Being a mediator...

[martin schulz]

As some of you know I am the manager of the Flensburg Museumharbour.

Now that doesn't only mean to check the finances, be in city-hall meetings and organise the infamous Muesumharbour events...it also means that I have to spend some times with interpersonal relationships.
Since we have a large quantity of "freaks" in the MH, probably because is is one of the last refuge for those who try to live different as the rest of society, or because the MH is a place where on can at least dream of living a "free" life (like a pirate perhaps).

Now I experienced a lot of different characters who try to establish their little dream in the MH. Some of those have utilized the MH for their purposes, which is quite ok, if the MH also has its benefit. Some have been gaining importance because of their memberships, have been invited to the mayor and have used that to get official orders. That in itself is not an issue, I guess I am sometimes doing the same thing.

Others have a job in the MH. One guy for instance is responsible for the "small boat harbour". I invited him to our executive board yesterday, to make some things clear.
1. With priviliges comes duty. Since he has used the little hut at the harbour as he thinks right, he also has to paint it outside- which he hasn't
2. Since he and his friends are using some of the boats which belong to the MH, he also has to care for them - which he hasn't
3. Since he has a group of friends that also like to go there and use every MH facility, we expect them to become members of the MH - so far they are not
4. He often "publishes" little information booklets. In some of those he has attacked the manager of the Museum Bpoatyard, because of a personal dispute. We believe that we have to censor that paper, not because we want to, but because we can't let other people except the elected executive board dictate the official politics of the MH. If the MH seeks trouble with the boatyard, it is our job to do so, not that of a single member of the MH (he even attacked our president in one of his booklets).

I have been working a lot with a friend who is the mediator of MOTOROLA here in Flensburg. I have learned a lot and I know what to do to create a win-win outcome. I invited this guy (an elderly person, ex-scientist now pensionist) and told him we would like to speak about this year - problems and positive results.
When suddenly some of the executive board and the guy shouted at each other, because of a misunderstanding I was still able to calm everybody and again created an open, factual athmosphere.

In the end everybody agreed that the meeting was a sucess and the guy accepted our objections and I didn't even have to get out the "torture-instruments" (sacking, exclusion).

I thought everything is fine and I even heard praise because of my wise and calm mediation...

An hour ago the guy came into my office telling me that he felt being like in an inquisition and he tried to prove that he was right with the attacks against the Boatyard manager...
He obviously didn't grab a single syllable of what was said yesterday. He doesn't understand that we have to provide an equal situation for everybody in the club and he doesn't see the difference in content and form of his publication. He said that it his his right of free speech to publish whatever he thinks is right. My objection that he represents the opinion of the whole MH when he hands out those booklets and that we can not let him express his opinion on a MH platform, didn't get through...

What shall I do?
The guy has reanimated the neglected "small boat harbour". He is always there and provides an contact point for those interessted in the MH.

But he also tends to disunite MH mambers. I an (unauthorised)article last year he even spoke about 2 clubs - big boats and little boats.

[glenallen]

Dis-Member that old fool, Martin.
You and your board need to issue an ultimatum to this man. You cannot allow him to disrupt the entire organization simply because he feels justified.
Remember, you're the boss!
Glen

[Del Lansing]

It sounds like this 'gentleman' is an unpaid volunteer?? I would approach it like he just has a bad memory, he needs a written explanation. Type up a small note that acknowledges his reanimation of the small boat harbor; point out the one positive asset is being outweighed by the negatives (points 1 to 4). Request a meeting at his convenience to resolve the unsettled issues.
Keep a copy of the message. Hand it to him in a sealed envelope and walk away. He would possibly (hopefully) think he is getting the sack. After he reads the message and comes to you for the meeting _never_ say you may can him, his doubt will be the tool more than your words. If he demands to know if you are hinting at letting him go, simply state "we need to resolve these issues". If he remains defiant and inactive then it sounds like the bad outweighs the good. It is nice to be nice, but it sucks to be walked on.

