Winners and finalists of the 2022 Indigenous Governance Awards talk about the importance of developing the next generation of leaders and how succession planning takes place in their organisation...
-
Home
-
01 Understanding governance
-
02 Culture and governance
-
03 Getting Started
-
04 Leadership
-
05 Governing the organisation
- 5.0 Governing the organisation
- 5.1 Roles, responsibilities and rights of a governing body
- 5.2 Accountability: what is it, to whom and how?
- 5.3 Decision making by the governing body
- 5.4 Governing finances and resources
- 5.5 Communicating
- 5.6 Future planning
- 5.7 Building capacity and confidence for governing bodies
- 5.8 Case Studies
-
06 Rules and policies
-
07 Management and staff
-
08 Disputes and complaints
- 8.0 Disputes and complaints
- 8.1 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous approaches
- 8.2 Core principles and skills for dispute and complaint resolution
- 8.3 Disputes and complaints about governance
- 8.4 Your members: Dealing with disputes and complaints
- 8.5 Organisations: dealing with internal disputes and complaints
- 8.6 Practical guidelines and approaches
- 8.7 Case Studies
-
09 Governance for nation rebuilding
- Governance Stories
- Glossary
- Useful links
- Acknowledgements
-
Preview new Toolkit
08 Disputes and complaints


This painting entitled: Two Ways: Yapa and Kardiya Ways depicts the Aboriginal dispute-resolution process at Ali Curung in the Northern Territory. It is reproduced with the kind permission of the artists, Gwen Brown and Marjorie Hayes, members of the Kurduju Committee from Ali Curung.
Conflicts of views between people and complaints about how things are done are common to every society and organisation.
However, if tensions and differences of opinions are left unresolved for too long, they can turn into irreconcilable disputes that poison the air and destroy people’s ability to work and live together.
Most societies have ways to protect peace and order, impose sanctions and punishment, deal with complaints by citizens, and mediate disputes.
Doing this well and fairly is a fundamental part of effective governance.
However, there can be major differences across cultures about what people consider to be ‘fair’ and the ‘right ways’ of settling conflict and restoring harmony.
This is the case for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander nations and their organisations that have to operate under and negotiate between two very different cultural ways of dealing with disputes and grievances.
This topic gives you a broad introduction to this very challenging area, focusing on disputes about governance. It includes tips about the principles and processes involved, along with tools and guidelines for dealing with some commonly encountered problems.
Today, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and their organisations operate under two very different systems of laws.
Incorporated organisations are established under western legislation that spells out legally what a conflict is (for example, a conflict of interest) or a grievance (which could be about an election process or decision), and what procedures should be followed (including appeals, complaints and audit procedures).
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are citizens living under the Australian parliamentary and common law inherited from the British legal system. Their lands and communities are located and regulated within the administrative boundaries of mainstream governments.
But they also have their own cultural identities and continue to adapt mechanisms for mediating disputes, resolving grievances and restoring social harmony that are based on their ancient systems of law, networked relationships and jurisdiction.
8.1.1 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mechanisms and values
There are common underlying values and processes that can be seen at work across the country when Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people deal with disputes, wrongdoing and grievances.
In general, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture-based mechanisms for managing and settling disputes and wrongdoing are: |
action-oriented and physical. Punishment and sanctions involve law-based and regulated restitution, revenge or injury. |
socially based. Conflicts seep into wider social networks, people ‘in the wrong’ may be sent away by the group, or may initiate their own self-imposed absence from the group or community. |
material and monetary. Restitution and compensation are valued, including the exchange of cash, food, services or commodity goods. |
religious and spiritual. Individuals with legitimate authority and power act as enforcers of punishment, people may participate in cleansing rituals, or the wrongdoer may be excluded from valued religious ceremony and knowledge. |
symbolic and performance-based. Ritualised peacemaking apologies and highly orchestrated reconciliation fights may be performed. |
The closely networked, kin-related nature of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander society means that conflict and wrongdoing can quickly spread across a wide circle of people.
This means that in order for resolution of disputes and grievances to be considered legitimate and fair, that wider circle of people needs to be included.
8.1.2 Differences in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous systems
At the heart of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander systems of law and related mechanisms is the desire to:
- recognise collective rights and interest
- restore social relationships
- restore a sense of cohesive collective identity
- reaffirm systems of religious law and authority.
