Developing An ADR Conflict Coach

Developing An ADR Conflict Coaching Process

By Anonymous Author

Presented by: Susan W. Brecher, Cornell University

This session covered what the presenter, Susan Brecher, referred to as a “new, emerging process.” It is a specific model she has developed for peer coaching in the workplace. The process provides employees with tools they can use to help fellow employees deal with an interpersonal conflict. It is appropriate when employees and/or managers with a conflict wish to resolve the situation using a consensual process.

The goal of the conflict coaching process is to resolve the concern at the lowest level in a non-confrontational manner, using one-on-one discussions. The conflict coach helps the employee in conflict develop and present options, problem solve collaboratively, and communicate respectfully. The ultimate goal of the process is to provide employees with skills and tools they can use to address future concerns through one-on-one discussion, without the assistance of a coach.

The key to this process is developing options for resolving or improving the situation. The coach supports the employee being coached in developing and then prioritizing at least three different options. The coach may also provide suggestions on how to describe the issue to the other party in a non-judgmental way. Ideally, both parties to a conflict are coached, each by a different peer coach. This practice, however, is not always practical.

Once options have been developed with the help of the coach, the employee in conflict initiates a one-on-one discussion with the second party. They express thanks for the willingness to meet; explain the process to be used; describe the issue at hand; and describe the impact of the behavior or concern. They then ask how the other party sees the situation, listening actively without other interruption. The initiator of the discussion presents at least two options for resolution, explains the rationale behind the options, makes sure they are clearly understood, and invites the other party to present additional options.

Through open-minded discussion, the two parties agree on either (a) a mutually agreeable option; (b) a need for more time; or (c) their inability to come to a resolution. The discussion is closed with a positive statement, the suggestion of using the method in the future (if this experience has been non-confrontational), and an expression of thanks for participating in the meeting.

If the two parties are unable to reach a solution on their own, the conflict coach may take on the role of a “resolution facilitator” who conducts shuttle diplomacy between the two parties in conflict. No more than two rounds of shuttle diplomacy are used. If agreement is reached in this manner, the two parties are then brought together to “seal” the agreement.

Ms. Brecher described her overall philosophy by saying, “I try to take the complex and make it simple.” She is passionate about the transfer of learning, and excited about the opportunity to share her model with the ACR community.

Questions about this peer coaching model can be directed to Ms. Brecher at swb6@cornell.edu. Please include “ACR Session” in the subject field.