SlideShare una empresa de Scribd logo
1 de 11
Descargar para leer sin conexión
…Negotiate Better Results!
Corporate Social Responsibility, Effective Grievance
Mechanisms, and Stakeholders Engagement Strategies
as Competitive Advantage
By Luis E. Oré, Consensus Building, Negotiation & Relationship Management Consultant
Association for Conflict Resolution’s International Section, Chair 2010-2011

Many think that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is about the way in which companies
decide to allocate profits; however, it is not about philanthropy, it is about how companies
are managed. For some, CSR is about protecting human rights and observing fair labor
normative standards; for others, the main concern deals with environmental and social
concerns. For those in the public sector, CSR deals with the concept of sustainable
development. Others look at CSR as initiatives to reduce or eliminate the social deficit
associated with globalization. Regardless of how organizations frame CSR, it is applicable to
all types of businesses; regardless of the business’ size, there is always room for
improvement. In fact, companies that implement a set of best practices and policies to
manage strategically their impacts and externalities are more likely to endure than those
that do not. It’s not uncommon to find unsatisfied corporate’ stakeholders, whether they
are internal stakeholders (for example, workers and employees) or external stakeholders
(for examples, local communities), many speak up and raise their voices about their
grievances, concerns, worries, aspirations, and other motivation, and some stakeholders
express their grievances, concerns and interests “behind-the–scenes” or what some may
say under the surface through “informal means” – perhaps building up a sense of
dissatisfaction or even anger. Stakeholders may even get together and protest in front of
facilities or participate in rallies in public squares and streets. Some express their concerns
regarding the processes and procedures that may see as ineffective to handle those
grievances and concerns.

Dealing with Internal Stakeholders & Grievance Mechanisms
When we consider internal stakeholders such as workers dealing with peers and
supervisors and diverse challenging situations they may have at their workplace, workers
do not have many alternatives to address their concerns. Many realize that the effects of
conflict in the workplace are widespread and costly. In the U.S. approximately, 24 to 60
_____________________________________________________________________________________
* Luis E. Oré is director and senior consultant with ORASI Consulting Group Inc., a training and development
consulting firm specializing in negotiation, consensus building, relationship management, and conflict prevention.
Oré assists businesses with cross-cultural and international negotiations, strategic alliances, organizational
changes, dispute resolution system design, and foreign direct investment, especially between the United States of
America and Latin-American countries. Oré has Masters of Arts degree in conflict management and in
organizational communication, a J.D. from the University of Lima (Peru), and extensive training in negotiation and
conflict management from CMI International Group, Western Kentucky University, Lipscomb University, and the
Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School. Luis Oré serves as Chair of the Association for Conflict Resolution’s
International Section, collaborates with the Consensus Building Institute and diverse committees with the American
Bar Association, he can be contacted directly via email: luis.ore@orasicg.com



                                                                                               www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
percent of management time and energy is spent dealing with anger, which leads to
decreased productivity, increased stress among employees, hampered performance, high
turnover rate, absenteeism, and at its worst, violence and even death. In fact, conflict is a
growing industry and distracts us from our purpose, whatever it may be. Many say “we
need to work together” but in fact most do not have the skills to do it effectively. If teams or
units run into a conflicting situation they may not know how to handle it properly and their
members will not accomplish the results they are aiming to reach. When organizations
involve legal counsel or outside attorneys to deal with conflicting situations, it is most
likely that they will accomplish high skyrocketing legal bills. Besides time, energy, and
resource consumption, there are other challenges that workplace differences and conflicts
bring about. Conflict handling processes and procedures affect employees’ satisfaction,
employees’ moral, and employees’ turnover rates, and even the way they handle their own
differences.

When organizational members, whether employees, staff or management deal with
conflicting situations they don’t have many alternatives to deal with those challenges and
concerns. If one adds the complexity of cross-cultural factors that most organizations are
exposed to, things get worst. When dealing with organizational or workplace conflict and
employee-management issues and relations, most organizations use an open-door policy or
a formal grievance procedure for handling employees concerns with an adjudicating rights
approach (rights-based approach) and some forward thinking organizations use some
limited alternative dispute resolution procedures such as internal mediation to deal with
some of these challenges. These are some concerns:

Concerns about Open Door Policy: Besides having a great opportunity to help employees
deal with their conflicts at the closest level to the issue, an open door policy, sometimes can
lead to frustrating situations because decisions might be made based on an adversarial
approach of what is right. A rights-based approach might bring about win-lose situations
that at times can escalate conflicts. Sometimes a supervisor or the appropriate person who
assists the employee in resolving an issue is not equipped or trained with proper problem-
solving and conflict management skills. Diversity is also an issue that affects how people
deal with differences; cultural awareness and competence dealing with conflict should also
be considered for training.

Concerns about Rights-Based Procedure, Formal Grievance Procedures and
Adjudicating Rights Approach: “The most common characteristic of people (employees)
who have a concern or grievance is that they just wish their problems would go away –
they ‘do not want any process.’ People with concerns and complaints fear loss of privacy
and respect with supervisors, coworkers, even families. Sometimes, people with complaints
fear they do not have enough evidence to prevail in a formal investigatory procedure.
Sometimes they value the relationship they have with the reason they see as the source of
their problem, and fear this relationship (and other relationships) will be placed at risk if
they file a grievance. Considering workplace conflicts, many complainants are
simultaneously uncomfortable about doing nothing, uncomfortable about taking any kind

                                                                                www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
of action on their concerns, and angry if they feel either they must do something or have to
quit. In general, from experience and mounts of research, people (employees) who want to
raise a concern or complaint overwhelming want different options to address their issues,
and prefer their own choice of options when appropriate.

Of course, there are situations and problems, such as criminal behavior, which require
formal procedures. However, there are lots of reasons why people don’t want to use these
formal procedures. For instance, people with concerns and complaints fear loss of privacy
and respect with supervisors, coworkers, even families. Sometimes, people with complaints
may fear they do not have enough evidence to prevail in a formal investigatory procedure.
Sometimes they value the relationship they have with the reason they see as the source of
the problem, and the relationships they have inside and outside the workplace, and fear
these relationships will be placed at risk if they file a grievance. People just want the
problem to stop.

Concerns about a Limited Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure: Sometimes
organizations decide to use alternative dispute resolution procedures but many times these
procedures are utilized for a short list of issues and most of the times these procedures are
not in place as a first step in grievance processes. If a limited alternative dispute resolution
procedure for a closed list of few issues is used after a right-based approach has been
completed, parties involved in a conflict will likely have battle mind-sets and will dig into
their positions which will make this dispute resolution process less efficient. It may be too
late to turn grievances and employees concerns to an efficient process such as mediation.

Employees just want the problem to stop. What about your organization differences-
handling approaches, conflict-management procedures, dispute resolution mechanisms
and policies for dealing with conflict? How are they working for you? How are the
organization’s human resources and legal procedures helping you reduce the costs and
consequences of conflict? How is the organizational members’ diversity and cross-cultural
differences handling approaches affecting your work and organizational performance?
How is your current conflict management system helping your organization to engage
employees, reduce expenses and risk, and increase productivity?

Regardless of unionized or nonunionized organizations, employees look of effective ways
for dealing with their challenges. In a Gallup survey of attitudes toward union participation,
90% of the respondents agree that employees should have some type of organization for
discussion and resolving concerns with their employees. As Kochan and Osterman (1994)
affirm that, “this results suggests that the vast majority of Americans recognize the need
for effective employee voice at the workplace, even if some question the effectiveness of
traditional unions as the instrument of this voice (…) America currently suffers from a
“representation gap” in the labor force and in the American workplaces” (p.143-144).
Interestingly, a survey conducted by Price Waterhouse and Cornell’s PERC Institute on
Conflict resolution of over 530 corporation in the fortune 1000 category revealed that 90%
of respondents view alternative dispute resolution as a critical cost-control technique.

                                                                                www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
Others mention that cooptation that have developed collaborative conflict management
systems report significant litigation costs savings, for instance, Brown & Root reported an
80% reduction in outside litigation costs, Motorola reported a 75% reduction over a period
of six years, and NCR reported a 50% reduction and a drop of pending lawsuits from 263 in
1984 to 28 in 1993.