This is different from Australia’s western legal system, which has a focus on:
- individual rights
- separation of the interests and rights of the ‘victim’ and ‘offender’
- representation by external legal advocates
- ‘arm’s length’ judgement and punishment by courts.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander dispute resolution
|
Western dispute resolution |
The close family, elders and wider community work out what the dispute or wrongdoing is about, who it has affected, and how it will be resolved or punished. |
Strangers (external professionals) determine the nature of the dispute or wrongdoing, and how it will be resolved or punished. |
Punishment and peacemaking processes are made by consensus among all participants, according to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander laws and legal precedent. The aim is both personal punishment and restoration of the wider social equilibrium and collective identity. |
Punishment is determined according to formalised laws and legal precedent. Peacemaking and restoration of collective identity are not considerations, although individual rehabilitation is. |
Participants take into account not only the impact on the ‘victim’, but also the wider, critical factors of social and religious impact. |
The impact of the dispute or wrongdoing on the ‘victim’ may be taken into account by the court. |
The people directly involved in the dispute (victims and offenders) are also involved in the customary law process, including determining innocence or guilt and advocating punishment or other restorative solutions. |
External advocates are used. |
Decision making is collective and by consensus, sometimes taking considerable time and negotiation. |
Decision making is hierarchical and formalised through institutions such as courts, hearings, professional members of the judiciary and jury systems. |
A wider group of people may be included in the punishment, peacemaking and compensation. |
Only the ‘offender’ is punished. |
8.1.3 The challenges of balancing two-way processes
“In Yolngu communities it’s very hard to use balanda [non-Indigenous] law system to bring about conflict resolution and restoration between families and clans. Balanda systems of law break and damage relationships between people, family and clan groups. This is because balanda system of law is very hard for us to understand and also does not come out of Yolngu dispute and conflict resolution practice and process.”
(Djiniyini Gondarra, Mawul Rom Project, Yolngu Nation)
The differences between the two ways of law and dispute resolution present major challenges for effective governance.
Western systems of dispute resolution are seen by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as imposing alien values and legal processes, and undermining or ignoring important relationships between family groups, clans and communities.
On the other hand, while many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander nations and communities continue to place a high value on their own laws and processes, they face practical difficulties in the contemporary conditions of many of their communities. For example:
- pressure from close-kin may mean that Indigenous leaders of organisations do not want to upset their families, and so hesitate to enforce decisions and policies
- elders and leaders may be incapacitated through poor health or are absent and are unable to effectively exercise any authority or calming influence—this can undermine consensus decision making and long-term planning, especially if demands for immediate access to resources, or disputed land-ownership rights are involved
- many Indigenous people are concerned about the breakdown of the traditional authority of elders, and the lack of respect among youth for their own dispute-resolution processes
- sometimes people feel unable to collectively deal with bad behaviour, crimes, or bullying and corrupt individuals in their own midst.
To meet these demanding conditions, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are crafting innovative ways of restoring their self-determination and delivering their own peacemaking and dispute-resolution processes, including:
- circle sentencing processes
- night patrols
- elders councils and advisory boards
- family-group conferencing
- women’s refuge services and youth diversion projects
- Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ethics committees
- specialist Indigenous agencies and services.
Many groups are also collaborating with non-Indigenous courts, magistrates and government agencies to design alternative approaches and local community courts that work two ways and take Indigenous values and restorative goals into account.
The challenge for Indigenous organisations and projects is to meet their statutory requirements for dealing with disputes or wrongdoing, while seeking out and designing rules and processes that have cultural legitimacy with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and creating outcomes that win their support.


KALACC’s mission is the maintenance and promotion of the traditional cultures of the 30 language groups of the Kimberley region of Western Australia.
“We got lots of kids not following our culture, they not following mainstream culture, they following lazy culture. So bad things are going on. We gotta stop the bad things and concentrate on the good things. Over the last 10 years we support them in every way we can. We try and meet their needs, help them find jobs. We have work-based projects, we try and find contracts for them. We linking people up with educational institutions, we network, we organise agencies to go out to communities and run programs …. All of this happen while we go back to country, learning from the old people about culture, skin and the old stories. We grateful for leadership that does all these things and this is what Yiriman has been doing for 10 years.
(Anthony Watson, Yiriman Bosses Meeting 2010)”
(Quote from Yiriman application to Indigenous Governance Awards, 2012)
Conflict is natural and can even have positive outcomes if it is properly managed and lessons are learned.
For that to happen, you need to have procedures, rules and policies to prevent, detect and deal with disputes and complaints, and to implement your decisions and solutions.
Conflicts and grievances within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations and communities can be extremely complex—many have long histories, and bring into play large social networks and overlapping rights and interests.
The issues under dispute may be emotionally charged and based on deeply felt cultural values and explanations that are not easily understood by outsiders.
