Deciding when a professional is needed
Reviewing available services
Hiring the right person for the job
Two or more of your employees are in a conflict and you know an intervention is needed. You may be thinking about stepping in and trying to use the processes outlined in Chapters 6 through 10, or maybe you're looking into the company's internal resources like those in Chapter 13. Or perhaps the option of bringing in a professional conflict resolution specialist is more in line with your needs, especially if you've tried other options and they're just not working.
Tip
As you think about the conflict and the needs of your employees, gather as much information as possible to make the best decision for you, your team, and the company.
This chapter provides you with information you need when hiring a conflict resolution consultant. I give you tips on how other managers decide when a professional is needed, lay out criteria to help you zero in on which service best meets your goal, and tell you how to find the right person for the job.
Making the decision to call in help can be a slippery slope. Unfortunately, there are no hard-and-fast rules to tell you definitively that, yes, a professional is needed, or no, you can handle this situation yourself. This section helps you research your options, weigh the pros and cons, and consider the best next steps.
Note
I recommend that managers in the process of making these decisions consider their own skill level, the severity of the conflict, the impact of a prolonged conflict, and the benefits and drawbacks to calling in a particular type of professional. In my experience, when managers are on the fence about whether to call someone in, I hear common reasons for hesitation as well as common reasons that ultimately push them into picking up the phone.
Organizations often delay calling in help because they're hesitant to allocate the money. Trainers, mediators, coaches, and consultants usually don't work for free, but don't let the cost dissuade you from considering outside help. You won't know how much an expert costs until you do the research, and you may be surprised by what you find.
Tip
If you're personally uncertain about spending the money, or if you need a solid argument to get accounting or upper management to authorize the expenditure, refer to Chapter 5 to assess the cost of doing nothing. The hard and soft costs associated with unresolved conflict can make a convincing argument for even the most fiscally conservative CFO.
Financial analysis aside, you may be hesitating to call in professional help because
You're worried that there's a stigma attached to asking for help. You want to believe — and, maybe more important, you want to show — that you can handle anything that comes your way. Reputation is important in business as well as in life, and the fear of how others will perceive the situation could lead you to hesitate in taking the next step. By calling in the right person, though, you have the opportunity to build on your reputation as a capable leader.
The idea of hiring a professional is overwhelming or intimidating. If you've never worked with a conflict resolution specialist before, the uncertainty associated with an unknown service may be daunting. The right person can calm your concerns, as can the rest of this chapter! (The section "Hiring an Expert and Knowing What to Expect" later in this chapter guides you through the process.)
You're holding out hope that the conflict will work itself out if you give it just one more day or another week. If you're willing to give it a little more time, that's okay. Keep in mind, though, that problems between a few co-workers often affect other employees and can lead to a larger conflict.
Emotionally, you feel you're giving the troublemakers too much attention, which is what you think they want. You may see calling in an expert as giving in to bad behavior. What appears to be giving in, though, can be a very strategic move on your part. Working with experts gives you the opportunity to set clear expectations for future behaviors and consequences.
You just want to fire the culprit. Starting the formal process of firing an employee may feel easier than giving her one more chance to correct the behavior or trying a different angle. The option of letting the person go is always there, but documenting your efforts to resolve the situation first is rarely a bad idea.
Each workplace conflict has a number of unique variables that move even the most adept managers to call for help. Some conflicts are easily handled, and others, well, are not so easy. You may want to call in a professional to manage the resolution because
You've assessed the conflict and it's beyond your abilities. There's no shame in acknowledging that you're not the right person for the situation; in fact, doing so shows that you're being thoughtful and cautious about the conflict.
You've tried everything else you can think of, and nothing has produced the desired effect. Giving it one more try by providing a fresh perspective may be what's needed to calm the situation or to move an employee from his fixed position.
You want the employees to know that you're serious. Bringing in a professional can send a message to your staff: You want them to make a change and do things differently, and you're willing to put your money where your mouth is. If you're clearly invested in the process, employees often follow suit and invest in the outcome.
You can't guarantee neutrality, impartiality, or confidentiality.
Warning
Mediating a case in which one of the employees could accuse you of favoritism is a potentially destructive way to spend a few hours. And if the circumstances of the conflict are such that you're not certain you can guarantee personal confidentiality, don't risk your reputation or the trust of your employees by trying to tackle the situation on your own.