As Kochan and Osterman assert “Achieving competitiveness at high standards of living
requires a high rate of growth in productivity, product innovation, and adaptability to
changing markets. This in turn requires corporate strategies that give high priority to
developing and fully utilizing the skills of the work force.” (1994, p.6) There is no doubt
that effective internal mechanisms for dealing with internal challenges, differences and
disputes as part of a corporate social responsibility strategy will foster a better work
environment, a better place in which organizational member can produce, innovate and
adapt to change.

Dealing with External Stakeholders & Grievance Mechanisms
When we consider external stakeholders (such as host communities) dealing with
companies developing investment projects (such as oil, gas, mining, energy, hydroelectric,
dam, infrastructure, agro-industry) in their communities and the interests, concerns or
fears they may have, many times community members tend to organize protests against
companies trying to implement investment projects. Stakeholders may engage in a “legal
fight” using the legal system, administrative procedures or the court system to block the
development or implementation of projects. Communities may also try to engage in direct
talk with companies however many times these conversations are approached by multiple
parties with an adversarial mindset or an antagonistic framework which result in impasses
and conversations’ break down.

Many stakeholders and local communities are demanding companies to manage the social
and environmental impacts of their operations. Traditional public relation and adversarial
responses, as well as the lack of strategic capacity to constructively engage stakeholders
concerns may leave companies vulnerable not only to legal and reputational risks but also
to social risk and social conflict which can prevent companies from operating efficiently
and incurring significant losses. Incorporating CSR practices into management of
operations may serve to mitigate and reduce those risks. It’s key to manage social risks.

It is well-known that companies that do good will do better, better at creating shareholders
value and better at avoiding conflicting confrontations with stakeholders. Leading and
forward thinking companies have realized that by doing good they do better, consequently
several multinational mining and other extractive industry companies have voluntarily
engaged in standard setting initiatives to manage the social and environmental dimensions
of their operations. This is also in alignment with the Environmental and Social Standards
of (IFC), which we know that many development projects need to comply with the
Environmental and Social Standards of the International Financial Company (IFC), an
institution of the World Bank Group that is responsible for transactions with the private

                                                                             www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
sector; as well as the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) Environmental and Social
Standards, the Equator Principles (Financial industry standard for managing social and
environmental risk in project financing) and the ISO 26000 Social Responsibility Standards.
For instance, World Bank’s International Financial Company requires that all projects with
potential significant adverse social or environmental impact (Category A) and some
projects with potential limited adverse social or environmental impacts (Category B)
include grievance mechanisms as part of its management system. This is crucial because
foreign investors can include effective grievance mechanisms, not only rights-based
approaches but also interest-based approaches, which can produce more sustainable and
positive results and strengthen working relationships with diverse stakeholders.

Stakeholders will continue scrutinizing companies operations and spotlight their impacts.
If companies don’t engage stakeholders concerns they may develop reputational damage
and losses. Whether company operations are related to hydroelectric power and
infrastructure development in the Amazon jungle or extractive industry dealing with oil,
gas, or mining in the Andean region, Conflict Resolution practitioners and CSR Practitioners
have to advise the company and community to engage constructively with one another to
prevent conflict and resolve crisis. Constructive engagement should consist of economic,
environmental and social costs and benefits of the project, and deliberating mutual gains
outcomes integrating the interests and concerns of companies and stakeholders.
Companies may conduct conflict prevention due diligence, social risk and stakeholders
assessment, set standards initiatives, develop consensus building strategies, consult with
affected communities, obtain communities consent before initiating operation or obtaining
a social license. Thinking through what is important for companies’ endurance, long-term
benefits, and competitive advantage, organizations of all sizes should design and
implement stakeholders’ engagement strategic systems, processes and procedures.

What can we do about dealing with stakeholder grievances? Can we do better? Would it be
possible engaging stakeholders in a more positive fashion? If so, how do we accomplish
this?

Yes. It can be done. Companies can build winning organizations to last. Companies and
organizations can help strengthening organizational members and stakeholder capacity to
address their concerns in a more positive and constructive way. Companies and
organizations can engage their stakeholders to design, develop and implement more
effective mechanisms and systems for dealing with stakeholders’ grievances and concerns.
They can engage and build dispute resolution systems. Effective dispute resolution systems
will retain and attract top talent, provide positive environment, improve corporate-
community relations, increase brand benefits by promoting reputation for being
responsible, and create a competitive advantage that allows them to differentiate
themselves from the competition in an economy with shrinking markets shares and
eroding profit margins.




                                                                             www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
Designing Effective Grievance Mechanisms and Dispute Resolution Systems as a
Stakeholders Engagement and CSR Strategy part of the Organizational Management
System
As with any organizational change effort, it will require hard work and commitment, but
most importantly it needs stakeholder engagement and ownership. As Jim Sebenius put it,
“The difference between successful and unsuccessful change efforts is the quality of the
negotiations that shape them. Without negotiation, you cannot get genuine agreement, and
without agreement, sustainable change is impossible. Negotiation is a means of advancing
the full set of your interests by jointly decided action. Effective negotiation leads to optimal
solutions and winning coalitions.” (Sebenius,1995).

A Dispute Resolution System is a coordinated set of processes or mechanisms that interact
with each other to prevent, manage, and/or resolve disputes, conflicts and grievances. The
design of a dispute resolution system would imply an intentional effort to harness
resources, processes, and capabilities to achieve a set of specified objectives for the dispute
resolution system. Based on Ury, Brett and Goldberg work (1993) a conflict management
big picture would show three different approaches to resolving disputes:
     Reconciling interests: trying to meet the needs, concerns, desires, and fears –things
        that one cares about or wants. (Interest-base approach)
     Adjudicating rights: looking to some independent standard with perceived
        legitimacy to vindicate who is “right” or “correct”. (Right-base approach)
     Using power: using one’s leverage to force or coerce someone to do something.
        (Power-base approach)

In this sense, an effective dispute resolution system suggests that most disputes should be
handled with an Interest-base approach, when this approach does not resolve the matter at
hand, disputing parties should try to resolve their differences through a Right-base
approach, and less conflicting situations should be addressed with Power-base approaches.
In general, an effective conflict resolution process clarifies the disputing parties’ interests,
builds a good working relationship, generates good mutual gains options, is perceived as
legitimate, is cognizant of the parties’ procedural alternatives, improves communication
and leads to wise commitments. Bordone, R. (2008) asserts that the following are the steps
for designing a system:
    (1) Conduct a conflict or stakeholder assessment.
    (2) Ascertain system objectives and establish priorities among them.
    (3) Develop the new system, working in concert with relevant stakeholders.
    (4) Implement the system, building in sufficient education and training along the way.
    (5) Evaluate the system and modify in accord with changing needs and objectives of the
        organizational/institutional stakeholders.

Before engaging in the dispute resolution design effort, an organization and its leadership
need to seriously consider what they really want and the reasoning that explains their
interests. It may be helpful trying to answer the question: What do they want and why this
is important to them? What’s the purpose? All initiatives, strategies or plans intended to

                                                                                www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
implement new processes and procedures which can introduce organizational change will
likely run into organizational resistance. According to Decaro (1996) before deciding to
either implement or propose a strategy for an organizational change it is required to
analyze the situation. It is necessary to analyze what the current situation is, what the
desired state is, and what issues could interfere with the organizational change. Among
those possible interferences, a crucial one is to find out if there is a challenge related to the
fact that the organization does not want to change or part of it wants to change while the
other part does not. Maybe some organizational members want to change but others not.
Do they want to change? If organizational members do not want to change it will be
extremely difficult to change, they will resist to the change. Therefore, it is important to
unveil the interests, issues, and beliefs of these members that resist the change. Decaro
(1996) argues that one thing that reveals existing interests, issues, values and beliefs in
conflict is the inconsistency of the messages, especially between what it is said and what it
is done, or between what it is said and done in a moment and what it is said in another
moment but with similar circumstance. When messages are inconsistent, two positions of
the same entity express its thoughts, and then confusion is generated. The key is to listen to
and allow organizational members to express the ideas or interests that provoke their
behavior. Thus, it is important to unveil what causes those behaviors. It is crucial to have a
shared understanding and know what the organization and individuals want and what
their purpose is.

