CBI Reports Spring 2008

May 16th, 2008

The latest edition of CBI Reports is now available. Also, please check-out the newly released, much better than before, CBI website!

Upcoming Basic Mediation Training in Cambridge, MA

January 24th, 2008

CDSC is pleased to announce the Spring 2008 Basic Mediation Training. Please find attached registration brochure which includes the dates and times of the training. Please note that class size is limited to a maximum of 24 participants. The cost of the training is $695. The early registration cost for the training is $650 if registration is received by April 3, 2008

Upcoming Divorce Mediation Training in Cambridge, MA

January 24th, 2008

The Community Dispute Settlement Center is pleased to announce its 2008 Divorce Mediation Training. 

This 24 hour course is designed for mediators who are interested in the practice of divorce mediation. The training integrates substantive information with practice through interactive role play experience. Prerequisite: Basic mediation training. The training is being held on March 28, 29, 31 & April 4.

Attached please find the Divorce Mediation Training brochure and registration for our upcoming training.

Consensus Building Institute

July 25th, 2007

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

I have very exciting news to share with all of you! I recently accepted the position of Senior Associate of Assessment, Coaching, Training at the Consensus Building Institute in Cambridge. It is a role that I am extremely excited about with an organization that I feel fortunate to be a part of. For me, it appears to be the perfect culmination of my experience as a mediator and organizational developer and leverages my education in dispute resolution, psychology, and law.

I want to say thank you to all of you for the various roles you have played in helping me get here. Without your support and encouragement, this opportunity simply would not have been available to me.

Some background…

The Consensus Building Institute (CBI) is a not-for-profit originally founded by Professor Lawrence Susskind out of the Harvard-MIT Program on Negotiation. My role will primarily be focussed on assisting corporate clients with enhancing their capacity to build creative, value-added, negotiations to further their inter and intra organizational challenges.

CBI’s Mission

The Consensus Building Institute improves the way leaders, advocates, experts and communities make public and organizational decisions. We use innovative strategies to engage diverse stakeholders, identify shared goals, manage conflicting interests, achieve joint gains, and build productive working relationships. We work with government agencies, community groups, businesses, advocacy organizations, researchers and educators.
Our work spans:
• Economic, environmental and social issues in the U.S. and around the world
• Organizational management in corporations, public agencies and non-profits
• Conflict resolution education in schools


What CBI does:

The Consensus Building Institute (CBI) improves the way leaders use negotiations to make organizational decisions, achieve agreements, and manage multiparty conflicts and planning efforts. We use proven principles, processes, and techniques that improve group decision-making on complex public and organizational issues. We use our substantive experience and innovative strategies to assist clients worldwide in three core areas:

Facilitate public collaboration
Strengthen organizations
Build knowledge

Whether managing important public issues, building organizational capacity, or expanding knowledge, CBI helps our clients make better decisions and get things done.

Feel free to contact me at the new information below. I will still be reachable through my jgordon@potsadr.com email address so no need to delete anything from your address book or contacts.

Joshua A. Gordon
Senior Associate
Assessment, Coaching & Training Services
The Consensus Building Institute
238 Main Street, Suite 400
Cambridge, MA 02142
617.492.1414 (Office)
617.492.1919 (Fax)
440.388.1079 (eFax)
http://www.cbitraining.org
http://www.cbuilding.org

Stop Snitching Fears

April 11th, 2007

In study, teens open up about ’snitching,’ fear of reprisal

One teenager described seeing a witness pistol-whipped for reporting a rape to police. “His eyes were completely red; you couldn’t see any white,” the unidentified youth said in an interview with researchers for a study on witness intimidation released yesterday. “They threatened to kill him and his family.”

Another said: “I’d get in trouble if I reported a violent crime. Gangs would be mad at me.”

A third teenager recalled deciding not to talk to police after witnessing a shootout.

“If I told them, the drug dealers would come back to me and make more trouble,” the teenager said. “I told my mom, and she was scared. She went back to the drug dealers and told them that I didn’t say nothing.”

Teens interviewed at Boys and Girls Clubs across Massachusetts told researchers they are afraid to cooperate with police against gang members, citing widespread violence and the power that gang members have in their neighborhoods.

The interviews were conducted for the study “Snitches Get Stitches: Youth, Gangs, and Witness Intimidation in Massachusetts,” sponsored by the state Executive Office of Public Safety and the National Center for Victims of Crime, a nonprofit advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.