You want to create a personal or professional boundary. You may not want to handle every dispute and disagreement in the office! Create some space by allowing someone else to help out once in a while.
You believe your employees will be more receptive if they hear the message from a different messenger. Hearing someone else's voice and learning from someone new may provide a needed breakthrough.
You anticipate that a disciplinary action will be necessary, and you want to show you've done everything you can. By bringing in a professional, you make a clear statement to the employee that a change is required. If a change isn't achieved, you can follow up with punitive action.
You want to be a part of the process, but not as the mediator. There are times when being a participant alongside your employees in a mediation, training, or group facilitation produces promising results. Taking a supportive role in conflict can create a new dynamic and an atmosphere of team building and problem solving that can last long after the mediation session has ended.
Tip
Whether the decision to hire a conflict resolution expert is yours to make alone or you need authorization from someone higher up, be sure you're giving it thoughtful and thorough consideration. Then when you approach your supervisor or Human Resources professional regarding your decision you'll be fully prepared to answer questions. Include a summary of the current situation, how you've already tried to remedy the problem, what (if anything) has been successful, and why a professional is the right choice now.
You can use a variety of professional services to solve conflicts. Often these services are referred to as alternative dispute resolution (ADR) because they can be used as alternatives to the standard avenue of litigation to resolve conflicts. Each service has benefits and limitations, and you may want to consider using the services on their own or in tandem with each other.
Note
A key element in choosing the right ADR process or combination of services is understanding fully what your conflict resolution goals are — both short term and long term. Short-term goals are more specific to your immediate needs — for example, getting Kathleen and José to stop yelling at each other, or getting Chris to reduce his absenteeism are two immediate short-term goals. Your long-term goals speak to broader ideas like developing respectful communication methods, maintaining a productive work environment, and building team morale.
Customize a plan that meets your specific goals. Carefully assess the situation so that the appropriate services are scheduled with the right people at the right time. Employees will get frustrated if you schedule everyone for a large group facilitation when all you really need to do is have a one-on-one conversation with a single employee. Mediation or conflict specialists can work with you to formulate a comprehensive plan or review yours with you.
One of the most proactive steps you can take as a manager is to make use of conflict resolution trainings for yourself and for your staff. Look for existing trainings to send one or more of your employees to, or look for a trainer who can customize a course specifically for your needs.
Common training topics include but certainly aren't limited to
Improving communication skills
Working with different personality styles
Holding successful one-on-one conflict conversations
Holding successful group meetings
Dealing with angry co-workers or clients
Managing workplace violence
Tip
Whenever possible, I recommend that a company invest in training a number of employees at one time to promote a common experience that team members can refer to when they need it.
The benefits of professional training include the following:
It builds employee skills.
It shows employees that you're invested in learning.
It can be a team-building experience.
It creates a common language or process to work from.
It can help staff see conflict as an opportunity for positive change.
It reduces future conflicts.
It fits well when coupled with other services.
It encourages early problem solving.
Professional training can have drawbacks, however. Some of the more common ones include the following:
It takes people away from tasks during work hours.
It doesn't usually address a specific, ongoing conflict.
The employee(s) may feel punished for having to attend.
There's no guarantee that an employee will be open to learning new skills.
Note
An employee told me she once sat through all three days of a workplace communications training with her headphones on, avoiding eye contact with the instructors. When I asked what her motivation was for the behavior, she replied that her boss "could make her go to the training but he couldn't make her learn anything."
Note
When negotiating costs with a trainer, remember to ask for a group discount. Costs per student/per day average about $100 to $200; however, a trainer will often consider reducing the rates depending on such variables as the number of students, length of training, and number of trainings she'll be providing for your organization. And remember to ask about travel and per diem costs, too.
Bringing in a professional to work one-on-one with individual employees can have a huge impact on the reduction of conflict and tension in the office. Conflict coaching which involves an employee meeting with a conflict coach or mediator, allows the person a chance to work through a particular conflict in a productive manner. Coaching helps her gain a better understanding of the situation and her role in the conflict, as well as the encouragement to brainstorm or consider different courses of action. This approach is also useful in helping the employee learn and test out new ways of reacting and interacting with her co-workers.
Coaching can be used on its own or in combination with training, mediation, or group facilitation. (For examples of how and when you, as a manager, may coach an employee, see Chapter 11.)
Here are some benefits of hiring someone to conduct conflict coaching:
It allows for in-depth one-on-one interactions.
