Conciliationis is an additional step proposed in the dispute resolution process.
The conciliator meets with the parties separately at a so-called pre-caucus. The purpose is to help each party release their pent up concerns enough to enable them to gain a broader perspective on the dispute.
The parties then meet together at a joint session, where they discuss directly with each other instead of through a mediator.
The conciliator is there to help the parties take responsibility for managing their own conflict, rather than to judge between the merits of the position of one party or the other.
The term 24/7 refers to something that is available all the time – 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It was first used in print in the November 1983 edition of Sports Illustrated: “Jerry (Ice) Reynolds, one of the SEC’s two best freshmen by the end of last season, calls his jump shot ’24-7-365′, because ‘It’s good 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year’.”
These days, the term 24/7 is largely used in the business world, especially for customer relations departments. Any business or service that is “24/7” is available for use at any time on any day of the week. In addition, in order to appear more “customer friendly,” to convenience, and sell better, many American businesses, organizations, projects, and books have even started including “24/7” in their name. Some examples include: 24/7 Wall St., America 24/7, and 24/7 Prayer International.
This was not the first time that stores used their opening hours in their names to attract customers. In 1946, the convenience store “Toe’m Store” changed its name to “7-Eleven” in order to reflect its new, unusually long hours – 7am to 11pm. 7-Eleven was also the first convenience store to stay open 24 hours on weekends. It did this in order to accommodate students at a local university.
Additionally, there is a website, 24-7stores(dot)com, which includes a store locator, so that people can find 24/7 stores near them, anywhere in the U.S.
The German State of Thüringen (Thuringia) analyzed aspects of its judicial system. It recommended that magistrates (judges) hold separate hearings with the parties in conflict. Separate hearings are considered to be “besonders hilfreich” – especially helpful.
Many attorneys were quoted praising the advantages of separate hearings: “loose, relaxed atmosphere; room to discuss matters other than the conflict itself; each side feels they are taken seriiously; an opportunity to present one’s viewpoint without the other party attacking it; creates a constructive communication climate.”
One of the magistrates underscored the value of holding separate hearings: “For me the most important part of the mediation is the hearing with each party separately. Points are made which are very important to the respective conflict party, points which helped me to better understand the nature of the conflict and which led us to a breakthrough.”
In 1893, the case Nix v.s. Hedden found its way to the American Supreme Court. In this case, John Nix, John W. Nix, and Frank W. Nix filed a suit against Edward Hedden, a collector at the Port of New York, who had charged them a vegetable tax on their imported tomatoes.
The Nixes argued that, because a tomato is, botanically speaking, a fruit, the vegetable tax shouldn’t have applied.
At the trial, dictionary definitions were ignored, because, according to the Court, “dictionaries are admitted, not as evidence, but only as aids to the memory and understanding of the court.”
Instead, the Court looked at such things as the “ordinary meaning” of the words “fruit” and “vegetable” and precedent. In 1889, the case Robertson v. Salomon had established that, although technically white beans were seeds, they were eaten like vegetables instead of planted, so they should be taxed as a vegetable.
Ultimately, the court decided that a tomato should be taxed as a vegetable. The opinion of the court read: “Botanically speaking, tomatoes are the fruit of a vine, just as are cucumbers, squashes, beans, and peas.
But in the common language of the people, whether sellers or consumers of provisions, all these are vegetables which are grown in kitchen gardens, and which, whether eaten cooked or raw, are, like potatoes, carrots, parsnips, turnips, beets, cauliflower, cabbage, celery, and lettuce, usually served at dinner in, with, or after the soup, fish, or meats which constitute the principal part of the repast, and not, like fruits generally, as dessert.”
In 1992, 79 year old Stella Liebeck bought a cup of coffee from a McDonald’s in New Mexico, spilled it on her lap, suffered multiple third-degree burns, and required skin grafts on her inner thighs and elsewhere. She subsequently sued McDonald’s.
Although the jury found Liebeck to be partly responsible for her injuries, based on evidence that McDonald’s coffee was unreasonably hot and had caused other injuries in the past, the jury decided to award Stella the equivalent of two days’ worth of coffee sales revenue for the entire restaurant chain. Some of the evidence presented at the trial includes:
1) An engineer from the University of Texas and the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation both testified that the risk of harm from the coffee was unacceptable.
2) An expert witness testified that the number of burns the coffee caused was insignificant compared to the number of cups of coffee sold every year.
3) A McDonald’s quality assurance manager testified that the coffee at the serving temperature was not fit for consumption because it would burn the throat.
4) After several other similar lawsuits, McDonald’s knew about the risk of serious burns from its coffee, but did not warn customers of the risk.
Short-, mid-, long-term. Fast, faster, fastest. We know that Americans and Germans define those terms differently. So it is when resolving a conflict.
Germans seek lasting, best practice-like, resolutions. This requires more time upfront, but saves time by reducing the chances that the same or similar conflict arises. Should it arrive, the team need only refer back to the best practice resolution.
Americans seek pragmatic resolutions. Often “down and dirty”, neither elegant nor perfect, they are fast in order to maintain forward movement and team cohesion.
Americans rarely seek a best practice resolution to a given conflict. From their experience, every situation is unique. The context, the content, the people involved, the ramifications, may be similar, but are not the same. Resolution is not a matter of referring to a manual, a process description or an organizational chart.
During a hearing, called by their boss, Americans are careful, factual, cooperative. Most importantly they are discreet. Anger, impatience, any lack of self control is considered to be unprofessional.
The boss listens carefully to what each party to the conflict claims. In a formal hearing, within the legal system, parties providing testimony first swear that they will provide „the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.“
The consequences for lying – perjury – are serious: a felony which can lead to a prison sentence for up to five years.
Perjury: the voluntary violation of an oath or vow either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath; false swearing.
American managers take very seriously their obligation, duty, responsibility to resolve conflicts within their organizations. Any attempt by a conflict party to manipulate that process is punished quickly and severely.
There are numerous cases brought to court in America each year. Some of these involve suspects who wish to clarify their misdeeds amongst public discourse. This is particularly prevalent in the current case regarding the suspect of the Boston Marathon Bombings.
The suspect in the case pleaded not guilty although his defense lawyer admits “it was him.” This brings about the right to appear in court to argue your side of the story and expect a fair hearing followed by a fair trial.
In 2012, American business magazine Forbes published an article that lists several keys to dealing with workplace conflict. In the article, the author suggests that every business leader should adhere to the principle “don’t fear conflict; embrace it – it’s your job.”
The article also recommends that every conflict should be resolved quickly, and, if possible, business leaders should identify people who are likely to get into conflicts and stage pre-conflict interventions with everyone who seems likely to become involved.
Another article from About Money lists actions to avoid when resolving workplace conflicts. The top two points on the list advise leaders not to avoid conflict and not to meet separately with the people in conflict. Most articles from American business journals include similar advice.
“A fair hearing is a judicial proceeding that is conducted in such a manner as to conform to fundamental concepts of justice and equality.
A fair hearing means that an individual will have an opportunity to present evidence to support his or her case and to discover what evidence exists against him or her . . . . during which time he or she may offer evidence, cross-examine opposition witnesses, and offer a defense.”
In criminal law, when an individual is arrested, a fair hearing means the right to be notified of the charge being brought against him or her and the chance to meet that charge.