Dealing with such situations requires considerable experience and intercultural sensitivity.
8.2.1 Effective two-way principles
Whatever the issue, your processes will be more effective if they are informed by best-practice cross-cultural principles that build two-way legitimacy and accountability.
The principles below will help inform such an approach.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have the right to processes, rules and agreement outcomes that:
- deal with disputes, corruption, conflicts of interest or complaints fairly, openly and without favouritism
- are tailored to local needs, beliefs and values, and are seen as culturally legitimate and accepted by the group, individual or organisation
- are based on people giving their free and informed consent to processes and agreement outcomes
- take all parties’ views into account, as well as the history and relationships involved
- reinforce consensus approaches to decision making—decisions are not rushed and ‘quick fix’ solutions are not imposed at the expense of sustainable resolutions
- enable people to actively participate in and own their decisions and solutions
- are legal, workable and consistent so that people see them as reliable and they can be put into practice
- recognise and build on local capacity, knowledge and skills
- promote social satisfaction and restoration of harmony among the parties involved
- maximise self-determination and protect hard-won legal, gender and human rights
- are fully documented, with relevant information widely communicated, understood and accessible
- are open to further appeal, review and mediation
- do no harm to relationships and collective identities—they should not further exacerbate a conflict, entrench people into antagonistic positions, or wrongly marginalise people
- recognise that some long-term disputes may not be amenable to resolution—but their destabilising dynamics should be taken into account in any solutions
- include options for arm’s-length facilitation where external people act as mediators or negotiators, and do so by being objective, free from bias and fair.
(Adapted from Toni Bauman, ‘Final Report of the Indigenous Facilitation and Mediation Project’, AIATSIS, 2006)
8.2.2 Skills and knowledge needed
Resolving disputes, grievances and complaints isn’t easy; especially if intercultural values and expectations are called into play.
To be an effective mediator of any form of conflict you need to have personal sensitivity, authority, astuteness, cross-cultural communication skills, and be trusted and respected.
Today, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations often find themselves at the frontline of trying to resolve disputes and complaints involving their members, governing bodies or staff.
As a result, many are investing in:
- running customised training for their own staff members and management in the areas of alternative dispute resolution and complaint mediation
- delivering education and information campaigns for their members
- ensuring their governing body leaders are equipped with the knowledge and skills to deal effectively with the contentious issues they are confronted with.
- Good conflict analysis skills.
- Good knowledge of the context and related history.
- Sensitivity to the local cultural context and relationships.
- Local language skills or access to good translators.
- Technical expertise as required.
- Enough status and credibility to make decisions and then act on them or have others do so.
- Good knowledge of the people, issues and organisation involved.
- Skills in facilitation, mediation, teamwork and counselling.
All governing bodies or community committees involved in dispute resolution, mediation or agreement making should have relevant skills and information, or be able to secure them externally.
“Misunderstanding and misinformation is a major contributor to conflict.”
(Toni Bauman, 2007, Indigenous Law Bulletin Vol 6, No 29)
Many grievances and disputes arise from governance arrangements themselves and can involve multiple parties.
For example, conflict may occur:
- within the membership of a nation, community or organisation
- within an organisation’s own governing body, staff and management
- between organisations or leaders
- between a group and an organisation
- with external stakeholders or other parties.
8.3.1 Governance hotspots for conflict and complaints.
This is a list of several hotspot areas in your governance arrangements that can quickly become the source of complaint and conflict:
- Your leadership— leaders not being seen as having the authority, legitimacy and credentials to lead and represent their people
- Your governing body—a lack of capacity, fairness and honesty; conflicts of interest; a lack of experience in setting directions and developing policy; poor communication and consultation with members; interference in the daily management of an organisation or giving direct instructions to staff contrary to stated policy and plans.
- Your decision making—it is not fair, consensual, legal, informed, consistent, and transparent; decisions are not implemented and reported on
- Your members—identifying who are the ‘right’ members of your community, group or nation, to the exclusion of others; having particular families take over the running of an organisation or project to the exclusion of others; competing or overlapping rights and interests; politicised factions
- Your managers and staff—taking over the role and authority of the governing body without delegation; a lack of capacity, fairness and honesty; lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities; not operating under policies and instructions
- Your assets and finances— money, resources and benefits are not correctly secured and distributed; service delivery and government funding are inadequate
- Your external stakeholders—a failure in the capacity, fairness and honesty of governments and their officers; differing views between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups, governments and private sector partners about what constitutes ‘good’ governance, financial management and leadership.
8.3.2 What happens if hotspot disputes are not addressed?
Effective governance involves stewardship—that means being able to lead on behalf of all your members in a way that safeguards and promotes the exercise of their collective and individual rights and interests.