It provides a safe way to address sensitive behavior problems.
It lets the employee practice and rehearse what she may say or do.
It allows the employee time to work through the conflict before addressing (or readdressing) the other person involved.
It helps the employee consider the best and worst alternatives if the problem goes unresolved.
Possible drawbacks to conflict coaching include the following:
It can be time consuming and costly if multiple employees need multiple sessions.
It may create dependency issues, in which an employee relies solely on the coach for support and decision-making.
It's not a substitute for counseling.
Conflict coaches shouldn't be hired to help an employee process intense emotions or address mental health issues. It is, however, a good idea to use a conflict coach in conjunction with mediation and group facilitation. When you have a conflict between a few employees, a conflict coach can work with the employees individually both before and after mediations to create and maintain cooperation.
Tip
Because conflict coaching is often paired with mediation and a mediator may provide both services, consider negotiating both when you're hiring an expert. Coaches may offer their services on a per-session or per-hour basis.
Mediation is an ever-evolving field of practice in which two or more people in a dispute sit down with an impartial facilitator to discuss a conflict and brainstorm mutually agreeable solutions. Chapters 6 through 9 give a thorough explanation of what the mediation process includes and how to go about conducting a mediation if you're interested in tackling it yourself.
No one wants to see a dispute mutate into a three-headed, fire-breathing beast, so addressing and resolving a conflict early with a mediator can save you and the company a lot of pain, suffering, and money down the line. Here are some other benefits to using outside mediation:
It provides you with an experienced professional who has received specific training in effectively analyzing and resolving conflicts. Hiring experts who can keep an employee engaged in the process while they peel back the layers of a conflict can be invaluable in helping you find resolution. And experts can act as sounding boards or give you a reality check when you may be too close to the forest to see the trees.
It frees up staff time that otherwise would be spent dealing with the conflict. You may be better served by putting your energies into what you do best and letting a mediator manage a conflict on your behalf.
It allows for an additional layer of neutrality and confidentiality for you and your employees. Mediation is an open forum that allows employees to discuss and problem-solve any issues or concerns they have. It's often easier for employees to discuss and problem-solve when they have a neutral third party in the room to help facilitate the conversation.
Here are some drawbacks to using outside mediation:
It's not always an instant solution. Mediation can take a few days to set up; you need to contact the mediator, clear employee schedules, and find a two- to four-hour block of time in which everyone can sit down free from distractions and interruptions. The conflict may continue to brew as calendar issues are worked out.
It doesn't work as well with larger groups. Mediations work best if you have fewer than six to ten people. More than ten significantly increases the length of the mediation while decreasing the amount of time each person has to speak and contribute. For groups of ten or more, facilitation is a better option. (See Chapter 10 for information on how to adapt mediation process for a large group.)
Not all mediators follow the same process or use the same mediation model. Some professionals adopt a style of mediation that blends different models, while other mediators see their style as "pure." Each mediator also has a distinct combination of instincts, training, and experiences, and this combination influences the way he approaches each case. When you provide the mediator with information about your specific situation, he should be able to tell you if his mediation style is right for you and how he'll apply his expertise to your case.
Here are common mediation models:
Evaluative: The evaluative model presupposes that the parties want or need an evaluation of their situation from the mediator in order to solve the problem. Evaluative mediators provide more directed assistance by giving their opinions, assessing the strengths and weaknesses of each position, and suggesting outcomes for settlement. In most cases, the mediator has experience or training in a specific field — law, real estate, labor bargaining, and so on — and reaching a settlement is the goal.
Facilitative: The facilitative model contends that the people in the dispute are the ones who can find the most durable and satisfying solutions to the conflict. The clients know their situations better than the mediator does, and they know what solutions would be satisfactory. The mediator doesn't make suggestions on how the issue should be resolved; instead, he focuses on uncovering what's beneath the surface issues, creating better communication between the parties, and helping them brainstorm solutions. The goals of this style are to clarify the issues, enhance communication, and assist the parties in resolution.
Transformative: Mediators using the transformative style are likely to delve into the clients' behaviors in the hopes of creating a sustainable change. This model focuses more on the interactions and communication between the parties than on the settlement of the issues. It seeks the empowerment and mutual recognition of the parties involved, rather than resolution of the immediate problem.
Narrative: The narrative style lets the participants tell their stories and share their perspectives. There's no one truth to be uncovered or judgment to be made about who's right or who's wrong. In sharing and discussing the stories, the mediator works to find the source of the conflict and helps the clients create a mutually acceptable "alternate" story. Improved communication and mutual understanding are the goals.