[martin schulz]

Del that's a good idea.

I know exactly where the line is between having an "usefull idiot" and allowing a misguided muddlehead to disrupt the whole organisation.

I must confess that I am amazed about the psyche of this guy. I mean what I have said and done is neither an executive arrogance nor a complicated behavior constraint. And he is actually an intelligent guy. And he is definetely not playing dumb to archieve his goals - he simply don't get it.

I am absolutely puzzled :confused:

[Ian McColgin]

Del's thoughts are in line with my own experience.

It can be hard to keep one's temper in the face of obdurate two-faced fools who won't hold to an agreement they have made and who think their's is the only possible way but that's what coming home and declaiming to the cat is for. In that or any other person's presence, you never loose it or threaten.

If it gets to the point where any person's negatives out-weigh their positives, organize your side with gile and stealth. It's best if your side don't even know they are being organized, which is usually possible if you manipulate the telos of any meetings with skill.

When the time is right, vote the offender out, heavy him/her out, or lop off his/her head. Whatever it takes.

Heavy out v. vote out? Depends on your controling rules but sometimes an organization is not set up to just dump a member. That's when you need a small group explicitly with you to block with justice and savagery every bad move the offender makes until s/he gives up in despair. By lop off the head, I of course mean metaphoricaly seperate the offender from whatever body s/he has in the organization, knowing that you may have to dump both head and body in the long run.

Real democracy is like real communication - a combination of trying to change and compromise with others in the first instance. Sometimes you must substitute the coersion of reason and proof for more engaging forms of persuasion. SOmetimes you have to set up - manipulate - people's experience so that they will more fully learn what you need them to learn. Sometimes you'll speak not so much to persuade the opposition as to engage your own side through the opposition.

It's usually better to move an imperfect consensus than win a perfect resolution by divisive vote.

G'luck

[martin schulz]

Wow Ian, that sounds like a lot of experience.

I bet you have digested you Machiavelli ;)

[martin schulz]

Please excuse me for bringing this up top again. I know it's a complicated issue, but I would really get some more opinions here...

[Gary E]

martin,
Dont feel bad, why should you be any better than Hennry Kissinger, he took ages to come to an understanding on the shape of a table. Then when that wuz setteled the rest was imposssible...

So now whutz HK doing?... whut else...Consulting :confused:

You do have by laws that this fellow has agreed to?

[Bruce Hooke]

To some degree the different issues involved seem to me to need different responses.

1. The publications issues is very cut-and-dry. If someone publishes something with the MH name on it then that publication needs to be authorized by the board. He is using the MH's name, and the board controls the use of that name. He cannot be allowed slack on this issue, especially because he is using his publication to sow division. It gets a little muddier if chooses to publish something without the MH name on it but pass it out at the museum, but I would clamp down on that too because of his use of publications to sow division. When he is on site as a volunteer he is representing the musuem.

2. Boat & shack maintenance -- Is there an official policy on this? If not maybe you need one that applies more broadly than just to his area. Here it feels to me like there is more room for slack -- if he is doing a lot of good stuff for the museum then maybe some other way can be found to deal with the maintenance. On the other hand, if much of the wear on the boats is because of the use he and his friends make of the boats then there is less reason to cut slack. Similarly, if he is really using the shack as his private space (and by private I'm going beyond it just being the office from which he runs his part of the museum, because that is an institutional function) then there is less room for slack.

3. Membership -- Again, I'd make sure you have an official policy on this so that he does not feel picked on.

As to how to approach all of this...it seems to me that a key judgement on which to base the next step is how he is likely to respond to what has been done so far. Was his visit to you after the meeting simply an attempt to save face and will he now go away and basically do what was asked, or is he the kind of guy who will continue to do what he wants to do until someone truly forces him to change? If the latter, or if there is doubt, then a polite letter may be the best way to handle things. This gives you a chance to both thank him for all that he has done and lay out your reasons for the things you need him to do...