Continuing with the steps for designing a system, the goals and objectives of an stakeholder
assessment are: to identify stakeholder; to understand stakeholders interests (understood
as the motivation underlying their positions including aspiration, wishes, hopes, desires,
expectations, concerns, fears, worries, and anything that might be at stake); to map
relationships and connections between stakeholders; and to map the nature of the disputes
in or with the organization. Considering this last objective, it is important to highlight that
it is crucial to clearly understand what the disputes are about, how the disputes are
handled and why the disputes are handle that way.

Several authors make emphasis on the principles for design and implementation; we have,
for instance, the Six Principles of Dispute Systems Design: 1) Put the focus on interests. 2)
Build in “loop-backs” to negotiation. 3) Provide low-cost rights and power backups. 4)
Build in consultation before, feedback after. 5) Arrange procedures in a low-to-high-cost
sequence. 6) Provide the necessary motivation, skills, and resources.” (Ury, Brett, &
Goldberg, 1993, p.41-64), and the Six Principles for Guiding Design Architecture: 1)
Develop guidelines for whether ADR is appropriate. 2) Tailor the ADR process to particular
problem. 3) Build in preventive methods of ADR. 4) Make sure that disputants have the
necessary knowledge and skill to choose and use ADR. 5) Create ADR systems that are
simple to use and easy to access and that resolve disputes early, at the lowest
organizational level, with the least bureaucracy. 6) Allow disputants to retain maximum
control over choice of ADR method and selection of neutral whenever possible.
(Constantino & Merchant, 1996, p.120-121).



                                                                                 www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
An important step in process design is deciding who should be involved in the process, who
should be part of this dispute resolution system design effort? To begin a stakeholders’
assessment, the right people need to be identified, who the stakeholders might be. The
organizational leadership needs to inquire who of these following people may be: Who are
the stakeholders with formal power to make a decision? Who are the stakeholders with the
power to block a decision? Who are the stakeholders affected by a decision? Who are the
stakeholders or people with relevant information or expertise?

In order to begin the stakeholders’ assessment, the organization’s leadership needs to
introduce the consultant, facilitator or person conducting the stakeholder assessment, this
can be done via a formal communication or a letter to the identified stakeholders stating
that the assessor will be helping the organization with a new initiative to fulfill a corporate
social responsibility interests and some voluntary operation standards comply and will
engage in conversation with some of the employees.

Once the stakeholders have reviewed the assessment report, the report will represent the
willingness of the stakeholders to engage in a consensus building effort to move forward to
create a new conflict management system. The report of the assessment will have the
potential issues to be included on a tentative agenda to work on. With the commitment of
the leadership of the organization to take on this endeavor and a set of proposed ground
rules, the organization leadership will need to set up a time to bring together the
stakeholders that need to be at the table to tackle this task on the first facilitated meeting.

The stakeholder assessment will produce a set of stakeholders and people that need to be
at the table as part of the design of the new system. The assessment will give us the raw
material of interests that will shape the tentative agenda for the “process design team” and
it will include the proposed ground rules for their interaction, a timetable and a tentative
work plan. With this information, the members of the “process design team” will engage in
a constructive, consensus building dialog to joint-problem solve, which will be used to
share interests, generate options to meet those interests and discuss relevant objective
criteria and principles of fairness to select the options that will create the conflict
management system and effective grievance mechanism. An important initial step is to
work with the “design team” members to help them learn and internalize the diverse range
of conflict management approaches, alternatives and systems, which will expose them to
information and give them an opportunity to experience negotiation, mediation and other
alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. This capacity building segment will ultimately
provide them with the accurate information to help them make informed decisions during
the design and implementation process of the new system.

Once the new conflict management systems or grievance mechanism has been agreed on,
the stakeholders or members of the design team will take the agreed result of their
deliberation to their “constituents”, the stakeholders they represent or voice in the design
team (some call these represented stakeholders the “second tables” they represent) to have
their feedback about any concern the constituents might have, if they have any feedback

                                                                               www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
with concerns the design team would take those consideration and work further on it and,
if there are not further concerns, the conflict management systems or grievance
mechanisms would be finalized and ready to be implemented. The next step would be to
implement it and later evaluate its use and effectiveness.

In order to have the new system successfully implemented and to help organizational
members, internal and external stakeholders internalize and use the new system, an
education campaign should be launched, potential users will need to be either informed,
educated or trained, depending on their degree of engagement, and simultaneously create a
reward and incentives system to get people using the new system and foster a new
organizational culture while modeling behavior, experiencing and sensing the benefits of
this new system. A new and innovative culture might be created and continuous
improvement can result as simultaneous consequence of a new organizational conflict
management culture.

After the new system is in place and being used by diverse stakeholders, there is a need for
evaluation. After the design, development and implementation of a dispute resolution
system, the results need to be evaluated. Researchers and practitioners have established
diverse criteria for evaluating the system. In this sense, Ury, Brett & Golberg (1993)
considers it important to evaluate the transaction costs, satisfaction with outcomes, effect
on relationships and the recurrence of disputes. Constantino & Sickles-Merchant (1996)
considered the criteria of efficiency, effectiveness and satisfaction. They measured each of
these elements differently efficiency is measured by change in costs and time, effectiveness
by the nature of the outcome, the durability of the resolution and the effect on the
environment; and lastly, satisfaction measures the degree of satisfaction with the process,
the relationship and the outcome. Finally, Susskind (1993) takes another look and
evaluates the outcomes produced by the system based on how fair, efficient, stable and
wise the outcomes are. Fairness is measured by the perception of the outcome as legitimate
in terms of substance and process; efficiency is consider with respect to the process (low
costs and speedy) and with respect to substance (the most integrative and value –creating
outcome); stability of the outcome is measured by the degree of compliance of the
outcomes, in this sense stakeholder do not expend resource looking for “ways out”; and
finally, the wisdom of the outcome is measured based on what is known at the time the
outcome is reached and how wise it is.

A Conclusion on stakeholders’ engagement strategies as competitive advantage
This article is about the core business function of a company and attempts to address the
increasing demands of corporation, companies, and organizations’ stakeholders that
companies be held accountable for the social and environmental internal and external
impact of their operations. Stakeholders include employees, shareholders, consumers, and
communities in which companies operate. Corporate Social Responsibility is a strategic
response to the changing nature of stakeholders’ expectations. Stakeholders expect
companies to abide by a wide range of standards and a strategy to engage stakeholders to
design, develop and implement dispute resolution systems will help organizations be on

                                                                             www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
top of the evolving context of companies CSR responsibilities and subsequent capacity
needed to respond to social and environmental standard, grievance mechanisms, and
effectively address stakeholders’ expectations.

                                          Reference

ABA Section of International Law (2010). The CSR Journal: Legal Perspectives on Corporate
        Social Responsibility, January 2010
Bordone, R. (2008). Dispute system design: An introduction. Harvard Negotiation Law
       Review 2008. Symposium. Harvard Law School. March 7, 2008
Constantino, C. A., & Merchant, C. S. (1996). Designing conflict management systems: A
       guide to creating productive and healthy organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-
       Bass.
Fisher, R. , & Shapiro, D. (2005). Beyond Reason: Using emotions as you negotiate. New
       York: Pinguin Group.
Fisher, R. , Ury, W. , & Patton, B. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without
       giving in. New York: Penguin Books.
Kochan, T. A., & Osterman, P. (1994). The mutual gains enterprise. Harvard Business School
       Press: Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press
ORASI Consulting Group (2010). ORASI Consulting Group, services and results
       http://www.wiserearth.org/uploads/file/0539962adfd5e073ab5dbfbb1671c8e8/ORA
       SI%20Consulting%20Group%20SERVICES.pdf
Oré, L. (2009). Cross Cultural Negotiation & Consensus Building Strategies for Foreign
       Investment Projects: Beyond Legal Systems. State Bar of Texas ADR Section’s
       Alternatives Resolutions Newsletter Vol.18, No.2, 27-34 pp.
       http://www.wiserearth.org/uploads/file/78ace89e643adbd327d11f1337f94a23/CRO
       SS-CULTURAL_NEGOTIATION_AND_CONSENSUS-
       BUILDING_STRATEGIES_FOR_FOREIGN-INVESTMENT_PROJECTS%20Luis%20Ore.pdf
Sebenius, J. K. (1995) Negotiating corporate change. Harvard Business School Publishing
        Video Series. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Publishing. Video
Susskind, L. , & Cruikshank, J. (2006). Breaking Robert’s Rules: The new way to run your
       meetings, build consensus, and get results.. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Susskind, L. , & Thomas-Larmer, J. (1999). Conducting a conflict assessment. In L.
       Susskind, S. McKearnan, & J, Thomas-Larmer (Eds.), The consensus building
       handbook: A comprehensive guide to reaching agreement (pp. 99-136).
       Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Straus, D. (2002). How to make collaboration work: Powerful ways to build consensus, solve
       problems, and make decisions. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publisher, Inc.
Straus, D. (1999). Designing a consensus building process using a graphic rod map. In