Along with mediation styles, mediation meetings can be structured in a variety of ways. Here are some structures to consider:
Co-mediation: As the saying goes, two heads are better than one! In a co-mediation situation, two mediators work in tandem to avoid any appearance of bias, favoritism, or partisanship. They model good communication and create a neutral environment.
Shuttle mediation: The structure of a shuttle mediation allows the clients to remain separate from each other for the majority of the meeting. Shuttle mediations are more common in family law or civil cases, but they can be used in workplace situations where the conflict is so intense that the employees can't or won't sit in the same room.
Warning
I try to avoid using a shuttle mediation style because keeping employees separated greatly reduces the possibility of rebuilding working relationships. Shuttle mediations also require more time and resources, and the risk of miscommunication is higher.
Facilitation is a process used with larger groups of employees, usually when the whole team is affected by an event or conflict. The meetings are an opportunity to bring everyone together and address the problems. They allow everyone the chance to define issues, share information, and brainstorm.
The structure of the facilitation and the methods used by the facilitator will vary depending on the professional's experience, his process, and the kind of conflict you need addressed. It could include one or more large-group meetings or a combination of large- and small-group meetings. (You can find specific details about facilitation, as well as guidelines for holding a large group facilitation, in Chapter 10.)
The benefits of handling a conflict or potential conflict in this manner include the following:
It provides you with experts who are trained to handle high conflict and volatile group dynamics.
It gives you the opportunity to focus your time on co-developing a strategy for the meeting but leaves the details and groundwork for the facilitator to manage.
It frees up the team to brainstorm with someone who isn't invested in the day-to-day aspects of the organization.
It provides an avenue to gather a more accurate view of the situation. Information can be gathered and reported by neutral, objective experts who have no stake in the outcome.
Here are some drawbacks to hiring group facilitators:
Employees who don't like speaking up in front of groups may feel even more uncomfortable with contractors they view as outsiders.
Some employees may take advantage of the "substitute teacher" syndrome and choose not to engage.
A hired professional doesn't know the individual personality quirks of your group and may require extra time on your part to get up to speed.
The facilitators may hold strictly to a group model, which eliminates the opportunity to address a particular participant's concerns or problematic behaviors.
Arbitration is a more formal ADR mechanism, most commonly used if an employee is in dispute with the company rather than with a colleague. The arbitration process can be voluntary (where an employee and employer consensually agree to participate) or mandatory (if there's a contract or other preestablished arrangement requiring it).
An arbitrator is a neutral third party who operates more like a judge than a facilitator. In arbitration, all participants in a dispute sit down with the arbitrator and each side has the opportunity to present its case. This system is very similar to trials in a courtroom but generally with less adherence to rules of civil procedure. The arbitrator then makes a decision, which may or may not be legally binding for both sides, depending on the terms of the contract that brought the case to arbitration or the terms that the parties agreed to.
Nonbinding arbitration, on the surface, looks similar to evaluative mediation (refer to the earlier section "Styles of mediation" for an explanation). The principle distinction, however, is that an arbitrator will give a determination of liability and a summary opinion on the amount of damages after he's heard evidence from both sides; mediators don't do that.
Many companies use an arbitration system as one step in a multi-step dispute resolution program. Typically, arbitration comes into play after mediation was unsuccessful in settling an employee's claim or grievance. If you work for a company that has a union, you may already have a multi-step dispute resolution program or grievance procedure in your collective bargaining agreement. Binding arbitration is commonly used as the final step in deciding grievance issues; in many states, it's used to make final decisions when labor and management are unable to come to an agreement on their overall collective bargaining contract negotiations.
Arbitration is used over litigation for a variety of reasons:
It's significantly less expensive than a formal legal process.
It's a relatively speedy process.
It's usually confidential, with no public records and no public hearings.
It's more informal than court. The more laid-back nature of the process can be a real advantage, especially when an employer is trying to preserve a relationship with an employee.
When arbitration is binding, it provides a final solution. Generally, there's no process in which a party can appeal a decision made in binding arbitration.
Like any conflict resolution process, arbitration has its drawbacks. They include the following:
When used as a first step, you miss many opportunities to resolve the dispute informally.
You lose all decision-making authority, and you could end up with a decision that no one likes or a compromise with two "partial winners."