Effective governance also means being able to plan, organise, delegate and give direction.
If your dispute resolution policies and procedures have not been developed, are not well understood or are not enforced:
- the effectiveness and legitimacy of your governance arrangements may be undermined, if not permanently eroded
- your organisation and group as a whole may be brought into public disrepute
- the members of your own nation and community may be ripped apart for generations
- your external funding and partnerships may be withdrawn.
Decisions about disputes and complaints should not be based on particular family connections, a single leader’s opinion or a romanticised view of how things may have been done in the past.
It is important to develop approaches that not only respect and reinvigorate cultural values but that can also work successfully in the practical situations people face today.
8.3.3 A quick conflict analysis tool
“We are strong. We talk about things together. If there are mistakes or any problems we find out what the problems are first and work out what to do. We work out what to do together.”
(Gloria Mengil, Director Waringarri Arts Aboriginal Corporation,
Application to Indigenous Governance Awards, 2012)
Before leaping in to fix a problem, it is useful to step back and get the facts.
The first step is to understand what the dispute or complaint is about, who is involved, the history behind it, and the nature of the interests and rights involved.
From there you can move on to consider what agreed values, rules and goals might inform your process and outcomes.
This tool will help groups and organisations understand the causes of a conflict or complaint, consider the range of views, values and actions involved, and then think about ways to deal with the issue based on those understandings and agreed rules.
Some disputes and complaints will arise from within the members of a community or nation, while others will arise from within organisations.
Many of the leaders and organisations involved in the Indigenous Governance Awards see complaints from their members as a positive means of improving their governance and services. Others pride themselves on receiving very few.
8.4.1 Recurrent sources of conflict and complaint from members
Common grievances coming from the members of nations and communities have to do with:
- determining exactly who is and is not a member—this is the problem of identifying the ‘self’ in self-governance and self-determination
- the negative impact of family factions and dominant families overruling others
- the representativeness, legitimacy, effectiveness, honesty and authority of leaders
- the legitimacy and fairness of decisions
- contested rights and interests in land ownership
- the distribution of resources, funding and benefits
- access to and quality of services
- lack of participation and a voice in governance arrangements
- poor communication and consultation.
When disputes and complaints occur about these matters, it is essential that governing bodies, leaders and organisations have clear, well-known mechanisms and procedures for fair dispute resolution that are locally supported and effective.
8.4.2 Common better-practice approaches
The legitimacy of governance is directly linked to having a strong mandate from the members of your community or nation.
That means being able to engage with and support them in resolving internal tensions, differences of opinion and outright conflicts.
Many of the organisations applying to the Indigenous Governance Awards have developed specific approaches for dealing with their members’ grievances. As seen below, they often share the same common steps.
- Have a written complaints and dispute resolution policy and procedure. Complaints are usually handled first by a designated officer, and if needed they can go to the top manager or the governing body as the ultimate decision maker.
- Approach the person or people directly involved. This can clarify the issues and then, if needed, the grievance can be put in writing or documented through a translator.
- Use a phased approach for resolution and keep a register or file. This can help people to see that the situation is being taken seriously and the process can be tracked through its different stages.
- Use traditional mechanisms as relevant, such as referral to a council of elders, or invoking the positive influence of particular kinship, ceremonial or gender-based institutions of authority.
- Use external mechanisms. If the dispute or grievance remains unresolved, external mechanisms—such as an agreed mediator, independent arbitrator, or referral to the services of representative bodies or non-government organisations with dispute resolution expertise—can help.
- Maintain good communication with the parties involved, including communication about their issues, rights, interests and options.
- Develop broader governance policy frameworks and charters that set out the codes of conduct, roles, responsibilities and rights of the governing body, management and staff in relation to members—and vice versa.
Today, organisations are aware of the importance of responding with care to complaints and grievances from their members and wider stakeholders.
Overwhelmingly, people name communication, fairness and cross-cultural sensitivity as critical factors in doing this.
“For all complaints (internal or external) all staff involved in the resolution process should ensure the principles of natural justice are followed, including:
- the opportunity of all individuals involved to put their points of view forward
- handling of the procedures in an unbiased manner
- protection of the rights of all parties concerned
- clear communication in sufficient detail as to the basis on which decisions have been made
- matters [being] dealt with by staff as sensitively as possible.”
(ANKAA Application to the Indigenous Governance Awards, 2012)
8.4.3 Conditions that help or hinder
It is important to recognise the limitations of formal processes and policies for dealing with disputes and grievances when the underlying issues are long-term, politicised and bitter.
