Mediation Case Study: Under the Microscope

EU Mediation's case studies aim to explore the types of disputes that mediation can work well for, particularly within multinational organisations based across mainland Europe. They are all based on real-life cases that our mediators have carried out.

This second entry looks at a dispute between Niko and Phillipe.

Names and specific details have been changed for confidentiality and privacy purposes.


The Backstory

Niko and Phillipe both work in a laboratory for a large multinational organisation in Germany. Their work is concerned with pan-European disease control. Niko is Phillipe’s manager within a team of nine scientists. In recent months there have been some concerns over Phillipe’s performance. For a while, he had some difficult family issues going on at home, and Niko was prepared to make allowances and give him the benefit of the doubt during this time. But in recent months, she has needed to speak to him repeatedly about quality issues, timekeeping, cleanliness in their sterile lab, and the standard of his reports.

Philippe felt picked on by Niko, so she decided to conduct a more formal performance review to demonstrate that she was being consistent. Philippe was quite unco-operative throughout the review, which concluded with some recommendations for training and ongoing mentoring. Philippe was unhappy with the outcome from the review and with Niko’s manner throughout the process. He has since been in conflict with Niko: working to rule, being surly and uncommunicative, rolling his eyes and barely contributing in meetings.

Niko has had to spend time with Philippe, trying to address things between them. As a result, Philippe now feels over-scrutinised and micromanaged. He has spoken to HR about entering a grievance, and HR has proposed they should instead try mediation first, before beginning anything more formal.


The Mediation

Initially, Philippe was reluctant to take part in mediation. He instead wanted Niko to be in trouble and ultimately for her to be disciplined. In the end, he agreed to meet the mediator for his initial session. Confidentiality was discussed and agreed, and Philippe had some time to tell the mediator about events from his point of view: how he felt over-scrutinised and singled out, and how Niko seemed to relish the opportunity to put him ‘under the microscope’ through the performance process.

Niko welcomed the opportunity of mediation to begin to try and mend her relationship with Philippe. She told the mediator in her initial session that, although she was able to make allowances for people who have personal issues going on, the lab’s work is safety-critical and quite risky, and she has to maintain a high standard of performance. For her, the top priority has to be ensuring that the job is done well and accurately.

In the build-up to the joint mediation session, there needed to be some boundary-setting to give the mediation the best chance of success. Philippe had asked for the session to be recorded, and that he could have someone with him. Neither of these requests were granted and, eventually, with some encouragement from HR, Philippe agreed to go ahead.

The joint session began as normal with both taking some time to give their own account of events and, importantly, what they wanted to be different about the working relationship. Philippe had to be asked repeatedly to allow Niko to speak, as he was inclined to interrupt her frequently. Once he was encouraged to listen to what she had to say, he was quite surprised by how conciliatory she was being in the session. They were then encouraged to have some dialogue about the impact of one another’s conduct: Philippe became quite distressed when talking about aspects of his home life and how he felt Niko had added to his stress; Niko was taken aback at just how upset Philippe was, and at what a difficult time he had been having.

Niko emphasised that she just wanted Philippe to be a good and productive member of the team, and that she would happily support him to get back to a high standard of performance. She acknowledged that she could try and be more person-centred, and less focussed on targets and deadlines. Philippe emphasised that he too wanted to do a great job, but that the constant scrutiny and checking up were just making him more nervous and under-confident, at a time when what he needed were encouragement and support. He wanted to be helped to improve his performance, and just wished that Niko could soften a little, and appreciate that different people need managing in different ways.


The Conclusion

At the end of the afternoon’s session, the two were helped to write up a brief agreement about how things would be different from this point: acknowledging both people’s wishes for how the relationship should change, agreeing the degree of scrutiny and reporting that would be acceptable to both, affirming the need for high standards in the work, and planning how they should both act to get things back on track if communication were to break down again. They agreed to share their agreement with HR, although the content of their discussions remained confidential.

The pair were followed up by the mediator after six weeks, and the agreement was found to be holding up between them. Philippe felt no further need to enter a grievance, and the two were both happy that a good enough relationship had been restored between them.


Get in touch

If you have a similar issue within your organisation, or if you would like some advice on whether our workplace mediation service would be suitable, please get in touch with our team on hello@eumediation.net. Alternatively, you can submit a contact form here.