Metro_HR Mediation or Facilitated Conversation

Here at Metro HR, we are frequently asked to support with conflict resolution and situations where individuals or sometimes groups or teams have different perspectives on things, or have had a disagreement and feel that the other person/people do not get their perspective, and that their differences are irreconcilable.

This can often be resolved through providing a safe space to enable the individuals involved to talk freely and as openly as they feel comfortable to do.  There two main ways to do this, a facilitated conversation or mediation.

Conflict left unresolved can be very destructive in an organisation/team and can affect many people.  If not addressed the situation can quickly escalate and the impact individuals feel can intensify over time, because each interaction moving forward is based on the most recent interaction, gaining momentum.

We thought in this week’s blog we would explain the differences between each approach.

Mediation and a facilitated conversation both involve bringing a third and neutral party into the situation to work with the individuals to explore the problem and attempt to resolve matters or agree a framework in which the individuals can move forward.  The main difference between the two approaches is the formality of the conversation, the scope and goals agreed.

What is a facilitated conversation?

A facilitated conversation is intended to be less formal than a mediated conversation.  The aim is to focus on developing an understanding of what the problem is from both perspectives with a view to improve communication and potentially stop conflict escalating further or escalate with the same momentum.

Key elements of a facilitated conversation:

  • A less formal process for all involved,
  • Can be carried out by a manager or an HR professional, but should be someone neutral, which is why this often comes to an external HR professional to lead.
  • Gives a sense of understanding of each other’s perspectives, sometimes individuals don’t understand the impact they have on others. Simply finding this out can sometimes be all that is needed to resolve matters.
  • Can be one or a number of meetings to discuss the situation, possibly allowing time for reflection between meetings, time to clarify the points of conflict and disagreement, and look for possible solutions.
  • Should open lines of communication in an open and honest way to air the issue but also improve communication moving forward.
  • Not intended to create a specific outcome or a legally binding agreement, but is intended to improve communication, restore working relationships, create a better understanding, start to rebuild trust between the parties, and propose solutions to reduce further escalation of the conflict and maybe resolve matters.
  • May move into formal mediation if the facilitation process isn’t working.
Facilitated Conversation

What is a mediated conversation?

A mediated conversation is approached in a much more formal way with the aim to develop a binding agreement or action plan that puts measures in place around how the individuals will interact and behave towards each other moving forward to move towards resolution or maintain a resolution proposed.  It usually involves an element of negotiation to come to an agreed way of working together and holds the individuals to account over what has been agreed/negotiated.

Key elements of a mediation:

Mediated Conversation
  • A more formal process led by a qualified and trained mediator, usually someone external to the organisation to have the required neutrality.
  • More confidential in the way the process is managed.
  • Has specific stages in the process that the mediator will lead, including:
    • Individual, confidential discussions with the individuals to gain an understanding of the issues/concerns,
    • Bringing the individuals together with set parameters around how the conversation will be structured and clear ground rules for engagement and interaction.
    • Private caucuses and negotiation with a view to coming to a specific resolution to the conflict.
    • Will involve encouraging compromise, making concessions and using negotiation to broker an agreement.
  • Should result in a mutually agreed, legally binding and enforceable agreement and action plan that the parties can be held accountable for if they don’t stick to the agreement.
  • May not actually resolve the conflict, although it is hoped it does, but defines the parameters on the binding agreement of ways of working moving forward.

There are many costs to conflict in any organisation or team regardless of the size of the company, but in small organisations the effects can be felt throughout the entire business.  Not only is there the cost of a lack of productivity, reduced performance and distraction, an increase in employee turnover, but a more human cost.

Conflict can be really upsetting and stressful for those involved who can feel that they aren’t being listened too or understood, or that they are being bullied, harassed or victimised for perhaps standing up for something they believe in. 

It can significantly affect the mental wellbeing of those involved and those on the periphery. It is therefore imperative that conflict is addressed and not left to fester and evolve into a much bigger issue.

If you have a conflict situation in your organisation and you would like to discuss how best to approach it, get in touch.

Book your free 30-minute consultation now
Metro_HR Proactive HR Charlotte

Responsive site designed and developed by