                                                                             www.orasicg.com
…Negotiate Better Results!
       L. Susskind, S. McKearnan, & J, Thomas-Larmer (Eds.), The consensus building
       handbook: A comprehensive guide to reaching agreement (pp. 137-168).
       Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Susskind, S. McKearnan, & J, Thomas-Larmer (Eds.), The consensus building
       handbook: A comprehensive guide to reaching agreement (pp. 591-630).
       Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ury, W. , Brett, J. , & Goldberg, S. (1993). Getting disputes resolved: Designing systems to cut
       the costs of conflict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.




                                                                                  www.orasicg.com

Más contenido relacionado

Más de Universidad de Lima

Candidatos Políticos Elecciones Generando confianza y legitimidad social Dic ...
Candidatos Políticos Elecciones Generando confianza y legitimidad social Dic ...Candidatos Políticos Elecciones Generando confianza y legitimidad social Dic ...
Candidatos Políticos Elecciones Generando confianza y legitimidad social Dic ...Universidad de Lima
 
Fortalecimiento de gobierno regional capacidad de mediacion y gestion de conf...
Fortalecimiento de gobierno regional capacidad de mediacion y gestion de conf...Fortalecimiento de gobierno regional capacidad de mediacion y gestion de conf...
Fortalecimiento de gobierno regional capacidad de mediacion y gestion de conf...Universidad de Lima
 
Advance Workplace Restoration & Health and Fairness Assessments H SET 2020
Advance Workplace Restoration & Health and Fairness Assessments H SET 2020Advance Workplace Restoration & Health and Fairness Assessments H SET 2020
Advance Workplace Restoration & Health and Fairness Assessments H SET 2020Universidad de Lima
 
Fondo de adelanto social y gobiernos regionales y locales convocantes y fac...
Fondo de adelanto social y gobiernos regionales y locales   convocantes y fac...Fondo de adelanto social y gobiernos regionales y locales   convocantes y fac...
Fondo de adelanto social y gobiernos regionales y locales convocantes y fac...Universidad de Lima
 
Evaluacion Participativa de Actores y Situacion
Evaluacion Participativa de Actores y Situacion Evaluacion Participativa de Actores y Situacion
Evaluacion Participativa de Actores y Situacion Universidad de Lima
 
CONSULTA PREVIA Y Facilitacion digital
CONSULTA PREVIA Y Facilitacion digitalCONSULTA PREVIA Y Facilitacion digital
CONSULTA PREVIA Y Facilitacion digitalUniversidad de Lima
 
CSR Mecanismos de Queja y Capacidades de Involucramiento para prevencion de c...
CSR Mecanismos de Queja y Capacidades de Involucramiento para prevencion de c...CSR Mecanismos de Queja y Capacidades de Involucramiento para prevencion de c...
CSR Mecanismos de Queja y Capacidades de Involucramiento para prevencion de c...Universidad de Lima
 
Gestion social mineria y coronavirus marzo 2020 recomendaciones
Gestion social mineria y coronavirus marzo 2020 recomendaciones Gestion social mineria y coronavirus marzo 2020 recomendaciones
Gestion social mineria y coronavirus marzo 2020 recomendaciones Universidad de Lima
 
Programa del temor al valor minero ene feb 2020
Programa del temor al valor minero ene feb 2020Programa del temor al valor minero ene feb 2020
Programa del temor al valor minero ene feb 2020Universidad de Lima
 
Orasi Consulting Group presentacion 2020
Orasi Consulting Group presentacion 2020Orasi Consulting Group presentacion 2020
Orasi Consulting Group presentacion 2020Universidad de Lima
 
Servicios de ORASI Consulting Group 2020
Servicios de ORASI Consulting Group 2020Servicios de ORASI Consulting Group 2020
Servicios de ORASI Consulting Group 2020Universidad de Lima
 
Es posible elaborar estudios de impacto ambiental (eia) con credibilidad y qu...
Es posible elaborar estudios de impacto ambiental (eia) con credibilidad y qu...Es posible elaborar estudios de impacto ambiental (eia) con credibilidad y qu...
Es posible elaborar estudios de impacto ambiental (eia) con credibilidad y qu...Universidad de Lima
 
Propuesta para el Viceministerio de Gobernanza de la PCM Peru y secretaria de...
Propuesta para el Viceministerio de Gobernanza de la PCM Peru y secretaria de...Propuesta para el Viceministerio de Gobernanza de la PCM Peru y secretaria de...
Propuesta para el Viceministerio de Gobernanza de la PCM Peru y secretaria de...Universidad de Lima
 
Canwi publica reducir costos e incrementar productividad mejorar relaciones...
Canwi publica  reducir costos e incrementar productividad  mejorar relaciones...Canwi publica  reducir costos e incrementar productividad  mejorar relaciones...
Canwi publica reducir costos e incrementar productividad mejorar relaciones...Universidad de Lima
 
Orasi reporte multiples actores peru sector extractivo ener getico y socieda...
Orasi  reporte multiples actores peru sector extractivo ener getico y socieda...Orasi  reporte multiples actores peru sector extractivo ener getico y socieda...
Orasi reporte multiples actores peru sector extractivo ener getico y socieda...Universidad de Lima
 
Propuestas y Analisis para la Viabilidad Integral de Proyectos de Inversion
Propuestas y Analisis para la Viabilidad Integral de Proyectos de Inversion Propuestas y Analisis para la Viabilidad Integral de Proyectos de Inversion
Propuestas y Analisis para la Viabilidad Integral de Proyectos de Inversion Universidad de Lima
 
Conversatorio conflictos socioambientales en Poder Judicial
Conversatorio conflictos socioambientales en Poder JudicialConversatorio conflictos socioambientales en Poder Judicial
Conversatorio conflictos socioambientales en Poder JudicialUniversidad de Lima
 
Propuesta para gestiona de conflicto conga Perú
Propuesta para gestiona de conflicto conga PerúPropuesta para gestiona de conflicto conga Perú
Propuesta para gestiona de conflicto conga PerúUniversidad de Lima
 
Advert peru project manager 2018 dic
Advert   peru project manager 2018 dicAdvert   peru project manager 2018 dic
Advert peru project manager 2018 dicUniversidad de Lima
 

Más de Universidad de Lima (20)

Candidatos Políticos Elecciones Generando confianza y legitimidad social Dic ...
Candidatos Políticos Elecciones Generando confianza y legitimidad social Dic ...Candidatos Políticos Elecciones Generando confianza y legitimidad social Dic ...
Candidatos Políticos Elecciones Generando confianza y legitimidad social Dic ...
 
Fortalecimiento de gobierno regional capacidad de mediacion y gestion de conf...
Fortalecimiento de gobierno regional capacidad de mediacion y gestion de conf...Fortalecimiento de gobierno regional capacidad de mediacion y gestion de conf...
Fortalecimiento de gobierno regional capacidad de mediacion y gestion de conf...
 
Advance Workplace Restoration & Health and Fairness Assessments H SET 2020
Advance Workplace Restoration & Health and Fairness Assessments H SET 2020Advance Workplace Restoration & Health and Fairness Assessments H SET 2020
Advance Workplace Restoration & Health and Fairness Assessments H SET 2020
 
Fondo de adelanto social y gobiernos regionales y locales convocantes y fac...
Fondo de adelanto social y gobiernos regionales y locales   convocantes y fac...Fondo de adelanto social y gobiernos regionales y locales   convocantes y fac...
Fondo de adelanto social y gobiernos regionales y locales convocantes y fac...
 