Twenty-five percent of survey participants said that none of their neighbors would report a gang-related crime, with 64 percent saying that people don’t report such crimes because they are afraid of being beaten up or killed.

“Witness intimidation remains a significant problem that seriously undermines the effectiveness of the criminal justice system,” the report says.

Mary Lou Leary, a former Middlesex prosecutor and executive director of the National Center for Victims of Crime, said her organization chose to profile Massachusetts because the state made significant inroads against gun violence and witness intimidation in the 1990s and is experiencing a resurgence of both problems now.

Researchers suggested that officials provide anonymity to witnesses whenever possible, reach out to parents, and keep in touch with witnesses throughout the legal process.

Leary said legislation passed last year to establish a state witness protection program puts Massachusetts far ahead of much of the country when it comes to protecting witnesses at the local level.

Despite the state’s leadership on public safety issues, Leary said she was startled by the high percentage of young people at the Boys and Girls Clubs who had experienced gun violence. Seven percent reported being the victim of a shooting, 20 percent reported witnessing a shooting, and 18 percent reported a family member or friend being shot at.

“When you live in those high-crime communities, even if you are not involved in gang activity, you’re exposed to it all the time,” Leary said.

Youths participating in the study agreed, telling researchers they resent the gangs’ power.

“You can’t walk through a street without looking back,” one said. “They just think everything is theirs. They want to be the president of the block.”

Another youth said gang members sometimes say they are protecting the neighborhood. “But they’re not keeping us safe, because a bullet [doesn’t] have a name on it; it can hit anybody,” the youth said.

Researchers interviewed 39 young people ranging from 13 to 21 at seven participating Boys and Girls Clubs across the state, from Roxbury to Springfield, and collected anonymous surveys from 641 young people, most between 12 and 18, who frequent the Boys and Girls Clubs.

While 38 percent reported hearing of a threat against a schoolmate related to reporting gang crimes, only 12 percent of youths who had personally reported a crime said they had been threatened.

And young people said schools offer no relief from their fear.

Many gang members attended his school, attracting rival gangs to campus, one youth said. “We’d have lock-downs; we’d have police, metal detectors. People came from other schools to fight people at my school. It felt like a prison.”

Another said: “The kids are out of control. The students don’t only fight students, they fight teachers, too.”

Boston Police Commissioner Edward F. Davis downplayed some of the report’s findings in an interview yesterday, saying that witness intimidation is more perception than reality. “The fear is much more widespread than the actual incidents,” he said.

Community leaders disagreed. “We find it very difficult to get young people to testify, even when they’re the victims of the crime, not just witnesses,” said Emmett Folgert, director of the Dorchester Youth Collaborative. “If they’re a victim of a gang crime, they usually are directly intimidated.”

District Attorney Daniel F. Conley said 90 percent of the gun and gang cases his office handles feature some form of witness intimidation.

“We do have many potential witnesses or witnesses who do come forward who have been overtly threatened or have been actually assaulted,” Conley said.

At least 42 families or individuals statewide have been relocated under the witness protection program, and about 35 of those lived in Suffolk County, according to Conley’s office.

Conley said many youths complain about overly aggressive police officers, which he said intensifies youths’ reluctance to cooperate with law enforcement.

Many youths interviewed for the study said they have tense relations with police. Some said they rarely see police in their neighborhood and others said they only see them driving by in cruisers.

“They are jerks,” one youth said. “They abuse their authority . . . giving people dirty looks, going about everything the wrong way.”

Davis said that he expects officers to treat everyone well and that most officers are friendly and respectful.

Suzanne Smalley can be reached at ssmalley@globe.com.

A Conversation with the Ombudsperson

April 3rd, 2007

A Conversation With the Ombudsperson

Vox of Dartmouth asked Mary Childers to answer some questions about the role of the College’s Ombuds Office, and to share her views on what she hopes to achieve in her new post. Childers was appointed ombudsperson in February 2007, the first person to hold the position at Dartmouth since the administration of former President John G. Kemeny.

Mary Childers
Mary Childers (Photo by Joseph Mehling ‘69)

VOX: What is an ombudsperson and what do you hope you can accomplish in this role?
MC: Ombuds Offices give people a chance to explore a wide range of problems by talking them through confidentially with someone who’s neutral and independent. My role as Dartmouth’s ombudsperson is to be a resource where non-faculty staff members can work towards resolving conflicts in an environment of civility and mutual respect. The word “ombudsman” derives from an 18th-century Swedish term describing a government officer whose role is to hear citizens’ complaints in a neutral and independent setting, but the concept of ombudspersons dates back to ancient China.