Decisions are final in binding arbitration, and the loser can't appeal.
It enforces the belief that others have better answers than the parties do.
Finding the right expert requires research and planning on your part. Jot down some notes regarding the conflict and what some of your expectations are for a professional. Then as you walk through the process I outline in this section, use your notes as a reference to help you stay on track and find the right person for your unique situation.
You can get referrals for outside help from the staff in your HR department who may be members of the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) and who often receive information and updates on conflict resolution experts in your area. HR should also be able to tell you if your company already has a mediation benefit through its employee assistance program (for more information about how HR can help resolve conflicts, see Chapter 13).
Other options for referrals are professional associations such as the Alternative Dispute Resolution section of the American Bar Association, dispute resolution centers that are often tied to nonprofit or community resource organizations, professional mediation associations (like the Washington Mediation Association, which keeps a directory you can sort by location, area of expertise, and range of services), and any colleagues you know who may have been down a similar road.
Don't forget to check out the Yellow Pages for local, county, and state dispute resolutions centers that may be court-funded, or tap into the Better Business Bureau and Chamber of Commerce. In the Yellow Pages you may find mediators listed under "legal services," "conflict resolution," "mediation," or "dispute resolution." On the Internet, a search using those phrases and the city in which you work should render a list of possibilities.
When you're calling experts, look for certain qualifications and ask some key questions. Conflict resolution professionals operate under a variety of titles — mediator, facilitator, coach, trainer, or consultant — but for the sake of consistency, in this section I'll call them experts.
Note
When contacting experts, provide a general overview of the situation you're experiencing and what outcomes you're looking for. You may have an idea of the service(s) you want, but if you keep it open and tell the expert your goals, he may surprise you with options you haven't considered.
Ask all candidates the following questions:
What's your experience in the field of conflict resolution? Pertinent experience can include how and where he was trained, what kind of work he's done, and how long he's been in the field. Ask for any certifications, degrees, or professional memberships he holds.
In my area, a rigorous and lengthy training through a dispute resolution center is available for certification, and not everyone who applies makes it through. In other areas, the criteria may not be as stringent but could require membership in a mediation association. I know competent mediators who aren't certified but hold degrees in law or psychology or are HR professionals. The requirements for certifications and licenses vary from region to region.
Do you feel that this situation requires a particular set of skills or knowledge? Discuss his comfort level with your situation and allow him the space to decline. I know mediators who really enjoy working with civil court conflicts but are the first to admit that they don't have the emotional fortitude to mediate family cases. Not every mediator is a fit for every conflict, nor will every expert be a fit for your unique case.
When and how will you provide me with a statement of work? Whoever you hire needs to be on the same page with you regarding what work will be done. Ask him to include start and end dates for the services, as well as an agreement regarding fees (including charges for travel time, preparatory work, and expenses).
Do you offer follow-up services? Some experts will provide follow-up meetings with you or a summary of work that was completed. This summary could include
Surveys completed by the participants: Though a mediation meeting between two or a few employees is confidential, most experts offer the participants an opportunity to provide feedback about the mediator and the process, which the expert will make available to you in a form that maintains participant anonymity.
A summary of issues identified and work completed: One of the outcomes you can contract for is a compilation of feedback and concerns gathered from a group facilitation process. The collection may or may not include such insight as prioritizing issues, identifying patterns, and interpreting data.
Recommendations for future services: After developing an understanding of the overall problem, an expert may be able to develop a conflict resolution plan for you that's customized to the current situation and/or take into account future needs.
Note
Ask for references, but understand that due to confidentiality, an expert may not be able to give you contact information for current clients. He could, however, provide testimonials. He also may be able to refer you to a colleague or third party who can verify his experience and quality of work.
The agreement you make with an external expert can vary from a letter of intent to a statement of work to a formal contract. How you proceed will depend on the professional's standard practice and how prepared he is to match your needs. Each person or organization you consider will be different depending on how prevalent these types of services are in your area; the going rate for such work; and the details of your circumstance, such as the intensity of conflict, the number of individuals involved, and the length of time needed. However, the mediators I know generally offer a small menu of services and charge by the hour, or a package deal that includes their travel time, pre-meeting work, and half-day or full-day mediation sessions. The rates where I live can range from $100 to $300 per hour and about $1,500 to $2,000 for a day package. The professionals also provide draft contracts or agreements for potential clients to review.
