 
	Blame (or exoneration) can leave a bad system undiscovered
	 
	The worst sort of bullies can be excellent liars, destroying all hope of a fair process or outcome. Serial predators can be a &lsquo;protected species&rsquo; which is usually a sign of weak leadership.


There is no legal obligation for an organisation to investigate every complaint. The law requires that complaints are treated seriously and that an organisation takes reasonable steps to address complaints. Further, the outcome or response to a complaint must be proportionate to the incident.

If the inappropriate behaviour stops through an informal complaints handling process, surely this is the ultimate and most effective reasonable step?

For effective Complaints Handling Training and Review of Complaints Handling Policy and Procedures, click here.
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/the-ultimate-outcome-is-for-inappropriate-behaviour-to-stop-117s66</guid>
<pubDate>15 Oct 2018 06:10:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/66/med-dont-want-to-do-anything.jpg' length='17978' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/when-team-building-to-resolve-conflict-is-a-waste-of-time-money-group-restorative-mediations-117s47</link>
<title><![CDATA[When Team Building to Resolve Conflict is a Waste of Time &amp; Money - Group Restorative Mediations]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[I am often approached by new clients who wish to engage me for a &lsquo;Team-Building&rsquo; related process. Again and again I have observed that when there is a history of conflict between staff, a single team-building activity at best provides only superficial &lsquo;band-aids&rsquo;.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[I am often approached by new clients who wish to engage me for a &lsquo;Team-Building&rsquo; related process. Again and again I have observed that when there is a history of conflict between staff, a single team-building activity at best provides only superficial &lsquo;band-aids&rsquo;.

In large groups of staff, conflict often arises between factions within a team where staff polarise behind the key &lsquo;ringleaders&rsquo; of the conflict. In a once-off team-building process these key spokespeople continue to advocate for the others and the staff who seldom speak-up will continue to stay silent. While these activities might be fun at the time, they are rarely transformative. After a while, low morale and disengagement inevitably re-surfaces as the underlying causes of conflict remain unexamined.

Through my 10-year consultancy practice in this work, I have developed a genuine Group Restorative Mediation process that is effective in diffusing long-term conflicts and unraveling the underlying issues to build lasting solutions.

A restorative group mediation has two components; one-on-one sessions with each staff member on Day 1, followed by a combined group process on Day 2.

Working with a diverse range of different personalities within a team, the first component offers staff a one-on-one session in a safe and confidential setting in which I use therapeutic skills to:


	listen deeply to their respective stories;
	gently diffuse anger and negativity;
	question their emotional attachment to their assumptions;
	assess their capacity for self-reflection, empathy and compassion; and
	slowly earn their trust to suspend their cynicism and genuinely engage in the process.


The one-on-one sessions also afford staff an opportunity to provide anonymous and often valuable upward feedback to management as generic themes.

The staff are then provided a set of questions to consider for the group process the following day. These questions ask staff to re-connect to the value they feel for the work, the team and their colleagues (as through conflict our focus inevitably becomes fixated on the negative). They are also asked to consider how they might have contributed to things not working as well as they could or how they might have let others down. This second question is a key component of my restorative process. 

Based on an assumption that conflict is mostly co-created, each staff member has a role to play. On occasion I am told by a staff member that another person is 99% to blame. My response is &ldquo;great, so let&rsquo;s focus on the 1%&rdquo;. 

Informed by Nelson Mandela&rsquo;s implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission which enabled perpetrators an opportunity to acknowledge their involvement in the traumatic history of apartheid and thus obtain future immunity from prosecution, the second question asks people to take responsibility for their own behaviour in the co-creation of the dysfunctionality of the team in a setting which is fortified by a prescribed &lsquo;NO-FAULT&rsquo; rule for the combined session. It is made very clear that this is not an opportunity to blame each other, but an opportunity for self-reflection and accountability.

Through conducting approximately 85 group restorative processes with teams of up to 25 staff, I have been privileged and humbled to observe the tremendous sense of emotional release when staff are afforded an opportunity to acknowledge their own participation in past negative behaviours in a safe setting; sometimes even offering a public apology to others who have been deeply impacted by this negative behaviour. Collectively there is also a sense of tremendous relief that underlying issues have finally been unravelled and acknowledged.

The question about how to move forward as a functional and supportive team is then considered. From this question, staff can collectively focus on solution-oriented practical steps and action plans to improve the overall functionality of the team.

The chronology of the questions is also important. There is little to be gained asking a team to consider what is necessary for the team to work together better until individuals are willing to take some responsibility for why things have not worked as effectively as they could have up until now. I also cannot expect staff members to take responsibility for the role that they might have played in the overall dysfunctionality of the team unless they feel completely safe and valued.