Evaluacion Participativa de Actores y Situacion
Evaluacion Participativa de Actores y Situacion Evaluacion Participativa de Actores y Situacion
Evaluacion Participativa de Actores y Situacion
 
CONSULTA PREVIA Y Facilitacion digital
CONSULTA PREVIA Y Facilitacion digitalCONSULTA PREVIA Y Facilitacion digital
CONSULTA PREVIA Y Facilitacion digital
 
CSR Mecanismos de Queja y Capacidades de Involucramiento para prevencion de c...
CSR Mecanismos de Queja y Capacidades de Involucramiento para prevencion de c...CSR Mecanismos de Queja y Capacidades de Involucramiento para prevencion de c...
CSR Mecanismos de Queja y Capacidades de Involucramiento para prevencion de c...
 
Gestion social mineria y coronavirus marzo 2020 recomendaciones
Gestion social mineria y coronavirus marzo 2020 recomendaciones Gestion social mineria y coronavirus marzo 2020 recomendaciones
Gestion social mineria y coronavirus marzo 2020 recomendaciones
 
Programa del temor al valor minero ene feb 2020
Programa del temor al valor minero ene feb 2020Programa del temor al valor minero ene feb 2020
Programa del temor al valor minero ene feb 2020
 
Orasi Consulting Group presentacion 2020
Orasi Consulting Group presentacion 2020Orasi Consulting Group presentacion 2020
Orasi Consulting Group presentacion 2020
 
Servicios de ORASI Consulting Group 2020
Servicios de ORASI Consulting Group 2020Servicios de ORASI Consulting Group 2020
Servicios de ORASI Consulting Group 2020
 
Es posible elaborar estudios de impacto ambiental (eia) con credibilidad y qu...
Es posible elaborar estudios de impacto ambiental (eia) con credibilidad y qu...Es posible elaborar estudios de impacto ambiental (eia) con credibilidad y qu...
Es posible elaborar estudios de impacto ambiental (eia) con credibilidad y qu...
 
Speaker luis ore awlc nov 2019
Speaker luis ore awlc nov 2019Speaker luis ore awlc nov 2019
Speaker luis ore awlc nov 2019
 
Propuesta para el Viceministerio de Gobernanza de la PCM Peru y secretaria de...
Propuesta para el Viceministerio de Gobernanza de la PCM Peru y secretaria de...Propuesta para el Viceministerio de Gobernanza de la PCM Peru y secretaria de...
Propuesta para el Viceministerio de Gobernanza de la PCM Peru y secretaria de...
 
Canwi publica reducir costos e incrementar productividad mejorar relaciones...
Canwi publica  reducir costos e incrementar productividad  mejorar relaciones...Canwi publica  reducir costos e incrementar productividad  mejorar relaciones...
Canwi publica reducir costos e incrementar productividad mejorar relaciones...
 
Orasi reporte multiples actores peru sector extractivo ener getico y socieda...
Orasi  reporte multiples actores peru sector extractivo ener getico y socieda...Orasi  reporte multiples actores peru sector extractivo ener getico y socieda...
Orasi reporte multiples actores peru sector extractivo ener getico y socieda...
 
Propuestas y Analisis para la Viabilidad Integral de Proyectos de Inversion
Propuestas y Analisis para la Viabilidad Integral de Proyectos de Inversion Propuestas y Analisis para la Viabilidad Integral de Proyectos de Inversion
Propuestas y Analisis para la Viabilidad Integral de Proyectos de Inversion
 
Conversatorio conflictos socioambientales en Poder Judicial
Conversatorio conflictos socioambientales en Poder JudicialConversatorio conflictos socioambientales en Poder Judicial
Conversatorio conflictos socioambientales en Poder Judicial
 
Propuesta para gestiona de conflicto conga Perú
Propuesta para gestiona de conflicto conga PerúPropuesta para gestiona de conflicto conga Perú
Propuesta para gestiona de conflicto conga Perú
 
Advert peru project manager 2018 dic
Advert   peru project manager 2018 dicAdvert   peru project manager 2018 dic
Advert peru project manager 2018 dic
 

Último

Plano de marketing- inglês em formato ppt
Plano de marketing- inglês  em formato pptPlano de marketing- inglês  em formato ppt
Plano de marketing- inglês em formato pptElizangelaSoaresdaCo
 
Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet- 2024
 Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet-  2024 Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet-  2024
Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet- 2024Stephan Koning
 
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)tazeenaila12
 
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxIntroduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxJemalSeid25
 
7movierulz.uk
7movierulz.uk7movierulz.uk
7movierulz.ukaroemirsr
 
A flour, rice and Suji company in Jhang.
A flour, rice and Suji company in Jhang.A flour, rice and Suji company in Jhang.
A flour, rice and Suji company in Jhang.mcshagufta46
 
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024Winbusinessin
 
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003believeminhh
 
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access
 
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessQ2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessAPCO
 
Intellectual Property Licensing Examples
Intellectual Property Licensing ExamplesIntellectual Property Licensing Examples
Intellectual Property Licensing Examplesamberjiles31
 
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHelene Heckrotte
 
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access
 
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...AustraliaChapterIIBA
 
Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer.pdf
Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer.pdfChicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer.pdf
Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer.pdfSourav Sikder
 
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGUNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGlokeshwarmaha
 
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxCracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxWorkforce Group
 
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakTata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakEditores1
 

Último (20)

Plano de marketing- inglês em formato ppt
Plano de marketing- inglês  em formato pptPlano de marketing- inglês  em formato ppt
Plano de marketing- inglês em formato ppt
 
Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet- 2024
 Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet-  2024 Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet-  2024
Building Your Personal Brand on LinkedIn - Expert Planet- 2024
 
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
Harvard Business Review.pptx | Navigating Labor Unrest (March-April 2024)
 
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptxIntroduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
Introduction to The overview of GAAP LO 1-5.pptx
 
7movierulz.uk
7movierulz.uk7movierulz.uk
7movierulz.uk
 
A flour, rice and Suji company in Jhang.
A flour, rice and Suji company in Jhang.A flour, rice and Suji company in Jhang.
A flour, rice and Suji company in Jhang.
 
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
Ethical stalking by Mark Williams. UpliftLive 2024
 
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
The Vietnam Believer Newsletter_MARCH 25, 2024_EN_Vol. 003
 
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global B2B Panel book-unlock 2024
 
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for BusinessQ2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
Q2 2024 APCO Geopolitical Radar - The Global Operating Environment for Business
 
Investment Opportunity for Thailand's Automotive & EV Industries
Investment Opportunity for Thailand's Automotive & EV IndustriesInvestment Opportunity for Thailand's Automotive & EV Industries
Investment Opportunity for Thailand's Automotive & EV Industries
 
Intellectual Property Licensing Examples
Intellectual Property Licensing ExamplesIntellectual Property Licensing Examples
Intellectual Property Licensing Examples
 
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptxHELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
HELENE HECKROTTE'S PROFESSIONAL PORTFOLIO.pptx
 
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
Borderless Access - Global Panel book-unlock 2024
 
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
IIBA® Melbourne - Navigating Business Analysis - Excellence for Career Growth...
 
Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer.pdf
Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer.pdfChicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer.pdf
Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer.pdf
 
WAM Corporate Presentation Mar 25 2024.pdf
WAM Corporate Presentation Mar 25 2024.pdfWAM Corporate Presentation Mar 25 2024.pdf
WAM Corporate Presentation Mar 25 2024.pdf
 
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISINGUNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
UNLEASHING THE POWER OF PROGRAMMATIC ADVERTISING
 
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptxCracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
Cracking the ‘Business Process Outsourcing’ Code Main.pptx
 
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerakTata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
Tata Kelola Bisnis perushaan yang bergerak
 

CSR Corporate Social Responsibility ORASI Consulting Group 2011 Luis Ore

  • 1. …Negotiate Better Results! Corporate Social Responsibility, Effective Grievance Mechanisms, and Stakeholders Engagement Strategies as Competitive Advantage By Luis E. Oré, Consensus Building, Negotiation & Relationship Management Consultant Association for Conflict Resolution’s International Section, Chair 2010-2011 Many think that Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is about the way in which companies decide to allocate profits; however, it is not about philanthropy, it is about how companies are managed. For some, CSR is about protecting human rights and observing fair labor normative standards; for others, the main concern deals with environmental and social concerns. For those in the public sector, CSR deals with the concept of sustainable development. Others look at CSR as initiatives to reduce or eliminate the social deficit associated with globalization. Regardless of how organizations frame CSR, it is applicable to all types of businesses; regardless of the business’ size, there is always room for improvement. In fact, companies that implement a set of best practices and policies to manage strategically their impacts and externalities are more likely to endure than those that do not. It’s not uncommon to find unsatisfied corporate’ stakeholders, whether they are internal stakeholders (for example, workers and employees) or external stakeholders (for examples, local communities), many speak up and raise their voices about their grievances, concerns, worries, aspirations, and other motivation, and some stakeholders express their grievances, concerns and interests “behind-the–scenes” or what some may say under the surface through “informal means” – perhaps building up a sense of dissatisfaction or even anger. Stakeholders may even get together and protest in front of facilities or participate in rallies in public squares and streets. Some express their concerns regarding the processes and procedures that may see as ineffective to handle those grievances and concerns. Dealing with Internal Stakeholders & Grievance Mechanisms When we consider internal stakeholders such as workers dealing with peers and supervisors and diverse challenging situations they may have at their workplace, workers do not have many alternatives to address their concerns. Many realize that the effects of conflict in the workplace are widespread and costly. In the U.S. approximately, 24 to 60 _____________________________________________________________________________________ * Luis E. Oré is director and senior consultant with ORASI Consulting Group Inc., a training and development consulting firm specializing in negotiation, consensus building, relationship management, and conflict prevention. Oré assists businesses with cross-cultural and international negotiations, strategic alliances, organizational changes, dispute resolution system design, and foreign direct investment, especially between the United States of America and Latin-American countries. Oré has Masters of Arts degree in conflict management and in organizational communication, a J.D. from the University of Lima (Peru), and extensive training in negotiation and conflict management from CMI International Group, Western Kentucky University, Lipscomb University, and the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School. Luis Oré serves as Chair of the Association for Conflict Resolution’s International Section, collaborates with the Consensus Building Institute and diverse committees with the American Bar Association, he can be contacted directly via email: luis.ore@orasicg.com www.orasicg.com
  • 2. …Negotiate Better Results! percent of management time and energy is spent dealing with anger, which leads to decreased productivity, increased stress among employees, hampered performance, high turnover rate, absenteeism, and at its worst, violence and even death. In fact, conflict is a growing industry and distracts us from our purpose, whatever it may be. Many say “we need to work together” but in fact most do not have the skills to do it effectively. If teams or units run into a conflicting situation they may not know how to handle it properly and their members will not accomplish the results they are aiming to reach. When organizations involve legal counsel or outside attorneys to deal with conflicting situations, it is most likely that they will accomplish high skyrocketing legal bills. Besides time, energy, and resource consumption, there are other challenges that workplace differences and conflicts bring about. Conflict handling processes and procedures affect employees’ satisfaction, employees’ moral, and employees’ turnover rates, and even the way they handle their own differences. When organizational members, whether employees, staff or management deal with conflicting situations they don’t have many alternatives to deal with those challenges and concerns. If one adds the complexity of cross-cultural factors that most organizations are exposed to, things get worst. When dealing with organizational or workplace conflict and employee-management issues and relations, most organizations use an open-door policy or a formal grievance procedure for handling employees concerns with an adjudicating rights approach (rights-based approach) and some forward thinking organizations use some limited alternative dispute resolution procedures such as internal mediation to deal with some of these challenges. These are some concerns: Concerns about Open Door Policy: Besides having a great opportunity to help employees deal with their conflicts at the closest level to the issue, an open door policy, sometimes can lead to frustrating situations because decisions might be made based on an adversarial approach of what is right. A rights-based approach might bring about win-lose situations that at times can escalate conflicts. Sometimes a supervisor or the appropriate person who assists the employee in resolving an issue is not equipped or trained with proper problem- solving and conflict management skills. Diversity is also an issue that affects how people deal with differences; cultural awareness and competence dealing with conflict should also be considered for training. Concerns about Rights-Based Procedure, Formal Grievance Procedures and Adjudicating Rights Approach: “The most common characteristic of people (employees) who have a concern or grievance is that they just wish their problems would go away – they ‘do not want any process.’ People with concerns and complaints fear loss of privacy and respect with supervisors, coworkers, even families. Sometimes, people with complaints fear they do not have enough evidence to prevail in a formal investigatory procedure. Sometimes they value the relationship they have with the reason they see as the source of their problem, and fear this relationship (and other relationships) will be placed at risk if they file a grievance. Considering workplace conflicts, many complainants are simultaneously uncomfortable about doing nothing, uncomfortable about taking any kind www.orasicg.com
  • 3. …Negotiate Better Results! of action on their concerns, and angry if they feel either they must do something or have to quit. In general, from experience and mounts of research, people (employees) who want to raise a concern or complaint overwhelming want different options to address their issues, and prefer their own choice of options when appropriate. Of course, there are situations and problems, such as criminal behavior, which require formal procedures. However, there are lots of reasons why people don’t want to use these formal procedures. For instance, people with concerns and complaints fear loss of privacy and respect with supervisors, coworkers, even families. Sometimes, people with complaints may fear they do not have enough evidence to prevail in a formal investigatory procedure. Sometimes they value the relationship they have with the reason they see as the source of the problem, and the relationships they have inside and outside the workplace, and fear these relationships will be placed at risk if they file a grievance. People just want the problem to stop. Concerns about a Limited Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure: Sometimes organizations decide to use alternative dispute resolution procedures but many times these procedures are utilized for a short list of issues and most of the times these procedures are not in place as a first step in grievance processes. If a limited alternative dispute resolution procedure for a closed list of few issues is used after a right-based approach has been completed, parties involved in a conflict will likely have battle mind-sets and will dig into their positions which will make this dispute resolution process less efficient. It may be too late to turn grievances and employees concerns to an efficient process such as mediation. Employees just want the problem to stop. What about your organization differences- handling approaches, conflict-management procedures, dispute resolution mechanisms and policies for dealing with conflict? How are they working for you? How are the organization’s human resources and legal procedures helping you reduce the costs and consequences of conflict? How is the organizational members’ diversity and cross-cultural differences handling approaches affecting your work and organizational performance? How is your current conflict management system helping your organization to engage employees, reduce expenses and risk, and increase productivity? Regardless of unionized or nonunionized organizations, employees look of effective ways for dealing with their challenges. In a Gallup survey of attitudes toward union participation, 90% of the respondents agree that employees should have some type of organization for discussion and resolving concerns with their employees. As Kochan and Osterman (1994) affirm that, “this results suggests that the vast majority of Americans recognize the need for effective employee voice at the workplace, even if some question the effectiveness of traditional unions as the instrument of this voice (…) America currently suffers from a “representation gap” in the labor force and in the American workplaces” (p.143-144). Interestingly, a survey conducted by Price Waterhouse and Cornell’s PERC Institute on Conflict resolution of over 530 corporation in the fortune 1000 category revealed that 90% of respondents view alternative dispute resolution as a critical cost-control technique. www.orasicg.com
