Conflict Resolution: Difference between revisions

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(70 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
=Introduction=


We are entering the FeF community with a deep respect for one another and we take conflict resolution seriously. When a conflict arises, the two parties involved are required to either work it out directly, by mediation or by arbitration. Both parties reserve the right to closure. If either party does not gain sufficient closure, then that party has to the right to pursue such closure. Here are the steps by which this occurs:
=OSE Conflict Resolution=


*'''Right to closure. ''' If two people have a disagreement where communication breaks down, the two parties involved are required to work it out between themselves. If they are incapable of working it between themselves then Aaron Makaruk will serve as the mediator to resolve the situation, unless Aaron is involved in the conflict, in which case Yoonseo will be the mediator. Neither party is allowed to triangulate the other party by talking to the mediator. The mediator is required to keep the matter confidential. Both parties are expected to act in good faith.
OSE takes conflict resolution as an opportunity, and we treat this opportunity seriously. Conflict is inevitable and it helps the organization to grow - if that conflict is resolved in a timely and constructive way. When a conflict arises, the two parties involved are required to either work it out directly, by mediation or by conciliation. Both parties reserve the right to closure. If either party does not gain sufficient closure, then that party has to the right to pursue such closure. This is to prevent any unclarity or ill feeling from lingering in an affected situation - to protect the interests of both parties. This procedure intends to invoking a more neutral and professional 3rd party to intervene and settle the issue in an honorable way. Closure between the parties is deemed upon both parties claiming so, or by closure being enforced via mediation that follows an attempt at direct resolution


*'''Right to direct resolution. ''' The two parties have the right to solve the issue between themselves and the rest of the community shall not participate in the mediation session because the intent is to let the two parties work it out directly.
Here are our guidelines:
 
#'''Preventive measures.''' All contracts and engagements between OSE and other parties shall include a "Conflict Resolution" section outlining potential breakdowns and resolutions in those cases.
*The mediation sessions shall continue until both parties are satisfied. Closure may not be attained under these circumstances:
#'''Right to closure. ''' If two people have a disagreement, the two parties involved are required to work it out between themselves. 'Working it out' means coming to terms where a healthy and positive working/living relationship can be had between the people.
** Case 1: One party refuses to undergo further mediation. In this case, the other party determines the steps to be taken to achieve resolution.
#'''Right to Direct Resolution. ''' Two conflicted parties are encouraged to work directly with one another as the first step in conflict resolution.
** Case 2: both parties still disagree after all reasonable efforts. In this case the matter will be taken to the Board of Elders for resolution.
#'''Mediation via Nonviolent Communication.''' It can be a good practice on Mediation for the first meeting to establish general guidelines and boundaries to support the two people. The meetings can be conducted using a menu of conflict resolution tools such as Process Dialoguing, [[Nonviolent Communication]] (NVC), or other models. As a first step to mediation, the parties in conflict must agree to a good faith effort at resolution via a third party mediator - using NVC or similar technique. OSE shall appoint a third party mediator in this case. If the case is not resolved, there are two options to settle: Right to Mediation or Binding Arbitration. At this step, the choice between Rigth to Mediation and Binding Arbitration is made by the party seeking closure.
 
#'''Right to Mediation.'''  If conflict remains unresolved, a [[Quorum]] of the OSE [[Board of Directors]] shall function towards conflict resolution closure. To invoke the OSE Board, the [[ED]] must be contacted in writing by the grieving party - stating the nature of the grievance and the remedy sought. A special meeting must be held by a quorum of the Board as soon as quorum is established. Parties to the conflict shall submit themselves to a request for further information by the Board, and must respond to any requests within a 24 hour period. The Parties shall submit their information in writing, or by phone, or in person as directed by the Board. Decisions of the Board are binding and final.
*It can be a good practice for the first meeting to establish general guidelines and boundaries to support the two people sharing the same space successfully. The meetings can be conducted using a menu of conflict resolution tools such as Process Dialoguing, Nonviolent Communication, or other models.
#'''Binding Arbitration.''' If the party seeking closure chooses Binding Arbitration, the formal [[Binding Arbitration]] process is invoked. In this case, both parties cover the costs involved in a 50/50 share.
 
=FeF Conflict Resolution Process=
 
Suggested process for attaining closure:
 