VOX: How do you maintain your independence from the administration? You report to the President and need to be aware of College policies. How do you create and maintain boundaries?
MC: I report to the President on trends, not specifics and have confidence that he and others will respect the independence of the Ombuds Office. Independence doesn’t mean an ombudsperson is a free agent, though. There are many restrictions on the activities I can engage in. For example, the ombudsperson doesn’t write policies, advocate for or organize against them. What I can do is help individuals and, on the institutional level, point out and question the repercussions of events that employees bring to my attention, without breaching their confidentiality.

VOX: Where is the Ombuds Office?
MC: My office is in room 206 in the Church of Christ at Dartmouth on College Street—more commonly known as the White Church. I know that some employees have qualms about coming to the office because of their religious affiliations and feelings. I want everyone to know that I’ll accommodate them by meeting elsewhere if need be. At the same time, I think this location bolsters my office’s independence because it’s not in an administrative building, yet is centrally located so that most hourly staff can pop in during lunch hour if that’s what’s most helpful to them. I also know that the Church of Christ is very inclusive and respectful of the boundaries between the church and the rental space.

VOX: Why does Dartmouth need an ombudsperson?
MC: The creation of the Ombuds Office was recommended by the Administrative Working Group on Hiring and Retention. That group was one of three committees established by President Wright to examine how Dartmouth could improve internal communication, recruit and retain talented administrators, and align the budgeting cycles more closely with the College’s strategic planning process. According to the hiring and retention group’s report, the Ombuds Office would “serve both managers and other staff members. It would operate outside the formal grievance procedures, in some instances simply offering advice and information, in others facilitating a resolution of the matter at hand and offering mediation when necessary.”

VOX: How does it feel to be the person that people come to with all of their problems?
MC: I personally find it gratifying to help people solve their own problems when it’s possible for them to do so. I’m also fascinated by how people change their definitions of issues and arrive at creative solutions themselves through the process of being listened to and questioned in a nonjudgmental way.

VOX: Explain how the Ombuds Office at Dartmouth maintains the confidentiality of those seeking consultation.
MC: First of all, not everyone wants confidentiality, but one of the primary purposes of the office is to give people a place to go where they are not putting the College on notice of an issue. I have no obligation to report what I hear unless there is an imminent physical threat, evidence of a discrimination issue, or a subpoena, which would be highly unusual. I keep notes only as long as I am working with someone. When their issue is resolved or referred elsewhere or enters a grievance process, I will shred notes.

Ombuds officers do not participate as witnesses or adjudicators in campus grievance procedures precisely because people need to feel free to explore their intentions, strategies, and fears separately from processes that involve creating records, judging evidence, and potentially recommending discipline.

VOX: If your consultations are confidential, then how do you account for the office’s activity in any given period of time? Don’t you have to submit reports?
MC: Quite rightly, the College wants to assess the effectiveness and contribution of the office. I will report on numbers and types of concerns and trends, while making sure that identities are not revealed.

VOX: Do you have a list of questions that employees can ask themselves that could guide them in knowing whether a consultation with you would be helpful?
MC: I’m just now working on materials and will be posting helpful advice on the Ombuds Office Web site, once it is launched. The launch will be announced online and in Vox of Dartmouth.

VOX: What special qualities do you bring to this role? What do you want people to know about you personally that might help them as they consider whether or not to seek your advice?
MC: I’ve served as Dartmouth’s director of equal opportunity and affirmative action, and as associate dean of arts and sciences and senior advisor to the provost at Brandeis University, where I focused on academic personnel. I’ve resolved disputes and offered training on over 15 campuses. This extensive experience combined with my genuine personal interest in helping people, makes me, I hope, a real resource for Dartmouth managers and staff. I think I also apply my skills as a teacher of writing when I help people clarify their thinking, understand policies, and cultivate strategies that are effective in professional environments.

VOX: In any workplace, there are bound to be disputes and character conflicts. Sometimes people just don’t get along. Is it the role of Dartmouth’s Ombuds Office to deal with those situations?
MC: My role is to deal with situations people bring to me by helping them resolve them or referring them elsewhere. Sometimes resolution is about trying to change a relationship; sometimes it’s about accepting differences by coming to understand them better and gaining distance from conflicts that are unlikely to disappear. I certainly don’t want to give people unrealistic expectations of utopian conviviality in the workplace. At the same time, I know it often helps to talk things through in a neutral and confidential environment.