  • 4. …Negotiate Better Results! Others mention that cooptation that have developed collaborative conflict management systems report significant litigation costs savings, for instance, Brown & Root reported an 80% reduction in outside litigation costs, Motorola reported a 75% reduction over a period of six years, and NCR reported a 50% reduction and a drop of pending lawsuits from 263 in 1984 to 28 in 1993. As Kochan and Osterman assert “Achieving competitiveness at high standards of living requires a high rate of growth in productivity, product innovation, and adaptability to changing markets. This in turn requires corporate strategies that give high priority to developing and fully utilizing the skills of the work force.” (1994, p.6) There is no doubt that effective internal mechanisms for dealing with internal challenges, differences and disputes as part of a corporate social responsibility strategy will foster a better work environment, a better place in which organizational member can produce, innovate and adapt to change. Dealing with External Stakeholders & Grievance Mechanisms When we consider external stakeholders (such as host communities) dealing with companies developing investment projects (such as oil, gas, mining, energy, hydroelectric, dam, infrastructure, agro-industry) in their communities and the interests, concerns or fears they may have, many times community members tend to organize protests against companies trying to implement investment projects. Stakeholders may engage in a “legal fight” using the legal system, administrative procedures or the court system to block the development or implementation of projects. Communities may also try to engage in direct talk with companies however many times these conversations are approached by multiple parties with an adversarial mindset or an antagonistic framework which result in impasses and conversations’ break down. Many stakeholders and local communities are demanding companies to manage the social and environmental impacts of their operations. Traditional public relation and adversarial responses, as well as the lack of strategic capacity to constructively engage stakeholders concerns may leave companies vulnerable not only to legal and reputational risks but also to social risk and social conflict which can prevent companies from operating efficiently and incurring significant losses. Incorporating CSR practices into management of operations may serve to mitigate and reduce those risks. It’s key to manage social risks. It is well-known that companies that do good will do better, better at creating shareholders value and better at avoiding conflicting confrontations with stakeholders. Leading and forward thinking companies have realized that by doing good they do better, consequently several multinational mining and other extractive industry companies have voluntarily engaged in standard setting initiatives to manage the social and environmental dimensions of their operations. This is also in alignment with the Environmental and Social Standards of (IFC), which we know that many development projects need to comply with the Environmental and Social Standards of the International Financial Company (IFC), an institution of the World Bank Group that is responsible for transactions with the private www.orasicg.com
  • 5. …Negotiate Better Results! sector; as well as the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) Environmental and Social Standards, the Equator Principles (Financial industry standard for managing social and environmental risk in project financing) and the ISO 26000 Social Responsibility Standards. For instance, World Bank’s International Financial Company requires that all projects with potential significant adverse social or environmental impact (Category A) and some projects with potential limited adverse social or environmental impacts (Category B) include grievance mechanisms as part of its management system. This is crucial because foreign investors can include effective grievance mechanisms, not only rights-based approaches but also interest-based approaches, which can produce more sustainable and positive results and strengthen working relationships with diverse stakeholders. Stakeholders will continue scrutinizing companies operations and spotlight their impacts. If companies don’t engage stakeholders concerns they may develop reputational damage and losses. Whether company operations are related to hydroelectric power and infrastructure development in the Amazon jungle or extractive industry dealing with oil, gas, or mining in the Andean region, Conflict Resolution practitioners and CSR Practitioners have to advise the company and community to engage constructively with one another to prevent conflict and resolve crisis. Constructive engagement should consist of economic, environmental and social costs and benefits of the project, and deliberating mutual gains outcomes integrating the interests and concerns of companies and stakeholders. Companies may conduct conflict prevention due diligence, social risk and stakeholders assessment, set standards initiatives, develop consensus building strategies, consult with affected communities, obtain communities consent before initiating operation or obtaining a social license. Thinking through what is important for companies’ endurance, long-term benefits, and competitive advantage, organizations of all sizes should design and implement stakeholders’ engagement strategic systems, processes and procedures. What can we do about dealing with stakeholder grievances? Can we do better? Would it be possible engaging stakeholders in a more positive fashion? If so, how do we accomplish this? Yes. It can be done. Companies can build winning organizations to last. Companies and organizations can help strengthening organizational members and stakeholder capacity to address their concerns in a more positive and constructive way. Companies and organizations can engage their stakeholders to design, develop and implement more effective mechanisms and systems for dealing with stakeholders’ grievances and concerns. They can engage and build dispute resolution systems. Effective dispute resolution systems will retain and attract top talent, provide positive environment, improve corporate- community relations, increase brand benefits by promoting reputation for being responsible, and create a competitive advantage that allows them to differentiate themselves from the competition in an economy with shrinking markets shares and eroding profit margins. www.orasicg.com
  • 6. …Negotiate Better Results! Designing Effective Grievance Mechanisms and Dispute Resolution Systems as a Stakeholders Engagement and CSR Strategy part of the Organizational Management System As with any organizational change effort, it will require hard work and commitment, but most importantly it needs stakeholder engagement and ownership. As Jim Sebenius put it, “The difference between successful and unsuccessful change efforts is the quality of the negotiations that shape them. Without negotiation, you cannot get genuine agreement, and without agreement, sustainable change is impossible. Negotiation is a means of advancing the full set of your interests by jointly decided action. Effective negotiation leads to optimal solutions and winning coalitions.” (Sebenius,1995). A Dispute Resolution System is a coordinated set of processes or mechanisms that interact with each other to prevent, manage, and/or resolve disputes, conflicts and grievances. The design of a dispute resolution system would imply an intentional effort to harness resources, processes, and capabilities to achieve a set of specified objectives for the dispute resolution system. Based on Ury, Brett and Goldberg work (1993) a conflict management big picture would show three different approaches to resolving disputes:  Reconciling interests: trying to meet the needs, concerns, desires, and fears –things that one cares about or wants. (Interest-base approach)  Adjudicating rights: looking to some independent standard with perceived legitimacy to vindicate who is “right” or “correct”. (Right-base approach)  Using power: using one’s leverage to force or coerce someone to do something. (Power-base approach) In this sense, an effective dispute resolution system suggests that most disputes should be handled with an Interest-base approach, when this approach does not resolve the matter at hand, disputing parties should try to resolve their differences through a Right-base approach, and less conflicting situations should be addressed with Power-base approaches. In general, an effective conflict resolution process clarifies the disputing parties’ interests, builds a good working relationship, generates good mutual gains options, is perceived as legitimate, is cognizant of the parties’ procedural alternatives, improves communication and leads to wise commitments. Bordone, R. (2008) asserts that the following are the steps for designing a system: (1) Conduct a conflict or stakeholder assessment. (2) Ascertain system objectives and establish priorities among them. (3) Develop the new system, working in concert with relevant stakeholders. (4) Implement the system, building in sufficient education and training along the way. (5) Evaluate the system and modify in accord with changing needs and objectives of the organizational/institutional stakeholders. Before engaging in the dispute resolution design effort, an organization and its leadership need to seriously consider what they really want and the reasoning that explains their interests. It may be helpful trying to answer the question: What do they want and why this is important to them? What’s the purpose? All initiatives, strategies or plans intended to www.orasicg.com
  • 7. …Negotiate Better Results! implement new processes and procedures which can introduce organizational change will likely run into organizational resistance. According to Decaro (1996) before deciding to either implement or propose a strategy for an organizational change it is required to analyze the situation. It is necessary to analyze what the current situation is, what the desired state is, and what issues could interfere with the organizational change. Among those possible interferences, a crucial one is to find out if there is a challenge related to the fact that the organization does not want to change or part of it wants to change while the other part does not. Maybe some organizational members want to change but others not. Do they want to change? If organizational members do not want to change it will be extremely difficult to change, they will resist to the change. Therefore, it is important to unveil the interests, issues, and beliefs of these members that resist the change. Decaro (1996) argues that one thing that reveals existing interests, issues, values and beliefs in conflict is the inconsistency of the messages, especially between what it is said and what it is done, or between what it is said and done in a moment and what it is said in another moment but with similar circumstance. When messages are inconsistent, two positions of the same entity express its thoughts, and then confusion is generated. The key is to listen to and allow organizational members to express the ideas or interests that provoke their behavior. Thus, it is important to unveil what causes those behaviors. It is crucial to have a shared understanding and know what the organization and individuals want and what their purpose is. Continuing with the steps for designing a system, the goals and objectives of an stakeholder assessment are: to identify stakeholder; to understand stakeholders interests (understood as the motivation underlying their positions including aspiration, wishes, hopes, desires, expectations, concerns, fears, worries, and anything that might be at stake); to map relationships and connections between stakeholders; and to map the nature of the disputes in or with the organization. Considering this last objective, it is important to highlight that it is crucial to clearly understand what the disputes are about, how the disputes are handled and why the disputes are handle that way. Several authors make emphasis on the principles for design and implementation; we have, for instance, the Six Principles of Dispute Systems Design: 1) Put the focus on interests. 2) Build in “loop-backs” to negotiation. 3) Provide low-cost rights and power backups. 4) Build in consultation before, feedback after. 5) Arrange procedures in a low-to-high-cost sequence. 6) Provide the necessary motivation, skills, and resources.” (Ury, Brett, & Goldberg, 1993, p.41-64), and the Six Principles for Guiding Design Architecture: 1) Develop guidelines for whether ADR is appropriate. 2) Tailor the ADR process to particular problem. 3) Build in preventive methods of ADR. 4) Make sure that disputants have the necessary knowledge and skill to choose and use ADR. 5) Create ADR systems that are simple to use and easy to access and that resolve disputes early, at the lowest organizational level, with the least bureaucracy. 6) Allow disputants to retain maximum control over choice of ADR method and selection of neutral whenever possible. (Constantino & Merchant, 1996, p.120-121). www.orasicg.com
