No abstract

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.

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -This paper has two main purposes. First, it considers the detrimental effects of four politically-salient asymmetries on the policy choices of liberal democracies when dealing with the problem of human-induced climate change. Second, it outlines and evaluates possible solutions for reducing or countering these asymmetries. Design/methodology/approach -The approach involves an analysis and evaluation of policy options based on a survey of the relevant literature. Findings -The paper highlights the serious mismatch between the magnitude and urgency of the climate change problem and the current political will to overcome or mitigate the problem. Although four categories of potential solutions, and the various mechanisms through which they might operate, are discussed, it is recognized that all the available options have significant drawbacks, not least limited political feasibility and doubtful effectiveness. In short, action within liberal democracies to mitigate climate change is likely to remain seriously constrained by the four asymmetries discussed, thus increasing the risk of dangerous climate change.Originality/value -The paper highlights the complexities, both international and national, of confronting human-induced climate change. In particular, it identifies four systemic reasons, in the form of politically-salient asymmetries, why liberal democracies have struggled to take effective measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and provides a systematic assessment of possible solutions to these asymmetries. These include changes to accounting frameworks to ensure that the impact of humanity on the environment and future generations is more transparent.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which formal logic can be applied to conflict analysis and resolution. It is motivated by the idea that conflicts can be understood as inconsistent sets of interests. Design/methodology/approach – A simple propositional model, based on propositional logic, which can be used to analyze conflicts, has been introduced and four algorithms have been presented to generate possible solutions to a conflict. The model is illustrated by applying it to the conflict between the Obama administration and the Syrian Government in September 2013 over the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons programme. Findings – The author shows how different solutions, such as compromises, minimally invasive solutions or solutions compatible with certain pre-defined norms, can be generated by the model. It is shown how the model can operate in situations where the game-theoretic model fails due to a lack of information about the parties’ utility values. Research limitations/implications – The model can be used as a theoretical framework for future experimental research and/or to trace the course of particular conflict scenarios. Practical implications – The model can be used as the basis for building software applications for conflict resolution practitioners, such as negotiators or mediators. Originality/value – While the idea of using logic to analyse the structure of conflicts and generate possible solutions is not new to the field of conflict studies, the model presented in this paper provides a novel way of understanding conflicts for both researchers and practitioners.

Substantial literature has investigated the relationship between religiosity and ethical decision-making (the what), while lesser consideration has been given to exploring why decisions are made. As part of a larger study, this paper aims to delve beyond the descriptive relationship between religiosity and ethical decision-making of Muslim employees in Malaysia. We analyse the qualitative data received from 160 employees by using thematic analysis. Our results reveal that, while religious values are important for Muslims in Malaysia, there are other factors that are also pertinent when making decisions at work, namely the organization's interest and the context of the decision. We also found that individuals' reasoning based on Islamic teachings is embedded in rules and regulations, which suggests lower levels of ethical reasoning. This study extends the current understanding of the processes of ethical reasoning in highly