Tip
Talk with a few conflict resolution specialists to determine the going rate in your area before you start negotiating. When hiring a professional on a long-term basis — for example, a year-long contract — you can negotiate a yearly fee with unlimited services or a per-session, per-service rate. For instance, a large group facilitation expert may charge a corporation on a per employee/per-month basis and offer unlimited conflict resolution services to that company and its employees. Other experts may work on a per-service basis and offer discounts for multiple sessions over a specific period of time.
After you decide which expert will help address your conflict, he'll complete an intake process with you and then conduct another intake process with the participants. Some experts require a significant amount of information beforehand, and others gather only a brief statement from each party because they prefer having the employees hear each other's perspective in a face-to-face meeting.
My preference is somewhere in the middle: I like to have just enough information to know what I'm getting into but not so much that I start making assumptions before I've even had a chance to meet the parties. People often tell me things over the phone that they won't say when they're in the middle of a mediation, or I discover that my initial understanding of the situation is radically different from what's revealed during the meeting.
The expert will want to know the details of the conflict: who's involved, what you've already tried, and any special requirements you have (such as the desire for agreements to be in writing, that staff participation is mandatory, or that certain behaviors must be addressed by an employee). You can also expect an expert to provide you with a detailed plan of action and talk with you regarding your participation in the process. Are you passing this off and don't need to be contacted until the expert is finished? Do you want to be informed every step of the way? Or maybe you prefer occasional updates throughout the process.
As the initial go-between for the expert and employees, make sure you provide accurate information to everyone so they have the same expectations.
Warning
Don't be like the manager who was trying to repair his damaged reputation that he caused by telling his team they were attending a sales skills training when, in fact, they were meeting with a conflict coach to work through problem behaviors. This switcheroo infuriated the employees and made the coaching sessions nearly impossible.
The expert should ask you for the contact information of each participant for the purposes of intake only. Don't let the news of his involvement come as a surprise, though. Let each employee know that an expert will be calling him to have a discussion. As the manager, you're the go-between until the expert contacts the employees directly, so be upfront and honest about what will take place and how it will benefit each person. Say something like, "We've hired an expert to help us with the current situation. He'll be calling you tomorrow to hear what's been going on with you, and I think this is going to be a good opportunity for some creative thinking and a way to find solutions that work for everyone. After you talk to him, he'll schedule a confidential meeting between you and Lee."
Often, the person doing the intake and performing the conflict resolution service are the same person. However, sometimes a third party — someone who's schooled in intake or conciliation — will make the initial phone calls or conduct the initial interviews, as well as complete paperwork and keep a confidential file in which the case status is documented.
Because the conciliator is the first line of communication with an employee who's upset, confused, or distressed, the intake specialist should be trained to gently, but effectively, make the disputant feel comfortable about moving forward in the conflict resolution process. Getting a phone call from a complete stranger (planned or not) can be jarring and unsettling.
During intake calls, I have a handful of questions I use for everyone, such as asking what the employee has tried to date, who he thinks needs to be involved in the discussion, and what his perception is of the situation in general. If appropriate, I also use the time to coach him on how he could present some of his concerns (including language choice and tone of voice). The last question I ask usually focuses on something positive, such as asking him to share what is working (or has worked) in the relationship, or what the employee enjoys about his job.
Generally, an intake call to an employee goes something like this:
A specific time is set for the intake expert to make the call.
The employee should be in a private place where she can speak freely and uninterrupted.
The expert introduces himself and states who has asked him to call, states the purpose of the call, and asks for a few confidential minutes to talk.
The expert asks the employee to briefly share her perspective about the conflict, and the expert takes notes while reflecting back what he's heard.
Questions in this phase may include what the employee has already tried and who she may believe is involved.
The expert asks clarifying questions and asks if the employee has any concerns about meeting.
If the employee has concerns, the two brainstorm about how her anxiety may be mitigated.
The expert goes over the mediation process; states the date, time, and location; and then outlines what the employee can expect to happen that day before he ends the call.
The process is repeated for all participants.
If a group facilitation is planned, the initial employee contact may be in the form of an introductory letter that outlines the expert's background, qualifications, and scope of work. It should include the purpose of the meeting and outline any requirements for participation. Often, a brief survey will accompany the letter with clear directions on completing the questionnaire, as well as contact information in case the recipient has any questions. If appropriate, the introductory document speaks to any confidentiality instructions and lets the reader know who will be attending.