Focus on Procedural Fairness: The Sixth Measure of Justice in Conflict Management

Often when asked about whether they have recieved justice, many employees will say "well at least I had my day in court." What this really amounts to is that they had a sense that there was fairness in the process by which a decision was made. This refers to procedural fairness. They may not have liked the result but they were satisfied that the process to get there was fair. Conversely, where the process is not fair, workplace participants will feel that a further injustice has been done to them.

The Procedural Fairness Focus measures how well the system enables the participants to feel that they have been heard, that their issues are taken seriously, and that the results are based upon fair standards. It measures how transparent, rational, predictable and unbiased an adjudicative component of the process is. It also measures access to an adjudicative process if necessary. This is related to the Efficiency Quotient in that speed and efficiency of the process are also a measure of its procedural fairness.

The Procedural Fairness Focus also measures the extent to which there are adequate resources in the system to ensure it is running fairly. The system must have resources to quickly process the conflicts, and avoid any attempt to scuttle the process through procedural delays.

One of the fundamental tenants of due process is that decisions are made rationally and objectively. Investigators and tribunals must be concerned with the facts and not the status of the parties or the political implications of their decisions. The Procedural Fairness Focus measures the consistency of rulings. In a free and democratic society we expect court and tribunal systems to follow procedures, apply rules of evidence, and to heed the sanctity of jurisprudence. This expectation also exists in the workplace. It is not necessary to make a Perry Mason style court case out of every conflict. But where adjudicative processes are used, there is an expectation of procedural fairness. This applies especially to the opportunity to be heard and to know the nature of the conflict from the perspective of the other workplace participants.

Finally this Focus measures the extent to which the system is visible. How periodic and extensive are communications to the participants; how effective is the system in reporting results (i.e. statistics concerning the number and types of conflicts handled)?

Looking for Tips on How to Market Your Mediation Practice?

I can recommend two very excellent people for this purpose. The first is Kristina Haymes of Mediation Marketing Institute. You can check her out by clicking "mediation marketing tips" on the side bar. She has a very interesting practice helping mediators find their niche and giving them solid advice on how to reach clients. And the second is Dina Lynch from ADR Practice Builder. You can reach her at ADRPracticebuilder.com. Dina also has connections with the Ombuds community so is a good resource for those interested in a practice in systems analysis and design.

I highly recommend both of these practice consultants because they both have strong faith in the value of ADR processes. They both have a passion for social transformation which makes them especially effective in their efforts to build practices with their clients. And they both have ADR practices of thier own - which means they know what they are doing. If you are looking for that personal touch to marketing your practice both Kristina and Dina are good choices.

Focus on Support: The Fifth Measure of Justice in a Workplace Conflict Management System

This is a continuation of the series called "The 25 Measures of Fairness in Workplace Conflict Management Systems."

I have noticed that many workplaces have invested their energies into creating sophisticated conflict management options that end up being underutilized by workplace participants. One of the primary reasons for this is that some options, (like arbitration for example) are impractical for use by workplace participants relying solely on their own devices. Often these options are of little value to those who do not have the proper advice, guidance and advocacy in the use of the system.

The Support Focus measures the advice and advocacy the participants have access to. This Focus is especially important where a rights-based or adjudicative process is built into the system. Workplace participants do not always have the experience or training to properly articulate their interests and views on the conflict in question. Some workplaces designate staff to support participants. This is frequently how an Ombuds office is used in larger workplaces. The Ombuds staff assists workplace participants to bring their conflicts to the table and monitor compliance with decisions. HR may play a role here or the fairness system may call for a self-selection of an “advocate” from the workplace community. Often this is a senior, respected member of the community selected by the participant.

And of course, where there is a unionized workplace, the union plays a central support role for the employee (and HR plays a central support role for managers). In either case, a great deal of resources are devoted to the workplace participant. The union will represent an employee through each stage of the process - providing legal and practical advice, and in fact paying for lawyers in some cases to advocate for the participant.

Where there is no union, a great deal of attention must be paid to this focus. Workplace participants will not raise issues if they are not supported through the process.

Join Me In Ottawa!

Below is an announcement for my upcoming seminar on measuring the strength of Workplace Conflict Management Systems.

MDR Associates and the Workplace Fairness Institute proudly present Making Workplaces Work, a one day workshop with a diagnostic tool to test the strength of workplace conflict management systems.

This workshop will be run jointly by Richard Moore of MDR Associates and Blaine Donais of the Workplace Fairness Institute.

Participants in the workshop will receive a copy of the book: Workplaces That Work: A Guide to Conflict Management in Union and Non-Union Work Environments (Aurora: Canada Law Book, 2006).

The seminar will be of particular interest to:

-HR Professionals
-Managers
-ADR Professionals
-Workplace Consultants
-Union Representatives
-Organizational Design Professionals
-Conflict Management System Designers
-Ombuds
-Diversity Departments
-Change Management Professionals

Attendees will gain a powerful tool to help them:
- define their workplace’s conflict management system
- test the system’s strength
- uncover weaknesses in the system
- develop a strategy for improving the system.

Cost: $500 + GST (which includes the cost of the book, a value of $79.00 + GST)

Place:
MDR Associates Conflict Resolution Inc.
201-280 Albert Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5G8
613-230-8671 or 866-212-8022
Fax: 613-238-3340
Email: nmurphy@mdrassociates.ca
www.mdrassociates.ca

Date: February 15, 2007

Redux on the ACR Conference

Last week I went to the Annual Conference of the Association For Conflict Resolution (ACR) in Philadelphia. It was an honour to speak at the conference on the topic of Measuring Workplace Fairness. Our small room was packed with interested workplace practitioners. I introduced my theory of fairness and showed participants how to use the Testing Instrument for Fairness Systems (TIFFS) to measure the strength of thier conflict management systems. I was also most pleased to be welcomed into the Workplace Section ACR. This is a vibrant community of workplace practitioners. One of the Tri-Chair's is my friend Debra Dupree from the Pulse Institute.

Other very interesting people I met were:

- Catherine O'Brien: Canadian Association of Professional Employees (CAPE
- Judy Curme: AFSCME local 2620
- John Ford: Managing Editor - mediate.com
- Michael Dickstein: Mediator/Arbitrator
- Barbara Swartz: Mediator
- Candace Gottlieb: Workplace Mediator
- Stephen Ktoev: American Bar Assocation
- Pattie Porter: Workplace Mediator
- Ken Starr: Mediator-Arbitrator
- Neil Bodine: Attorney
- Connie Ferris: ADR Program Manager
- Denese Edsall: HR Manager
- Shari Swoish: Workforce Solutions Plus
- Bill Eddy: Mediator/author
- Margarita Canal: Professor
- Erica Sher: conflict coach and mediator
- Professor David Lipsky: Cornell University
- Stephanie Stobbe: Professor - University of Winnipeg
- Steve Critchley: Pulse Institute
- Gina Barbieri: Executive Director, African Institute of Mediation
- Eskandar Rastegar: Ombudsperson, United Nations
- Tanis Sourdin: Professor of Law and DR, La Trobe, Australia
- Kevin Brown - Mediator
- And of course, who could forget Kristina Haymes of Mediator Marketing Institute?

The ACR community is vibrant and engaging. It was such a pleasure to share theory and practice ideas with so many workplace consultants, coaches, mediators and abitrators.