#Personal resolution of conflict between two people.
#If a satisfactory solution is not obtained, if it is avoided, or is otherwise not practical, then each of the 2 parties has a right to request binding mediation. Binding mediation means that upon request, the other party is required to undergo mediation, with the third party currently being Aaron Makaruk or Marshall Hilton. Another third party may be used upon mutual agreement.
#To engage in mediation, the requesting party must submit a written notice of grievance to both the other party and to the mediator. The grievance must contain a brief summary of the issue with key relevant facts, and it should also include a condition of satisfaction for resolution (ex, for me to have a resolution, I need x). The second party is encouraged to write a written response of key issues with relevant facts from their own perspective. The intent of the written notice and response is to tame enflamed emotions - and to have both parties come to the meeting after having done some thinking and clarification on the issues involved. It is required that both parties come to the mediation session with open minds - for example - such that the conditions of satisfaction are not set in stone and alternative solutions may be pursued upon mutual agreement. It is required that each party respect each other's right to a process and right to closure. Right to closure is that each party must feel satisfied that all possible steps were taken, and that each party is at rest. Each party reserves a right to call a mediation meeting within 24 hours of at the point of submitting their notice - for the purpose of rapid resolution of sensitive, timely issues. The right of each party to pursue closure is deemed as a non-negotiable right - and engaging the conflict resolution process shall be prioritized over other activities at FeF until satisfactory closure is obtained by both parties. The reason for this is that relations on site need to be positive and healthy for the community - otherwise morale, productivity, and creativity are compromised in the community. This is especially important because of the close-knit nature of the community where people live and work together.
*The Board of Elders is a group of trusted protectors of the project. These are third parties (not currently members of Factor e Farm) with a more neutral viewpoint, who are professionals in human resources, startups, and enterprise development. The role of these individuals is to provide an objective suggestion in the conflict resolution process with the intent of doing the best for the project as a whole.
*The Board of Elders are presented with a written 1-2 page brief on the situation presented to them by the grieving party. They are requested to ask any questions for clarification, and are required to make an assessement of the situation in the form of a written suggestion as to a desirable course of action within 48 hours of receiving the grievance. The second party in the conflict also has a right to submit their point of view in a 1-2 page brief within 24 hours of being requested to do so by the grieving party.
**The number of the Board of Elders shall be 5, with at least 3 of the 5 members constituting quorum.
**Suggested Board of Elders include:
***Karien Bezuidenhuit, COO of Shuttleworth Foundation
***Scott Blessing, business coach, Inspired Leadership,
***Stephanie Rosol, SupporTED coach, human resources professional
***Claire Davis, Director of People and Culture, Canonical
***Jose Gil-Duarte, Essentia
 
==Balance of Power==
If a conflict escalates beyond personal resolution and mediation, the Founding Director shall have the final decision making power on the resolution based on the feedback provided by the Board of Elders, except in the case where Founding Director is involved in the grievance, in which case Aaron Makaruk will be the final say. In order to provide a balance of power, this process will be carried on with radical transparency:
*The grieving party's brief, the second party's brief, and the Board of Elders' assessments shall be published with full disclosure of names and comments on the wiki.
*The Founding Director's decision, with rationale for making that decision, shall also be published transparently for any observer to see.
The intent of the transparency is to provide a balance of power to the prevent flame wars and to avoid negative publicity coming from those who are interested in the outcome but who may otherwise not have sufficient information to make an honest assessment of the situation. It is the aim that due process and a logical approach can be utilized to provide peaceful resolution to touchy issues.
 
[[Category:Conflict Resolution]]

Latest revision as of 19:47, 11 June 2018

OSE Conflict Resolution

OSE takes conflict resolution as an opportunity, and we treat this opportunity seriously. Conflict is inevitable and it helps the organization to grow - if that conflict is resolved in a timely and constructive way. When a conflict arises, the two parties involved are required to either work it out directly, by mediation or by conciliation. Both parties reserve the right to closure. If either party does not gain sufficient closure, then that party has to the right to pursue such closure. This is to prevent any unclarity or ill feeling from lingering in an affected situation - to protect the interests of both parties. This procedure intends to invoking a more neutral and professional 3rd party to intervene and settle the issue in an honorable way. Closure between the parties is deemed upon both parties claiming so, or by closure being enforced via mediation that follows an attempt at direct resolution

Here are our guidelines:

  1. Preventive measures. All contracts and engagements between OSE and other parties shall include a "Conflict Resolution" section outlining potential breakdowns and resolutions in those cases.
  2. Right to closure. If two people have a disagreement, the two parties involved are required to work it out between themselves. 'Working it out' means coming to terms where a healthy and positive working/living relationship can be had between the people.
  3. Right to Direct Resolution. Two conflicted parties are encouraged to work directly with one another as the first step in conflict resolution.
  4. Mediation via Nonviolent Communication. It can be a good practice on Mediation for the first meeting to establish general guidelines and boundaries to support the two people. The meetings can be conducted using a menu of conflict resolution tools such as Process Dialoguing, Nonviolent Communication (NVC), or other models. As a first step to mediation, the parties in conflict must agree to a good faith effort at resolution via a third party mediator - using NVC or similar technique. OSE shall appoint a third party mediator in this case. If the case is not resolved, there are two options to settle: Right to Mediation or Binding Arbitration. At this step, the choice between Rigth to Mediation and Binding Arbitration is made by the party seeking closure.
  5. Right to Mediation. If conflict remains unresolved, a Quorum of the OSE Board of Directors shall function towards conflict resolution closure. To invoke the OSE Board, the ED must be contacted in writing by the grieving party - stating the nature of the grievance and the remedy sought. A special meeting must be held by a quorum of the Board as soon as quorum is established. Parties to the conflict shall submit themselves to a request for further information by the Board, and must respond to any requests within a 24 hour period. The Parties shall submit their information in writing, or by phone, or in person as directed by the Board. Decisions of the Board are binding and final.
  6. Binding Arbitration. If the party seeking closure chooses Binding Arbitration, the formal Binding Arbitration process is invoked. In this case, both parties cover the costs involved in a 50/50 share.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Conflict_Resolution&oldid=173469"