About this page
These simplified case studies show a small sample across a range of interventions by Julian Evans. These interventions use a mixture of mediation, facilitation, coaching, mentoring and negotiation, separately or intermingled. They are described in a way that masks identification of the individuals and companies involved although the essentials of each case remain correct.
Ordering of the case studies
SECTION 1 - TOP MANAGEMENT CASES
Support for corporate CEO – over a period of years, and on many occasions, Julian supported this particular CEO in a wide range of matters, discussing through issues, options and implications, challenging assumptions and approaches and considering creative solutions. Matters covered included total organisational restructure, the future of particular divisions, future management arrangements, making savings and where the axe might fall, and introduction of a leadership development programme to arrest some poor management cultures and raise performance. The most significant period of time was when the CEO needed to introduce major structural changes to pay and benefits across the organisation. This caused a stir and much shuttle diplomacy, negotiation and mediation was undertaken between the staff, union executive and management in a highly charged atmosphere. Support was provided to get the package as ‘right’ as possible so it would stand the best chance of being approved by the Personnel Board and enable a smoother passage through a series of big staff consultation/information-giving exercises. This was a success.
Board and shareholder dispute – this case had already been ‘brewing’ for several years before Julian’s intervention. It was all about the running of the company with a large number of significant differences of opinion over how this should best be done – this gave rise to behaviours which then led to legal action (the legal aspects were just the tip of the iceberg). It had already been before a judge and ‘resolved’, came back to the same judge a year later who then referred it to mediation as he considered the issues to be too complex and far-reaching to be satisfactorily dealt with at court. He did not expect mediation would be successful, but wanted to try it. Julian dealt with the parties and their lawyers with a combination of face-to-face mediation and then follow-up mediation by phone and email. The parties made good progress with urgent issues resolved at the end of the face-to-face stage, but were unable to come to a comprehensive settlement. Not wanting to give up, Julian offered to give a wide-ranging semi-arbitrated ‘judgement’ taking into account the legal, business and interpersonal aspects which needed to be addressed together, something a court couldn’t do holistically. This offer was taken up and the document was later signed by the parties.
New director reorganising his 100-person department – this newly appointed director decided to undertake a major reorganisation of his new department. After causing significant upset with his first proposal, he talked through different options and issues with Julian so he could revise it and create a better solution which would meet his business objectives but in a way that minimised staff resistance and maximised ‘buy-in’ to the new concepts of doing business. This was achieved.
Team trouble for corporate head of function – one of the teams which this business unit head was responsible for (important customer-facing team) developed significant problems due to some key staff not being well suited to their role which then led to poor working practices, dysfunctional relationships between staff and management, poor morale and heightened sickness absence. Over a period of several months, Julian worked with the head of function, coaching her on the issues of greatest concern, her own management style, and covering options for resolution from her perspective. During this time, he also facilitated discussion within the team to get a better understanding of the issues and mediated a way forward. The necessary changes were implemented – roles, practices and attitudes – and productivity gains resulted.
Performance and behaviour issues with corporate head of function – this head of function managed in a style that could be abrasive and, eventually, someone raised a grievance about it. The outcome of this was disciplinary action which he took exception to, but sought help. Julian provided this, using his usual initial approach, which is to try and holistically resolve an issue rather than simply to resist it, so he coached the person, trying to help him modify his behaviour to fit in with the organisational expectations. Julian also spoke with the ‘prosecuting’ director to try and aid resolution from that side too, to help the head of function along. For restorative mediation to work, both sides need to desire a shared solution, but the head of function didn’t, wanting to ‘win’ at all costs even though this would have been self-destructive. Consequently, Julian moved into ‘business divorce’ mode and facilitated a deal for him to quickly leave the organisation – this was what both sides wanted really. Note: Julian could have ‘turned around’ this head of function had he been invited to coach him at an earlier stage.
Breach of trust and dismissal of CEO – this dispute concerned allegations of dishonesty and lack of disclosure, including financial impropriety between him, the company he was acting as CEO for, and another company. This amounted to a breach of trust with his board - they lost confidence in him and terminated the management services contract. The key issues were resolved at mediation in one day with some of the finer details to be resolved by the parties later, on their own. The solicitors for each side estimated that settlement saved a substantial six-figure sum by not having to pursue and defend the claim leading up to a two-week trial about a year later. This not only saved money, but a great deal of management time, disruption and anxiety, enabling all parties to get on with their lives and businesses.
Merger of legal practices – Julian spent some time with the head of a legal practice talking through the issues surrounding the intention to merge with another legal practice, notably on the people side of things. This included working practices, staff relocation issues, pay and conditions and the like, all with a view to making the process as smooth as possible. This is what happened and the merger was a success, leading to service efficiencies and savings.
