Mediation a La Carte

Introduction

Based on comprehensive research, the Dutch government established a goal to transform approximately forty disadvantaged neighborhoods into vibrant, thriving communities. This initiative seeks to address longstanding, complex, and often intergenerational challenges. It aims to reverse persistent, previously overlooked decline while managing and guiding the uncontrolled processes that have emerged in these areas. Municipalities have been assigned primary responsibility for developing plans to achieve these objectives. One of these neighborhoods, located on the western edge of this municipality, is defined as the System in Focus.

In 2004 the local government started a brand new Private-Public partnership (PPP) with the two largest housing associations and a public traded  property developer. A senior project manager for urban development was appointed to oversee the project and to represent the municipality. The organizational structure showed that the limited partnership exclusively operated as investors.

In addition, a structure was established for the investors (GIM). The Steering Committee (ST) consisting of the four directors of the parent organizations, jointly determined and directed the policy to be implemented. The Core Team (CT) consisted of managers from the four parent organizations, were responsible for operationalizing the policy mandates of the steering committee. The senior project manager representing the municipality also served as secretary of the steering committee and the leader of the CT. This team established a Construction Management Company (CMC). 

The Trigger

At a Core Team meeting, agreements were reached and objectives for the 2008/2009 annual budget were established. Given that certain decisions involve forthcoming political choices and associated financing, the Core Team opted to set goals with minimal risk exposure for the time being. High-risk decisions were deferred until greater clarity emerges regarding external factors that remain uncertain.

The Core Team determined that once the metropolitan policy is clarified, a comprehensive risk assessment would be conducted to adjust the project’s trajectory based on the available information. These decisions were submitted to the Steering Committee, which approved them.

However, the manager of the publicly traded commercial property developer revisited the issue, emphasizing the need for robust risk management immediately, rather than waiting for all external factors to be resolved. This manager expressed concern that decisions made now could have severe financial repercussions for his company and he refused to participate in drafting the annual budget unless his concerns were addressed.

The Situation

This disagreement led to an impasse, straining the partnership and threatening project progress. The municipality’s senior project manager suggested terminating the cooperation, further escalating risks to the project’s continuation. To resolve this deadlock, Peter was invited into the project, commissioned by the Core Team to guide the Director of the Construction Management Company in his professional development toward a senior project manager role.

During two mediation sessions, Peter facilitated the Core Team members in articulating their challenges and contextualizing them within a broader perspective, considering their professional competencies and interpersonal dynamics. By leveraging the crisis, Peter enabled the Core Tean to confront the impasse collaboratively and to address shared challenges.

The Background

A few months before, Peter signaled to key principals that the Core Team was addressing symptoms rather than root causes and he proposed to solve the situation from a mediating perspective, suggesting he could solve the dispute in one meeting. Subsequently, all Core Team members were interviewed, and asked to prepare a brief written reflection or a drawing depicting their experience in this crisis. Each Core Team member agreed to participate in two 90-minute meetings.

Shared Analysis of the Risk

Tensions within the Core Team had disrupted the communication, negatively impacting the collaboration and hindering the progress of the project risking a breakdown of hundreds of millions.

1. The lack of a current local policy regarding the (large-scale) urban policy and zoning plans to be implemented. This affects land use, the feasibility of demolition and construction plans in the neighborhood.

2. Fear that irreversible decisions will be made and that will lead to significant losses in the long term.

3. Construction costs will exceed the profit from the sale of the homes. Unclear communication between the core group members and between the steering committee and the core group.

The Result

The mediation led to the resolution of the impasse at that time, and the Core Team redefined its problems and presented those to the Steering Committee. In the Steering Committee all parties agreed to adhere to the previously made agreements.

The Way Forward

1. Invest in fostering flexible learning and reflective practices to enhance individual and collective decision-making processes.

2. Develop a shared vision and methodology while strengthening mutual trust among core group members.

3.  Communication is unclear both within the core group and between the core group and the steering committee.