Then, and only then, can any team-building, planning sessions or other work-related group processes be truly inspiring!

https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/workplace-mediations
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/when-team-building-to-resolve-conflict-is-a-waste-of-time-money-group-restorative-mediations-117s47</guid>
<pubDate>06 Oct 2018 04:06:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/47/med-team-building-waste-of-money.jpg' length='32561' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/quotwe-do-not-see-things-as-they-are-we-see-things-as-we-arequot-117s48</link>
<title><![CDATA[&quot;We do not see things as they are, we see things as we are&quot;]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[&quot;When you did this, I felt that....&quot;  Does laboriously trying to get the other person to hear our story deeply dissolve workplace conflict and build trust and respect?
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[&quot;When you did this, I felt that....&quot;

Does laboriously trying to get the other person to hear our story deeply dissolve workplace conflict and build trust and respect?

We hear and speak through innately subjective filters and become very attached to our stories/versions to organise our experience.

During restorative mediations, the attachment to the story or the need to &#39;be right&#39; is gradually superseded by self-reflection, personal accountability and ultimately a preference for inner peace.

Once we are willing to see ourselves, we become more available to compassionately see others.

https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/workplace-mediations
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/quotwe-do-not-see-things-as-they-are-we-see-things-as-we-arequot-117s48</guid>
<pubDate>25 Sep 2018 04:07:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/48/med-anais-nin-quote.jpg' length='56818' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/fixing-a-fragmented-team-group-restorative-mediations-117s49</link>
<title><![CDATA[Fixing a Fragmented Team - Group Restorative Mediations]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[&#39;Ringleaders&#39; drive the division. Others polarise and hide behind them. Some perpetuate the conflict through either overt or covert negativity and gossip. Others withdraw and shut down due to a sense of helplessness or overwhelm.
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[&#39;Ringleaders&#39; drive the division. Others polarise and hide behind them. Some perpetuate the conflict through either overt or covert negativity and gossip. Others withdraw and shut down due to a sense of helplessness or overwhelm.

If you put a team together straight away in one combined process, the same dynamics continue to play out - the &#39;advocates&#39; continue to speak on behalf of others and the people who never speak up, remain silent. I don&#39;t believe we can fix something until we examine honestly how and why it doesn&#39;t work and each team member is personally responsible for this - no matter how great or little their degree of participation in the overall fragmentation. Read more about team restorative processes in my blog post &quot;When Team Building is a Waste of Time and Money&quot;

https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/workplace-mediations
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/fixing-a-fragmented-team-group-restorative-mediations-117s49</guid>
<pubDate>13 Sep 2018 04:08:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/49/med-fixing-a-fragmented-team.jpg' length='18378' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

<item>
<link>https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/recruiting-and-interviewing-what39s-really-going-on-117s50</link>
<title><![CDATA[Recruiting and Interviewing - What&#39;s Really Going On!]]></title>
<description><![CDATA[A 60 minute interview is a very short amount of time in which to determine whether a prospective applicant for a position in your business will work out. 
]]></description>
<content><![CDATA[A 60 minute interview is a very short amount of time in which to determine whether a prospective applicant for a position in your business will work out. Even the best written covering letters, resumes, elaborate selection criteria and behavioural-based interview questions cannot accurately predict a successful recruit in the long term. (The real test is once they have started in the new role and the probationary period becomes critical).

Why? Because there is a detailed story behind every applicant which is often not evident from the paperwork and even at interview. How then does one unravel the story behind an application to find out as much as much as possible about a person during the recruitment process?

Having worked as a recruiter and HR Manager for many years (and not necessarily being the ultimate decision-maker who chooses to appoint one person over another), I have come to learn many things about recruitment. I love interviewing Managers who are skilled at interviewing because &quot;they know, that I know, that they know, that I know&quot;....what&#39;s going on!

1.  GENERAL PRINCIPLES

The &ldquo;X-Factor&rdquo;

Decision-makers will often appoint someone who is less qualified or experienced over another simply because they like them and feel they will &ldquo;fit well&rdquo; in the team and add value to organisation (the &ldquo;X-Factor&rdquo;). So, assuming the potential pool of applicants broadly satisfies the essential/desired attributes on paper, it is preferable to shortlist to interview a larger group of applicants (not necessarily just 3) as the &ldquo;X-Factor&rdquo; phenomenon inevitably subconsciously plays out in interviews.

One Size Doesn&rsquo;t Fit All

I am often asked by people, &ldquo;Surely one must ask the same questions of each applicant at interview?&rdquo;  Of course, one must have an interview framework of essentially similar questions; however every applicant brings a different story to the interview. On an obvious level, there is no point asking an applicant who is currently unemployed how much notice they need to give their current employer in order to determine a start date! Similarly, if a particular applicant will need to relocate for the position, one needs to delve specifically into relocation issues.