There may also simply be a lack of time, resources and capacity to take on the heavy workload associated with resolving entrenched disputes about governance.
If the community or group itself is split with factionalised interest groups, apathy, nepotism or poor self-determination, then:
- there may be a high level of complaint, conflict and misunderstandings which will be difficult to successfully resolve in the short term
- leaders who do what some members want will be viewed as a friend and ‘good leader’, while those who don’t will be abused and the object of complaint
- leaders may become defensive and resentful of being treated as a complaints department, and so dismiss valid criticism
- misinformation and rumours can spread fast and may poison efforts to explain the facts or settle conflicts
- some members may feel reluctant to criticise or complain for fear of offending others or suffering repercussions.
Economic success itself may increase disputes, as disadvantaged people compete for scarce resources, feel entitled to certain things, and make greater demands on their organisations.
In these circumstances, trust in the decisions of leaders and governing bodies can quickly diminish, and the good of the whole nation or community (and future generations) may take a back seat.
On the other hand, your members will be more capable of resolving their own disputes and will demand excellence and a high standard of conduct from their leaders if they:
- have a resilient collective identify
- have a confident sense of self-determination which they try to put into practice
- are clearly informed about their options, risks and rights
- can access local capacity-building and incentives
- have practically effective and legitimate rules and processes.
Every organisation will experience periods of internal discord, tension and conflict. But they must have ways of resolving these if they are to carry out their functions and achieve their goals.
8.5.1 Recurrent sources of internal conflict and complaint
There are some common sources of complaint arising within organisations. Most have to do with the professional roles and relationships within and between the governing body, management and staff, as seen below.
- Governing body—disagreement and conflict within the governing body itself; poor chairing or bullying at meetings; poor conduct and dishonesty; interference by the governing body in the daily work of individual staff and managers; intimidation or unilateral direction of staff.
- Management—poor conduct and dishonesty among management; tension and unresolved issues between the governing body and top manager; poor management communication and leadership; inconsistent decision making and application of policies; poor work performance; failure to communicate relevant information to governing body and staff.
- Staff—poor conduct and dishonesty; harassment and tensions between management and staff; operating without delegation; poor work performance; confusion about roles and responsibilities; failure to report on actions and progress.
When these sources of discord are allowed to continue unchecked, the internal culture of an organisation can quickly deteriorate into one of mistrust and rumour mongering, where decision making, teamwork and outcomes are undermined.
This is where having clear policies and procedures that are well understood, respected and consistently enforced becomes critical both for prevention and effective intervention.
You can use this check-up to see what you are doing well to manage disputes or grievances in your organisation or group and get ideas for other things you could do to improve your processes.
This check-up can be used by organisations to get a quick idea of where they are at in the ways they handle dispute, grievances and complaints.
It shouldn’t replace a thorough evaluation of your arrangements. It is simply a starting point, to give you an overall picture.
Its main purpose is to help you:
- identify key areas of your policies and procedures where there might be some problems or gaps
- identify your internal strengths
- start discussions and get people involved
- work out which areas need closer evaluation and possible change
- figure out some initial priorities.
8.5.2 Some common best practice approaches
Those organisations that have developed stable and enforceable policies and procedures for dealing with internal conflict and complaints are more resilient in times of great change and external crises, and more likely to achieve their goals.
Most solutions share the same common steps for dealing with complaints and disputes (such as those set out in section 8.4.2).
“Warlpiri issues will be dealt with initially by meeting quietly with Elders, directors or members as required. Staff disputes will be handled initially by the Operations Manager and if this is not appropriate or ineffective, by the directors.
If the dispute is about the Act or the corporation’s rules, the directors or any of the dispute parties may ask ORIC for an opinion. If the directors cannot resolve the dispute, it must be put to the members to resolve at a general meeting.”
(Warlpiri Youth Development Aboriginal Corporation, Application to the 2012 Indigenous Governance Awards)
Today, instead of adopting off-the-shelf rules created by others, many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations are developing their own customised policy manuals and codes of conduct to suit their specific needs and operating environments.
To back these up, they then provide in-house training and inductions on these, in order to pre-empt internal tensions, misconduct and conflict.
The best approaches usually have clear definitions about:
- who should be involved in different complaints
- the roles, rights and responsibilities of those involved
- the procedures and options available to them
- the way communications and discussions will be carried out
- the kind of cultural input and factors that should be taken into account
- other kinds of external expertise available, including allowing individuals to resolve their grievance through any external legal means at any stage of the process
- the need for timeliness so that disputes are not left to simmer
- requirements for full documentation of the process and outcomes.