[Henning 4148]

Martin,

although we have never met I have visited your harbour three times now. It is a wonderfull place, but I guess I know what you mean when you say you have a few strange fellows there who try to live a life outside the normal way. This is putting it carefully.

As for your situation: I can understand that the guy got upset. He is intelligent, no question about that. From his background he is used to run things his way and trust his own judgement more than other peoples. And he is too old to change. For him it must have felt like the inquisition. He was very close to loosing his face (or even felt like he was loosing his face) in front of a group of people he knows and whose judgement may be important to him (even if he doesn't show it).

So, what can you do?

How about this: Leadership is not about written rules and democratic committees. The written rules are there for the members to watch over each other, the committees are there for organised development and progress, but especially with a crowd like you seem to have assembled, I only see one way forward on the current issues:

Go into harms way and go alone.

Fix a time for a 4 eye meeting over a beer with him and explain to him that he is harming the place that he likes (he wouldn't spend his time there otherwise) by writing bad things about other people who also work there. Perhaps you can offer him the job of creating the official newsletter, if he subjects himself to having each issue approved by the committee / you / ... . You can only do this under 4 eyes. Whatever is said in this meeting must stay under 4 eyes. Being a leader can be tough.

Once you have this point sorted (and only then), ask him for a second meeting with his mates. Explain to them, that the boats need maintenance and that you would be glad if they could help you with this.

I don't know if this will work for you. That depends on who you are and how much cloud you got and how strange your fellows are. The guy might go berserk on you, but somehow I wouldn't think he will. He should be too intelligent for that.

[Peter Plones]

Martin I have visited your harbour last summer, it was very interesting. I think I have seen the guy you rever to.
There is one thing about this thread that bothers me. You are communicating about him, whithout him.
You seem to worry about the museum, but you seem to worry about that person as well, that is a positive point.
Stop the procedural talking ( although it can be an effective way of problem solving) and let him read these treads and speak with him ( don't talk to him)Show him that this situation bothers you and you would like a pleasant way out. If this doen't work ( try it more than one time) use the harder options as suggested by the others

[Henning 4148]

Ok, some more thoughts:

The first of the two meetings (the one under 4 eyes) must take place on his ground. Either his shed or his bar or his flat, whatever. You want something from him - he is voluntary, you want him to stop writing bad about others, so you got to go to him, tough though it may be.

Also - you will need to be prepared to spend whatever time it takes to get his commitment / promise. Wherever the discussion goes (and you will have to let it drift, you need to spend time with him) - eventually bring it back to the harbour, that it is important to you, that he is harming it and that you want his promise to stop that. Acknowledge his good other work. But eventually come back to the point - that you want his commitment to stop writing bad about others in the "club".

The second meeting also has to take place on their ground - again it may be difficult. But you are the leader, you have to face it. Again you will have to be prepared to spend a lot of time on the topic without giving up until you get the commitment.

My 5 cents.

[uncas]

I guess...I may be coming in late here although I have read the posts...
Firstly...am I right understanding the following:

1) You are the manager
2) You have a board of Trustees
3) you allow individuals to do pretty much as they please as long as they follow the basic rules.
4) You have a guy that doesn't
5) Also have the same guy writing quips maligning the establishment...

Maybe I am really dumb...I would not bother mediating if the above is true...Kick the guy outta there...He is taking advantage of you...using you to his own purpose and agenda..
and thinking that well what the heck, they won't do anything to me...

Look at an analogy...You are the boss of a company...someone under you is not meeting the requirements of his job, or doing his job, and maligning you and the company behind your back....
What does one do when one is the head guy...Get rid of the idiot.
If I'm wrong I'm wrong...Just can't figure out what hold he has over you. As far as I can see, he has no hold over you...such as a contract etc.

ps...there are basic rules of behavior which most would want to follow in this situation...He is not doing so...Yes, I know he is old...but his continued presense will make future similar sitations harder to deal with..
So...I'm a bastard...Having been there...in situations similar to this, I know...
Don't let the guy set a precidence

[ 12-01-2005, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: uncas ]

[Stiletto]

Uncas, it seems to me the 'hold' this guy has is the respect that Martin has for him because of the positive aspects of his membership, and Martin's desire to, and be seen to, treat him fairly.
In my view this dilemma is about personal relationships much more than beaureaucratic procedure.