Actively Listening and Probing

Unravelling the real story behind an application involves actively listening and diverting from the interview question framework when necessary. If an answer to a question raises concerns or requires further clarification (during the interview or when referencing checking), it is important to probe more deeply into the issue by asking further questions. Ignoring these cues and sticking to a prescriptive interview question form may miss crucial information. An analogy would be going to a therapist who asks the same set of questions of each client. With interviewing, there needs to be a balance between ensuring similar questions are asked of each applicant, whilst also allowing each interview to have its own unique flavour based on the different personalities and stories of each person being interviewed.

2. UNRAVELLING THE FULL STORY BEHIND AN APPLICATION

A critical point - the more relaxed an applicant is at interview, the more information they will share with you and the closer you will get to unravelling the real story behind the person and their application. Building rapport with each applicant softens a formal interview process and allows for the information to flow.

 So, how does one do this?


	Preferably interview in a warm and welcoming setting &ndash; I prefer interviewing in a couch setting in a smaller and &lsquo;cosier&rsquo; room with a jug of water and glasses and even some flowers in the background, rather than across a table in a boardroom;
	The sooner the applicant is given an opportunity to start talking, the sooner they can start to relax. I start an interview with a generic question: &ldquo;Perhaps to start off, can you tell us a bit about yourself?&rdquo; The interview panel already knows the answer to this question from the paperwork, however it enables the applicant to start talking once the panel and process is introduced at the start of the interview;
	 
	To allow the story line to unravel, the interview needs to be conducted by a Convenor of an interview panel. This person will ask questions, listen intently, probe into answers more deeply when necessary and build rapport with the applicant. It is very bewildering for an applicant when questions are &ldquo;fired&rdquo; from different panel members throughout the interview and the &lsquo;thread&rsquo; of the full story is lost. The remaining panel members can write down their questions arising from the applicant&rsquo;s answer to the Convenor&rsquo;s questions and, at the appropriate time, the Convenor will turn to each panel member affording them as much time as needed to ask their specific questions.  As an HR Manager, I often left the technical questions (regarding the scope and depth of an applicant&rsquo;s experience to determine their capability to perform the role) to the Line Manager in the interview panel; after all, they are the experts in their fields and have to work with the new recruits;
	 
	Applicants expect to be interviewed at interviews. They should be asked questions and talk for most of the duration of the hour. Towards the end of the interview, the Convenor can ask the applicant whether they have any questions. Depending on the question, it may be more appropriate for one panel member to answer this question than another. I recall being interviewed once when the Convenor started the interview by spending 30 minutes talking about the company before a single question was asked. I was flabbergasted! 


3. DETERMINING ALIGNMENT AND COMMITMENT TO YOUR TEAM AND ORGANISATION

Competing for an Applicant with other Organisations

There are only a couple of times when it is necessary to &lsquo;sell&rsquo; your business to an applicant. 

Firstly, when the applicant responds affirmatively to the question: &ldquo;Have you been to other interviews with other organisations?&rdquo; 

In relation to this question, I recall as an HR Manager interviewing an attorney in London whose answer revealed that a competitor Australian firm had already interviewed and made her an offer which she needed to respond to by the end of that week. Her answer mobilised the recruiting partners to fast-track the recruitment process. The attorney then chose to privately disclose to me the details of the competitor&rsquo;s offer &lsquo;on the table&rsquo; and the firm was able to make an offer she couldn&rsquo;t refuse. 

This question also helps to determine the applicant&rsquo;s commitment to your role. If the other roles the applicant has applied for are in a different sector and their resume indicates they are currently studying in the field of this different sector, it is likely that your role may just be an &lsquo;in-between&rsquo; role for them.

The other time it is necessary to &lsquo;sell&rsquo; your business to an applicant is when you eventually make an offer and an applicant advises you that they are currently considering offers from other organisations as well. 

Likes/Dislikes

Often, I&rsquo;ll pick one of the more recent roles from the applicant&rsquo;s resume with longer tenure and ask questions like: &ldquo;What did you enjoy the most about your work there?&rdquo; and &ldquo;What did you enjoy the least?&rdquo;  Whilst these questions may seem simplistic, the answers to these types of questions reveal a lot about whether the applicant is likely to enjoy the precise nature of the role in your organisation. So if an applicant answers they did not enjoy the admin side of their role and you know that your role has a large admin component to it, you may have a problem. I also ask: &ldquo;What type of people do you enjoy working with the most?&rdquo; and &ldquo;What type of people do you enjoy working with the least?&rdquo; If an applicant answers that they prefer close supervision and the Line-Manager has a &ldquo;hands-off&rdquo; management style, once again, there may be misalignment.

