Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which mediation constitutes an appropriate and effective intervention in cases of alleged workplace bullying.

Design/methodology/approach

Data was collected from 25 practising mediators in New Zealand by way of semi-structured interviews. The transcribed data was analysed by way of thematic analysis using the software NVivo11. The features of bullying cases identified as potential concerns for mediation in the literature acted as a coding framework, alongside the analytical framework for assessing dispute resolution processes developed by John Budd and Alexander Colvin.

Findings

A thematic analysis of the data revealed four key features of bullying experiences that mediators believed influenced the efficacy of the mediation process: emotional stability of the parties; power imbalance between the parties; insight and differing interpretations; and the impact of organisational context. Further, the analysis revealed two strategies to overcome barriers to the efficacy of mediation: considering mediation as part of a broader range of dispute resolution processes; and encouraging early low-level mediation intervention.

Research limitations/implications

This study only elicited the views of workplace mediators, many of whom were self-employed. Thus, the participants in the sample were likely to speak positively about the use of mediation. In part, this was helpful because the mediators spoke largely about how they made the process work allowing identification of techniques to improve the efficacy of mediation. However, future research is needed to explore the views of other parties, including parties to a bullying mediation, managers and/or human resources (HR) personnel.

Practical implications

Five recommendations for workplace mediators dealing with bullying cases are suggested: mediators should screen the emotional stability of the parties during the initial stages of the mediation; mediators should discuss with the parties the possibility and potential benefits of bringing along a support person; mediators should view their role more widely to influence the wider organisational contexts in which bullying occurs; informal mediation should take place before the escalation of a bullying experience; and mediators should consider completing an investigation prior to the start of the mediation.

Originality/value

Prior empirical studies on the efficacy of workplace mediation have not specifically investigated the use of mediation for bullying cases. This study addresses this gap in that it provides empirical support for the proposition that mediation in cases of bullying may only be appropriate under certain circumstances and that a flexible approach to mediation is required.

中文翻译：

---

探索在工作场所欺凌情况下调解的效力

目的

本文的目的是探讨在所谓的工作场所欺凌案件中，调解在何种程度上构成了适当而有效的干预措施。

设计/方法/方法

通过半结构化访谈从新西兰的25名执业调解员那里收集了数据。使用软件NVivo11通过主题分析对转录的数据进行分析。欺负案件的特征在文献中被认为是调解的潜在关注点，它与约翰·布德和亚历山大·科尔文开发的评估争端解决程序的分析框架一起，被用作编码框架。

发现

对数据进行专题分析后发现，调解员认为欺凌经历的四个关键特征影响了调解过程的有效性：当事人的情绪稳定；双方之间的权力不平衡；洞察力和不同的解释；以及组织环境的影响。此外，分析还揭示了两种克服调解效力障碍的策略：将调解视为更广泛的争端解决程序的一部分；并鼓励早期的低层调解干预。

研究局限/意义

这项研究仅引起了工作场所调解员的意见，其中许多人是自雇人士。因此，样本中的参与者可能对调解的使用持肯定态度。在某种程度上，这是有帮助的，因为调解员在很大程度上谈论了他们如何使程序发挥作用，从而确定了提高调解效力的技术。但是，需要进行进一步的研究来探索其他各方的观点，包括欺凌调解的各方，经理和/或人力资源（HR）人员。

实际影响

对于处理欺负案件的工作场所调解员，提出了五项建议：调解员应在调解的初始阶段筛选当事方的情绪稳定性；调解员应与当事方讨论召集支持人员的可能性和潜在利益；调解员应更广泛地考虑其作用，以影响发生欺凌行为的更广泛的组织环境；非正式调解应在欺凌经历升级之前进行；调解员应考虑在调解开始之前完成调查。

创意/价值

先前有关工作场所调解效力的实证研究尚未专门调查对欺凌案件使用调解的情况。本研究解决了这一空白，因为它为以下观点提供了实证支持：在欺凌情况下进行调解仅在某些情况下才是适当的，并且需要灵活的调解方法。