8.5.3 Conflict within the governing body
“Board members are commonly recruited to bring diverse views on issues to board debates and decision making. Constructive disagreements between board members are encouraged in a well-functioning board. They can generally be managed by following proper rules of procedure and encouragement of good listening skills. However, in the heat of board debate, disagreements sometimes degenerate into serious conflict on issues or between personalities.”
(Canadian Institute on Governance , Policies for First Nations)
While differences of opinion are normal, ongoing conflict between the members of a board will undermine the board’s overall capacity to govern well. Examples of ongoing conflict include:
- misconduct
- unhelpful disunity and public brawling
- bullying and politicised arguments at meetings
- intimidation and public insults of staff by the governing body.
Behaviour like this presents a poor example to staff and community members, who may then think it is acceptable to follow suit.
Such behaviour constitutes a failure of governance and can seriously damage an organisation’s good reputation and effectiveness.
It may even result in demands for greater accountability, or unilateral intervention, by external agencies into the governance of your organisation.
These internal problems require strong remedial action.
This is a tough thing to do, but being able to negotiate these sensitive issues is a sign of mature governance.
The chairperson of the governing body needs to have the confidence and experience to intervene, provide advice and support to resolve tensions, and be able to work with individuals on the governing body who may be experiencing difficulties in their duties.
The top manager has an important role in supporting the chairperson’s mediation role, and encouraging the governing body to follow its own code of conduct.
Both the chair and top manager need to be able to work well together to maintain internal harmony and teamwork within the governing body.
Today, many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations are developing innovative strategies to build the capacity of their governing bodies to deal with their own issues of conflict and misconduct, and to better support the same processes amongst their managers and staff.
Effective strategies to build the capacity of governing bodies to deal with conflict and misconduct include:
- delivering customised training in dispute mediation and negotiation
- ensuring the governing body carries out an annual self-evaluation of its own governance performance, and its ability to work and make decisions as a group
- providing regular briefings and progress reports on issues under dispute
- developing specific policies setting out expectations for codes of conduct, conflicts of interest, governing roles and responsibilities, and guidelines for resolving internal disputes and complaints
- training in how to run productive meetings and make consensus decisions
- development of protocols and procedures for grievances and appeals
- using the strategic plan, succession planning and future vision as guides for more consistent decision making, to reduce factionalism and conflict
- drawing on the cultural input and advice of the wider peer groups of leaders in a nation or community
- development of governance charters and manuals laying out agreed values, rules and commitments.
If you are an incorporated organisation registered with the Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations under the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006 (Cth) you can also ask the registrar to intervene to resolve disputes.
8.5.4 Conflict between the governing body and top manager
Good communication, trust and mutual respect between a governing body and its executive management is essential to effective governance.
One of the most important duties of a governing body is to hire, supervise, evaluate, and dismiss their top manager. Unfortunately, this job is often poorly done by the governing body, or undermined because of tension and conflict between its members and the top manager.
When there is antagonism, distrust and low mutual respect in this important relationship, an organisation will begin to travel in directions that are contrary to its overall vision.
Ongoing conflict is a common cause of high turnover of leaders, managers and staff, and a critical factor in the success or failure of an organisation.
This relationship needs to be a real working partnership, so it is important to ensure that early signs of discord or dispute are addressed early. Below are several effective strategies.
Effective strategies include:
- honest and informative communication and feedback between a governing body and top manager
- clearly setting out, understanding and having a mutual respect for each other’s role, knowledge and responsibilities
- a clearly enforced chain of command between the governing body, top manager and staff
- regular meetings between the chairperson and top manager to discuss potentially problematic issues
- expectations and standards for the top manager’s conduct, set out in their contract and performance agreement
- annual review of the top manager’s performance, carried out by the governing body
- a written code of conduct for the top manager
- written procedures for counselling and/or dismissing the top manager for poor performance, misconduct or prolonged dispute with the governing body
- written procedures for appeal by the top manager for unfair dismissal or treatment by the governing body
- written policies and delegations to enable the top manager to get on with their job without hostility or interference from the governing body
- professional development, mentoring and training opportunities for the top manager in mediation and negotiation skills
- succession planning for the top manager’s position—no-one stays forever.
8.5.5 Conflict among staff and with management
The best atmosphere for staff members is one of collaboration, mutual respect and stable leadership from above. The staff of many successful Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations have described it as ‘being like a family’.
“A workplace that is physically and emotionally safe is conducive to productive, harmonious work relations.”