VOX: How should employees view the ombudsperson? Are you the person of last resort or should they touch base with you as soon as there are questions or concerns?
MC: Most employee issues are addressed with supervisors and in the Office of Human Resources. But when people would rather seek advice and informal coaching elsewhere, they can come to me with an issue, preferably before it escalates. I’m a first and last resort, and an option at any point in someone’s efforts to break through bureaucratic entanglements, sort through ethical questions about office practices, communicate with a co-worker or supervisor, or improve any other aspect of their working lives at Dartmouth.

VOX: Have you ever been in a situation where you’ve consulted with an ombudsperson or someone in a similar role? Was it helpful?
MC: I’ve been in situations where I would have benefited from such a confidential, neutral conversation but where the option wasn’t available. I’m glad it exists at Dartmouth now. It’s a great privilege to be providing this service to my fellow employees.

By LAUREL STAVIS

http://www.dartmouth.edu/%7Evox/0607/0402/childers.html

How to stifle your creativity in 10 easy steps!

April 3rd, 2007

How to stifle your creativity in 10 easy steps

~ Courtesy of Lifehack.org

  1. Be afraid. Be very afraid. There’s nothing like fear to put a stop to any kind of creativity: fear of getting it wrong; fear of what other people may say; fear of embarrassment; fear of change. The more afraid that you are, the less creative you will be—and the less you will act on any creative thoughts that manage to break through the curtain of anxiety.
  2. Remind yourself of all the times that you failed in the past. Keep them fresh in your mind. Dwell on them—the pain, the shame, the hurt, the way others sniggered. Let your imagination go to work and really re-live those cringe-making moments. That should stop you ever trying again.
  3. Never waste time. Stay constantly busy. Never mind what the tasks are, just keep them coming thick and fast. Time is money, isn’t it? There’s no mileage in leaving any moments free from gainful activity—especially for self-indulgent activities like day dreaming or reflecting on what has happened. If you fill every waking moment with busyness, you won’t have to worry about creative thoughts sneaking up on you. There will be no space for them.
  4. Always try to fit in. Be much more than a good team player—be the person who never, ever rocks the boat. Whatever seems to be the majority opinion, go with it. People who have ideas of their own can face suspicion or—horror of horrors—criticism and dislike by the majority. Don’t risk being on the wrong side. The minute that it’s clear what the majority (or the most powerful players) want, that’s where your opinions and thoughts must be.
  5. Stick to what you know. Tried and true is what’s right for you. Change and novelty involve risk, and risks can go wrong. If you give in to entertaining innovative thoughts, you may find that what you’ve been doing all these years isn’t as good as you thought. That would upset you and maybe force you to do something risky, like altering your habits or changing your viewpoint. So don’t be rash. Caution must be your watchword at all times. Whatever that new idea is, let it wait a while—say a decade or so—before considering it seriously. You’ll be surprised how many will go away in far less time than that.
  6. Always defer to authority. The people in charge must know what they are doing, or they wouldn’t hold the positions that they do. It would be presumptuous to inject any of your own ideas, when they clearly have all the answers. Rules exist to be obeyed, not challenged. If you always do exactly as you are told, you won’t ever risk disapproval from your betters.
  7. Don’t ask stupid questions. Best of all, don’t ask any questions. They only get people into trouble. Folk who develop the nasty habit of questioning things may upset the status quo, and that simply causes trouble and disruption. Things are as they are. There’s no point wasting time or effort wondering whether they ought to be different in some way. Only dissidents and weirdoes don’t understand that simple fact.
  8. Always listen to your Inner Critic. It’s there to stop you making a fool of yourself. Whatever it says, pay close attention. It will unfailingly point out how useless, pointless, and silly those creative ideas really are. It will explain to you that they will never work, and how expressing them will only make you a laughingstock. It’s your friend. Trust it implicitly.
  9. Leave thinking to the experts. There’s no point in bothering them with with your pathetic notions or observations. If it was an idea worth having, the experts would already have thought about it. They have all kinds of qualifications and can use long words too. If you think that some change might be needed (and you can’t simply ignore such a disruptive idea), hire expensive, expert consultants to do the thinking. They’ll quickly tell you whatever you want to hear, then add what others are doing, so you can copy them. Best of all, if it goes wrong, you can first of all say that what you did was follow industry best practice (whatever that means); and, if that doesn’t disarm any criticism, you can blame the consultants.
  10. Keep it simple, stupid. The worst thing about creative ideas is that they so often make life more complicated. The best way to stay on an even keel is to keep everything very, very simple. Find one or two rules of thumb and stick to them like glue. Don’t listen to anyone who tries to tell you that there aren’t simple, easy answers to every situation. There are. It’s just that, for some odd reason, they don’t work very often—if ever. Still, persistence is a great virtue. If you stay with these simple, superficial approaches long enough, one or two are bound to work in some circumstance, sometime. Then you can point out to the clever dicks that you were right all along. Why mess up your head with learning? It’s learning that allows creative ideas in the first place. Anyway, learning is for children. Adults like you don’t need it.