  • 8. …Negotiate Better Results! An important step in process design is deciding who should be involved in the process, who should be part of this dispute resolution system design effort? To begin a stakeholders’ assessment, the right people need to be identified, who the stakeholders might be. The organizational leadership needs to inquire who of these following people may be: Who are the stakeholders with formal power to make a decision? Who are the stakeholders with the power to block a decision? Who are the stakeholders affected by a decision? Who are the stakeholders or people with relevant information or expertise? In order to begin the stakeholders’ assessment, the organization’s leadership needs to introduce the consultant, facilitator or person conducting the stakeholder assessment, this can be done via a formal communication or a letter to the identified stakeholders stating that the assessor will be helping the organization with a new initiative to fulfill a corporate social responsibility interests and some voluntary operation standards comply and will engage in conversation with some of the employees. Once the stakeholders have reviewed the assessment report, the report will represent the willingness of the stakeholders to engage in a consensus building effort to move forward to create a new conflict management system. The report of the assessment will have the potential issues to be included on a tentative agenda to work on. With the commitment of the leadership of the organization to take on this endeavor and a set of proposed ground rules, the organization leadership will need to set up a time to bring together the stakeholders that need to be at the table to tackle this task on the first facilitated meeting. The stakeholder assessment will produce a set of stakeholders and people that need to be at the table as part of the design of the new system. The assessment will give us the raw material of interests that will shape the tentative agenda for the “process design team” and it will include the proposed ground rules for their interaction, a timetable and a tentative work plan. With this information, the members of the “process design team” will engage in a constructive, consensus building dialog to joint-problem solve, which will be used to share interests, generate options to meet those interests and discuss relevant objective criteria and principles of fairness to select the options that will create the conflict management system and effective grievance mechanism. An important initial step is to work with the “design team” members to help them learn and internalize the diverse range of conflict management approaches, alternatives and systems, which will expose them to information and give them an opportunity to experience negotiation, mediation and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. This capacity building segment will ultimately provide them with the accurate information to help them make informed decisions during the design and implementation process of the new system. Once the new conflict management systems or grievance mechanism has been agreed on, the stakeholders or members of the design team will take the agreed result of their deliberation to their “constituents”, the stakeholders they represent or voice in the design team (some call these represented stakeholders the “second tables” they represent) to have their feedback about any concern the constituents might have, if they have any feedback www.orasicg.com
  • 9. …Negotiate Better Results! with concerns the design team would take those consideration and work further on it and, if there are not further concerns, the conflict management systems or grievance mechanisms would be finalized and ready to be implemented. The next step would be to implement it and later evaluate its use and effectiveness. In order to have the new system successfully implemented and to help organizational members, internal and external stakeholders internalize and use the new system, an education campaign should be launched, potential users will need to be either informed, educated or trained, depending on their degree of engagement, and simultaneously create a reward and incentives system to get people using the new system and foster a new organizational culture while modeling behavior, experiencing and sensing the benefits of this new system. A new and innovative culture might be created and continuous improvement can result as simultaneous consequence of a new organizational conflict management culture. After the new system is in place and being used by diverse stakeholders, there is a need for evaluation. After the design, development and implementation of a dispute resolution system, the results need to be evaluated. Researchers and practitioners have established diverse criteria for evaluating the system. In this sense, Ury, Brett & Golberg (1993) considers it important to evaluate the transaction costs, satisfaction with outcomes, effect on relationships and the recurrence of disputes. Constantino & Sickles-Merchant (1996) considered the criteria of efficiency, effectiveness and satisfaction. They measured each of these elements differently efficiency is measured by change in costs and time, effectiveness by the nature of the outcome, the durability of the resolution and the effect on the environment; and lastly, satisfaction measures the degree of satisfaction with the process, the relationship and the outcome. Finally, Susskind (1993) takes another look and evaluates the outcomes produced by the system based on how fair, efficient, stable and wise the outcomes are. Fairness is measured by the perception of the outcome as legitimate in terms of substance and process; efficiency is consider with respect to the process (low costs and speedy) and with respect to substance (the most integrative and value –creating outcome); stability of the outcome is measured by the degree of compliance of the outcomes, in this sense stakeholder do not expend resource looking for “ways out”; and finally, the wisdom of the outcome is measured based on what is known at the time the outcome is reached and how wise it is. A Conclusion on stakeholders’ engagement strategies as competitive advantage This article is about the core business function of a company and attempts to address the increasing demands of corporation, companies, and organizations’ stakeholders that companies be held accountable for the social and environmental internal and external impact of their operations. Stakeholders include employees, shareholders, consumers, and communities in which companies operate. Corporate Social Responsibility is a strategic response to the changing nature of stakeholders’ expectations. Stakeholders expect companies to abide by a wide range of standards and a strategy to engage stakeholders to design, develop and implement dispute resolution systems will help organizations be on www.orasicg.com
  • 10. …Negotiate Better Results! top of the evolving context of companies CSR responsibilities and subsequent capacity needed to respond to social and environmental standard, grievance mechanisms, and effectively address stakeholders’ expectations. Reference ABA Section of International Law (2010). The CSR Journal: Legal Perspectives on Corporate Social Responsibility, January 2010 Bordone, R. (2008). Dispute system design: An introduction. Harvard Negotiation Law Review 2008. Symposium. Harvard Law School. March 7, 2008 Constantino, C. A., & Merchant, C. S. (1996). Designing conflict management systems: A guide to creating productive and healthy organizations. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Fisher, R. , & Shapiro, D. (2005). Beyond Reason: Using emotions as you negotiate. New York: Pinguin Group. Fisher, R. , Ury, W. , & Patton, B. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin Books. Kochan, T. A., & Osterman, P. (1994). The mutual gains enterprise. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press ORASI Consulting Group (2010). ORASI Consulting Group, services and results http://www.wiserearth.org/uploads/file/0539962adfd5e073ab5dbfbb1671c8e8/ORA SI%20Consulting%20Group%20SERVICES.pdf Oré, L. (2009). Cross Cultural Negotiation & Consensus Building Strategies for Foreign Investment Projects: Beyond Legal Systems. State Bar of Texas ADR Section’s Alternatives Resolutions Newsletter Vol.18, No.2, 27-34 pp. http://www.wiserearth.org/uploads/file/78ace89e643adbd327d11f1337f94a23/CRO SS-CULTURAL_NEGOTIATION_AND_CONSENSUS- BUILDING_STRATEGIES_FOR_FOREIGN-INVESTMENT_PROJECTS%20Luis%20Ore.pdf Sebenius, J. K. (1995) Negotiating corporate change. Harvard Business School Publishing Video Series. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Publishing. Video Susskind, L. , & Cruikshank, J. (2006). Breaking Robert’s Rules: The new way to run your meetings, build consensus, and get results.. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. Susskind, L. , & Thomas-Larmer, J. (1999). Conducting a conflict assessment. In L. Susskind, S. McKearnan, & J, Thomas-Larmer (Eds.), The consensus building handbook: A comprehensive guide to reaching agreement (pp. 99-136). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Straus, D. (2002). How to make collaboration work: Powerful ways to build consensus, solve problems, and make decisions. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publisher, Inc. Straus, D. (1999). Designing a consensus building process using a graphic rod map. In www.orasicg.com
  • 11. …Negotiate Better Results! L. Susskind, S. McKearnan, & J, Thomas-Larmer (Eds.), The consensus building handbook: A comprehensive guide to reaching agreement (pp. 137-168). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Susskind, S. McKearnan, & J, Thomas-Larmer (Eds.), The consensus building handbook: A comprehensive guide to reaching agreement (pp. 591-630). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ury, W. , Brett, J. , & Goldberg, S. (1993). Getting disputes resolved: Designing systems to cut the costs of conflict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. www.orasicg.com