(‘Maps to Success. Successful Strategies for Indigenous Organisations’, AIATSIS 2007)
When internal conflict or tension does arise—whether among staff members or between them and management—it is best resolved, initially, by the most immediate level in the chain of command. The facts should be considered and the relevant parties brought together for discussions.
If this is not successful, the top manager should intervene to make a final decision or take the process to another stage of mediation.
Some organisations expect their governing bodies (and specifically the chairperson) to become involved in conflict between management and staff. Others specifically restrict this from happening. Many organisations develop processes to ask leaders or elders from the wider community for advice and intervention.
Whatever your approach it needs to be well communicated to and understood by all staff.
Staff dissatisfaction and poor work performance can easily erupt into disputes or grievances, but can be effectively prevented through several effective strategies.
Effective strategies include:
- detailed HR policies and written procedures that clearly set out the rights, roles and responsibilities of management and staff, including how disputes and complaints should be addressed at regular staff meetings
- a strong internal culture that values feedback and open communication across the whole organisation
- staff codes of conduct
- a clear chain of command and lines of reporting, supervision and delegation
- cross-cultural training, inductions and customised training that deal with processes for resolving disputes, grievances and complaints
- professional development and career opportunities
- expectations and standards for staff conduct set out in their contracts and performance agreements
- annual performance reviews where a range of sensitive issues can be discussed and addressed
- consistency and fairness in decision making and policy implementation by managers
- clear rules and procedures for the working relationship between staff members and the governing body
- access to external mediation or counsel if disputes are entrenched or focus on the top manager.
Getting people to agree can sometimes seem easy—people may say they are satisfied when in fact they are not.
The real trick is getting an informed consensus and satisfaction to last—and to work.
8.6.1 Getting satisfaction
When setting up meetings, discussions, or making decisions about disputes and complaints, it is a good idea to remember that most people have interdependent needs they want considered.
In order to achieve agreements and decisions that will last, people must feel that the dispute resolution and complaint processes and outcomes are:
- procedurally legitimate and fair. People have had the opportunity to participate, put forward their views and be listened to,and have confidence in the information, rules and processes.
- emotionally satisfying and restorative of social cohesion. These are people’s personal and emotional reasons for the dispute or grievance—whether they feel those have been taken into account in the process, and how they feel about themselves and others after outcomes have been negotiated.
- substantively ‘resolved’. This means addressing the actual issues or intangible things under dispute which people are actually seeking to have resolved.
(Adapted from ‘The Satisfaction Triangle: A Simple Measure for Negotiations and Decision Making’. The Indigenous Facilitation and Mediation Project, 2004. AIATSIS, Canberra)
It is not possible to please everyone all of the time, but in order to get an outcome that moves people out of dispute mode into more cooperative behaviour, check whether you have considered these three areas of interest.
8.6.2 Managing disputes in meetings
All organisations come across controversies about changes or decisions under consideration at meetings. Many are driven by issues and personalities.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, but the way they are handled can determine whether an organisation will emerge from the discussions bruised and divided, or healed, confident and united.
Here the role of a good chairperson or facilitator is invaluable.
All organisations run into controversies about issues or changes under consideration. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but the way it is handled can determine whether an organisation will emerge from the discussions bruised and divided, or healed, confident and united.
The following tips for managing controversies in meetings are drawn from Eli Mina Consulting.
- Meet with the individuals before the meeting. Contact potentially disruptive individuals or factions before the meeting and try to resolve any legitimate concerns. Reassure them that the meeting will be run fairly and ask for their support.
- Set a constructive tone for the meeting—don’t assign blame. Try opening the discussion by saying “The issues before us today are not easy. At the same time I am confident that we can work together, debate the issues and reach positive outcomes for our organisation and community”.
- Remind members of the organisation’s vision, goals and values. At the start of the meeting—and again if things become heated—say “It would be helpful to remind ourselves of our purpose and goals for the future, which are: ____. If we want the best for our organisation and community, then we need to ask ourselves: Are we on track right now?”
- Remind people about guidelines for meetings. Introduce or remind people about the meeting guidelines at the beginning and have them approved/confirmed by the members. You might say “Let’s remember before we start the meeting today that we should speak when recognised by the chair, focus on the issues and not people, be respectful and behave properly”.
- Try to modify contentious proposals. When the issue is being discussed, see if the contentious proposal can be modified (without compromising it) to take into account valid concerns. Integrate constructive suggestions.
- Intervene if necessary. Intervene decisively if members are disruptive. Try saying “Please focus on the issues and not the personalities” or “Please give others the same respect that you want when you are speaking”.
- Use positive language. Convert criticisms into options and interests. Instead of “You sound unhappy with our leadership” say “You seem to be suggesting that we could be more inclusive and better tuned to the needs of the members that we serve”.