Open Letter to Superintendents and Mediation Programs from the Office of the Attorney General

March 27th, 2007

I am pleased to announce the opening of the Request for Proposals for the Student Conflict Resolution Experts (SCORE) program for the 2007 - 2008 school year. We are accepting applications from schools who are interested in working in partnership with a Local Community Mediation Program (LCMP) on the development of a SCORE program.

As you may know, SCORE uses trained student mediators to help resolve conflict between and among their peers. The model for SCORE is a unique collaboration among the Attorney General’s Office (AGO), middle, junior, and high schools, and LCMPs. The grant funds are awarded to the school to support a local SCORE partnership. The school funds staff from the LCMP who implements the program in the school.

As a condition of participation, we require the partnership to raise matching funds for the community mediation program to hire a SCORE Coordinator to work in the school exclusively to develop and direct a peer mediation program. The Coordinator=s responsibilities include program development, recruiting and training student mediators, scheduling and supervising student mediation sessions, conducting post-mediation follow-up, and working collaboratively with school and AGO staff. The partnering LCMP is responsible for hiring and supervising the SCORE Coordinator. The AGO collects data from SCORE programs and provides training and technical assistance to the partnership as needed. Subject to funding availability, we anticipate awarding grants of up to $20,000 per school.

This year we are also offering a SCORE Training Grant. This differs from the traditional grant in that the responsibility of the LCMP is limited to the initial training of student mediators. The management of the program is left to school staff. Some of the grant funds may be used to stipend school staff as well as to pay the LCMP for the training of the students.

Staff from my office will conduct two pre-proposal conferences to help potential applicants understand the requirements of the program and how to apply for a SCORE grant. To register to attend a pre-proposal conference, please contact Dawn Fontaine, Program Coordinator at 617-727-2200 x 2934 or by e-mail at dawn.fontaine@ago.state.ma.us
The pre-proposal conferences will we held on:

April 12, 2007 at our regional office in New Bedford and
April 13, 2007 at our regional office in Springfield.

You may download a copy of the Request for Proposals from the website, www.ago.state.ma.us. The due date for applications is May 15, 2007. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Nora Mann, Chief of the Community Information and Education Division at 617-727-220 x2356 or nora.mann@state.ma.us.

Cordially,


Martha Coakley

Massachusetts Attorney General

When the Boss is a Bully or Jerk

March 27th, 2007

When the Boss is a Bully or Jerk

By Tom Kosakowski of the Ombuds Blog
MNSBC has two stories today about bad bosses. (Either these stories are becoming more common or I’m just better at finding them.) The first story was prompted by an Elle/MSNBC survey that found 16 percent of employees considered their bosses to be bullies. Stephen R. Covey (of “7 Habits” fame) advises approaching the boss calmly, learning to live with the stress or looking for another job. The second article features advice from Robert I. Sutton, author of a recent best seller, “The No A—— Rule.” He urges employers to screen out and purge jerks. For the unfortunate victims, Sutton says the best options are becoming indifferent or quitting. (How to Cope When the Boss is a Bully; Advice for Tackling Workplace Jerks; related Ombuds Blog post NYT Career Couch: If Bullied, Visit Ombuds.)

Arbitration and Mediation workshop by JAMS

January 27th, 2007

JAMS co-produced workshop on International Arbitration & Mediation, Mar. 27, in Los Angeles, CA, you will gain tips and strategies for the resolution of complex international disputes, with special consideration to matters based in Asia. Join program co-chairs Cedric C. Chao, Esq. of Morrison & Foerster LLP, Jay Welsh, Esq. of JAMS, and a faculty of leading practitioners, including senior corporate counsel from such major multinationals as Bechtel and Nike, to discuss what corporate counsel, litigators and professionals involved in transnational ADR need to know. Sign up soon. You can register here What: International Arbitration & Mediation When: March 27, 2007 Where: Los Angeles, CA (Omni Los Angeles Hotel) Details: International Arbitration & Mediation Workshop or call us at (800) 854-8009


« Previous Entries