SECTION 2 - GENERAL MANAGEMENT CASES
Employment Tribunal case - whilst undertaking another major long-term mediation job within a FTSE listed firm, Julian was 'pulled off' to undertake this isolated problem. A member of staff was sufficiently disgruntled by the treatment she had received that her union put in an ET claim. After liaising with the solicitors on both sides by phone and getting their 'take' of the situation, Julian proceeded to conduct a swift mediation which was over in less than three hours. It started with great acrimony and tears, but by the end of it the member of staff and manager shook hands and hugged with tears of joy. The financial claim was completely dropped and a better solution agreed where both sides genuinely benefited quite a lot. Several months later, things were still going very well.
Contractual changes – Julian was asked to mediate a dispute over contractual changes between a small group of managers and their head of function. It was over the loss of flexitime and overtime with new shift patterns and this was settled quickly in a series of short meetings.
Stress at work – a team of professionals which had a pressured regulatory role got a new manager. Additional workload, coupled with pressures which came with a new management style, led to overbearing stress and higher sickness absences. Julian was asked to help and he individually spoke with key team members and the manager to build up a picture of what was going on. This led to further mediation discussions and coaching which in turn led to new understandings and improvements in behaviour over a period of time. Julian was asked to deal with other stress and bullying issues in the same organisation and subsequently was on an organisational-wide stress management group.
Big changes to working practices – the managers of a sizeable team of people who worked outdoors wanted to introduce significant changes to their working practices, shift patterns, supervision and more. This met with stiff resistance, not only because of concerns as to its workability, but also because of likely redundancies. The consultation period was carried out in a tense and emotional atmosphere, heightened by one suspension and another disciplinary case. Julian was asked to help deal with the situation, mediating between the different levels of management involved and the staff with their supervisors. This was undertaken over a period of time and involved coaching of individual staff and managers to help them in their approach to the situation. The proposals were helpfully modified as a result (yet retaining the intended management outcome), and some staff took voluntary redundancy. Tribunals had been threatened but were avoided. The revised team bedded in over a period of months with minor interventions to help this process along.
SECTION 3 - BUSINESS TO BUSINESS/CONSUMER CASES
Building dispute – this case concerned the conversion of a large building to another use. The issues in dispute were the adequacy of the workmanship (specification and contractual issues), who should ultimately pay for the necessary remedial works and compensation for delay and inconvenience. It was quite a technically complex case and the first half of the day was spent with the parties trying to win their cause using technical and legal arguments. However, it was not until they were prepared to look at things commercially, ‘in the round’, that real progress was made. The whole case was resolved by wrapping up all the issues into one payment from the contractor to the building owner.
Note: Julian has dealt with many other construction disputes over quality of work, interpretation of drawings, contractual terms and payments etc, the most financially significant being a £500,000 extra payment claim on a £1,000,000 civil engineering contract which was satisfactorily resolved through Julian negotiating (not as a mediator) with the well-known national construction firm without having to invoke the arbitration clause in the ICE contract - only a relatively small sum was involved in the end for reasonable extras which could be justified.
Rural business dispute – Julian was asked to mediate a dispute where the two parties had refused to speak with each other for years, and there was some antagonism between the solicitors too, through whom they communicated. Even at the brief opening session of the mediation, they refused to meet, which is rare (one of the solicitors told Julian afterwards that he believed that the case was ‘unresolvable’). They were on their way to court with litigation at an advanced stage. The case concerned a cocktail of environmental and contractual issues between farming interests. Julian quickly got to the key issues underlying the positions they were taking, clarified interpersonal misunderstandings and removed a fundamental legal misunderstanding too, which had created a log-jam to settlement. In less than one day, they had signed an agreement which included resolution of issues going well beyond what the court could have ruled on. The parties even signed the agreement in the same room and shook hands.
Boundary and property dispute – sometimes it is seemingly small matters which can prove to be the most difficult to deal with, as parties dig ever deeper trenches. This case basically involved an unclear boundary line between properties and the ownership of adjacent land. However, it also involved a string of tit-for-tat behaviours between the parties due to their inability to resolve the basic issues and, as a result, litigation was well advanced. Bad feeling was very tangible and the property solicitor representing several of the parties was not at all confident settlement was possible in these circumstances. However, in the small hours of the next morning, a mediated settlement was reached, with compensation payment involved, an agreed boundary line, understanding reached over the land ownership, and also including many non-legal matters, to do with behaviours and similar, which the court could not have dealt with as well as the substantive legal issues.
Nuisance dispute – this case involved the 'misuse' of an open space area which was near to several houses and this caused considerable annoyance to the residents concerned. Julian was given the results of a local public consultation exercise concerning this matter and was asked to find a solution which had eluded others due to the competing views, concerns and demands. He had meetings with and facilitated discussion between the housing association (who owned some of the nearby properties), their tenants, private house owners, local politicians, police, corporate lawyers and the local authority as landowner, as maintainer of the open spaces and as Local Planning Authority. Flowing from these conversations, he initially negotiated and then mediated a solution acceptable to all, over a period of time. This involved the local authority selling the open space to the housing association to build more houses on, providing ‘hanging out’ facilities for youths in a more appropriate place nearby and compensating for the loss of green space by undertaking local environmental enhancements (to make the locality more appealing to residents), and upgrading of another nearby open space. This was a self-funded solution which was liked by the various parties.