- Set up the room for consensus. This can be as simple as replacing parallel rows with round tables. See if you can break adversarial patterns by mixing the group’s various factions.
8.6.3 Managing issue-based conflict
If the substantive issue under dispute or the subject of complaint is not adequately addressed, the parties involved will not be satisfied or will not change their antagonistic behaviours.
Several effective strategies and tips are set out below.
The Canadian Institute for Conflict Resolution suggests these techniques to help manage issue-based conflicts.
- Acknowledge the value of different views. Acknowledge the value and importance of divergent views in making decisions.
- Practise good listening skills. Practise and encourage good listening skills, understanding and respect. Clarify the ground rules for effective communication, for example:
- discussions are confidential
- others are allowed to have their say
- there is group ownership of problems and solutions.
- Focus on issues rather than personalities.
- Name the problem. Help the parties define the issue. State what you understand it to be and seek agreement between them on a clear definition of the issue.
- Seek agreement on outcomes. Seek agreement from the parties on the objectives, outcomes or decisions sought, by placing this item on the board agenda.
- Help parties identify why the issue is important. Seek consensus from the parties on why the issue matters, rather than encouraging more debate on who has the best solution or idea.
- Conduct a role-play. Ask each to step into the other’s shoes and role-play the debate from the other’s perspective.
- Summarise the discussion. Paraphrase or summarise the discussions several times until there is consensus on points of agreement and disagreement.
- Seek compromise. Encourage the parties to suggest new insights or compromises. Seek agreement on a compromise.
- Restate the solution. Restate the favoured solution. Check with parties to see if it is acceptable and if it will allow them to resolve the matter.
- Document the decision. Table or document the item to be dealt with after a cooling-off period.
8.6.4 Managing personality-based conflict
If emotional or personality-driven conflicts become entrenched into politicised positions they are extremely difficult to resolve.
Early intervention based on objective, fair and open processes is critical to addressing these conflicts.
The following tips are adapted from tools developed by the Canadian Institute on Governance to help manage conflicts that are based on personality, personal or political agendas, or other more deep-rooted causes.
- Don’t try to resolve this kind of conflict in one go. Do not waste valuable time and energy trying to resolve these conflicts at a one-off community or organisational meeting.
- Meet with parties individually.
- Meet outside the work or meeting environment.
- Try to define the issues.
- Discuss the negative effect of the conflict on the group, community or organisation.
- Seek a resolution.
- Meet with the parties together. Meet with the disputing parties together to see if they can reach an agreement, so the organisation can still function effectively with their continued membership.
- Try to mediate the conflict. If that doesn’t work, bring in an acceptable third person—such as an Elder—who may influence the disputing parties’ behaviour. Conflicting parties are more likely to accept guidance from local mediators than from other external sources. This is because an Elder’s decision does not entail any loss of face and is backed by social pressure.The end result is, ideally, a sense of unity, shared involvement and responsibility, and dialogue among groups otherwise in conflict.
- Allow the party or parties to withdraw if that seems like the only option. If the parties can’t reach an agreement, one or both may have to withdraw from the activity that is the subject of dispute, or resign their positions as directors, managers or staff members of the organisation.
- Recommend disciplinary action. If the matter still isn’t resolved, recommend disciplinary action to the organisation.
8.6.5 Collaborative decision making
It should go without saying that if the people who are most directly involved in a dispute are able to actively participate in determining the process and making decisions, the more sustainable the outcome will be.
Yet this is an area where organisations often resort to closed ranks and hierarchical decision making.
Promoting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander consensus methods of decision making into the arena of dispute resolution within organisations can significantly enhance the success and resilience of outcomes.
This means enabling your staff members to become collaborators in developing their own codes of conduct and making collective decisions about what constitutes fair process.
This tool provides a basic five-step model for a group approach to problem solving using a facilitator.
It has been adapted from ORIC resources.
Developing a confidential, flexible and fair grievance policy
Maari Ma Health Aboriginal Corporation is a community controlled regional health service providing for the needs of Aboriginal people in far west NSW.
Maari Ma promotes a friendly and supportive workplace where staff are able to perform to the best of their ability with confidence and respect. They have a grievance policy to support staff who feel they have been unfairly treated, to work through issues and actively contribute to a resolution. Their grievance system is confidential, flexible, fair, focused on resolution and accessible to all staff. The Human Resource Manager supports staff and managers in the process of managing grievances and developing confidence and experience to appropriately respond to staff issues. Some issues which cannot be resolved internally may end up being mediated by an independent party.