Also, an applicant&rsquo;s answers to questions about what they understand about your business, the prospective role, and whether they&rsquo;ve looked at your website, are important indicators of how genuinely interested they are to join your business.

4. OTHER IMPORTANT QUESTIONS

Reporting Line issues: I will pick a more recent role from the applicant&rsquo;s resume with longer tenure to ask &ldquo;Who did you report to in this role?&rdquo; Why? Because I want to see if the person they name is listed as a referee on their resume and if not, would they be okay if I do a reference check with this reporting supervisor? If their answer is &ldquo;no&rdquo;, there is something more going on. Sometimes I may ask &ldquo;Is your manager in your current employment role aware that you are interviewing for other positions?&rdquo; What I&rsquo;m wanting to hear is: &ldquo;No, and they will be devastated if they find out&rdquo;. I then assure them that this will not happen or may only happen after an offer is made and with their permission. What I don&rsquo;t particularly want to hear is &ldquo;Yes, my manager is supportive of me looking for other opportunities&rdquo; or &ldquo;I&rsquo;d prefer you not to do a reference check with them&rdquo;. This alerts me to a possible problem &ndash; a personality clash or performance issue which needs to be explored more thoroughly through further interview questions and reference checking.

Relocation issues: After asking an applicant how they feel about relocating, I will ask them how their family feels about their possible relocation. This is particularly important for interstate or overseas moves which may involve extensive relocation costs. If the spouse or kids are not fully supportive of the move, there is a significant possibility that your offer might not be accepted or be a costly retention risk in the short-term if the family cannot adjust to the move.

Behavioural Interviewing Questions: As a recruiter I&rsquo;ve prepared candidates on how to answer behavioural interviewing questions. If they are not prepared, these types of questions can be daunting. If prepared, it&rsquo;s actually quite easy for an applicant to manipulate these questions to give examples which demonstrate the highlights of their career. These questions mostly serve a prepared applicant. I prefer to simply ask: &ldquo;What would you consider to be the highlight of your career and why?&rdquo; This gives applicants an opportunity to &lsquo;showcase&rsquo; their best career achievements.

5. WHAT INTERESTS ME IN RESUMES

I generally don&rsquo;t place much value on what people say in their covering letters or in response to selection criteria. I think it is easy for people to &ldquo;write themselves up&rdquo; in covering letters and resumes.

What interests me the most in resumes is what is not being said:


	The time lapses between employment roles (were they travelling or recovering from their previous job?);
	 
	Changes of roles (why they left a particular job and why they started a new one?);
	 
	The tenure of roles (if they have had only one or two roles for lengthy periods of time, are they flexible, adaptable and willing to &ldquo;skill-up&rdquo;, if necessary);
	 
	Changes of career direction and study (does your role align with their long-term career plans and aspirations); and
	 
	Changes of location &ndash; prior city or country moves (are they committed to staying in your area in the long-term?)


6. SOME FINAL THOUGHTS ON RECRUITMENT


	When setting up the interviews, let the applicant know the names of the interview panel members. If they&rsquo;re keen, they may jump online and do some research about these individuals.
	 
	Organise the interviews to take place on the same day. This helps the interview panel properly engage with the process and not be distracted by other work. It&rsquo;s also gives the panel time to debrief and regroup after each interview and compare &ldquo;apples with apples&rdquo;.
	 
	Think &lsquo;outside the box&rsquo; &ndash; a great applicant may be more suitable for a different role within your organisation.
	 
	When reference checking, you are entitled to ask an applicant for referees to whom they directly reported, notwithstanding the referees listed on their resumes.
	 
	Until your preferred applicant has signed your written contract of employment, manage the expectations of the &ldquo;runner-up&rdquo; applicant by delaying notification of any decision to them. Everyone likes to feel that they got the job because they were the preferred choice. I recently heard about an HR Manager who told an applicant on her start date that she was not the HR Manager&rsquo;s first choice. What an appalling way to start a new job!


Finally, the best interviews are the ones that simply just flow! Most of us would hopefully have experienced this at some stage in our careers. The interview becomes an enjoyable and fun experience and you may even forget that you&rsquo;re being interviewed!
]]></content>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/blog/recruiting-and-interviewing-what39s-really-going-on-117s50</guid>
<pubDate>27 Feb 2018 04:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
<enclosure url='https://www.ruthlevyconsulting.com.au/uploads/117/50/med-recruiting-interviewing.jpg' length='28813' type='image/jpeg'/>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