I think that if Martin expresses his view of the problem and asks for the fellow's help in solving it, as a founding member of the organisation the fellow will at least be given the respect he feels he is due. ( at this level it seems it may have become an emotional issue for him rather than a purely rational one).

In my opinion there is some way to go before the heavy handed solution you advocate. I hope it doesnt come to that.

[ 12-01-2005, 04:35 PM: Message edited by: Stiletto ]

[uncas]

Stiletto...I guess I missed the positves...All I read were a bunch of negs...
Although this situation appears to have been going on for a while...and the guy doesn't seem to want to meet half way.
It seems to be a case of his way or no way.
Well, we will see...I threw my useless 2 cents in.

[ 12-01-2005, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: uncas ]

[Stiletto]

Yep, that's four cents between us. smile.gif

[uncas]

What can we buy with $0.04 and share?

[Stiletto]

I'm working out the compound interest as I type.

[Billy Bones]

With a nod to Peter, showing the fellow these threads would, I believe, be the worst mistake you could make. As it stands this is an anonymous problem solving session, with a small bit of healthy venting. Showing it to him would make it personal and very rude, perhaps even ugly.

Fascinating stuff here from many posters, much of which I could and will use in the near future.

Good luck Martin.

[uncas]

Good luck Martin....

[martin schulz]

Thanks a lot guys.
This is probbly the first time I came here for help (except when I asked how to get my girlfriend sailing ;) ).

And as opposed to what I think about the "bilge" sometimes I must say that I am both surprized and thankful.

Looks like this place can offer much more help than splicing-tips. ;)

[George Roberts]

martin schulz ---

It appears the fellow has been acting the way he is now for some time. I guess he has the right to be ticked off with you for changing the rules now.

You even called him up before the "board" to tell him off.

I guess you messed up a lot already.

If you want him to go, kick him out.

If you want him to stay, I guess you have to change some also.

But then you might see it different.

[uncas]

I guess he has the right to be ticked off with you for changing the rules now.

I don't think the rules had been changed...I think that the enforcement of those rules have...

Give a guy an inch...and he will take a mile...Someone famous wrote that...wasn't me though.. :D

[martin schulz]

Originally posted by George Roberts:
martin schulz ---

It appears the fellow has been acting the way he is now for some time. I guess he has the right to be ticked off with you for changing the rules now.
There are always certain set of rules. Some are accurately defined, such as amployer-employee relationships. But even there, as well as everywhere else there are rules that everybody agrees on although they are not openly outspoken. Sometimes the loose definition of those undefined rules provide more positive effects as a pedantic framework of rules would.

If you ask me if I could borrow you a tool, I would give it to you assuming that I will get it back - as fast as possible, not broke. I would also assume that in return I could borrow a tool from you as well.

As we all know that doesn't always work, nevertheless most of us still believe that borrowing is basically a good idea.

Now, if I make you the harbourmaster and give you a little hut with the obligation that boatowners must be able to use the hut, that you have to care for the hut and the boats under your custody, I would assume that you will do this. So far the hut has been remodelled to fit his general idea. It is not how I would do it, but that is his decision. The problem is that inside everything is snug and cosy, they have an old woodburning stove, sometimes make their meals there, in the summer some guys relax in a haddock...

That is all quite alright with me, as long as it doesn't affect the general idea of the MH (I wouldn't allow people to live there. I even kicked out one guy of the trustee board who thought it a good idea to move in the hut to live there). Also I insist that the outside appearance of the hut has to be cared for as well.

So far I always try to keep things a bit open, not because I am not able to be decisive, but because I don't want to hinder creative ideas. Once I nail a Museumhafen code of conduct at the door, everybody will try to behave, afraid of being kicked out.