At the end of 2008, General Motors received the prestigious Great Moments in Engineering Award to mark its development of the first mass-production catalytic converter for cars 30 years ago. These devices, the award's judging panel pointed out, paved the way for the widespread use of unleaded fuel and led to near complete reductions in toxic carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide emissions.
Now I have to confess that what goes on under the bonnet of my car is a total mystery to me, but I was intrigued by the GM award and decided to find out a bit more. And I'm glad I did - because the catalytic converter is the closest thing to magic I've come across!
In a nutshell, passing the exhaust fumes through a chamber coated with a catalyst such as platinum causes an interaction which results in the creation of non-toxic gasses. And what seems almost magical to me is that the catalyst simply serves as a mediator between the two - it creates an environment in which the interaction leads to a healthy rather than a poisonous outcome.
And it is the drive for non-toxic outcomes such as these that sees the launch this month of the new Acas Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. It is a code that replaces the ill-fated Dispute Resolution Regulations that came into effect in October 2004 as an attempt to tackle the spiralling number of employment tribunals.
Back in 2001 there were over 130,000 applications to employment tribunals - a figure that had increased threefold in a decade. Indeed, the atmosphere was considered to be so noxious that Alan Johnson, then employment relations minister, announced the Government would urgently "review the steps we can take to promote conciliation, not litigation".
These steps, in the shape of the Dispute Resolution Regulations, were so unsuccessful that the Acas Report for 2007-08 found the number of tribunal cases had risen to 151,249. So for me, one of the most exciting opportunities recommended by the new Acas Code is the use of independent third-parties - mediators - to act as catalysts for conflict resolution. This is an approach, the benefits of which the public sector have been quick to spot, that private-sector employers have been slow to take up.
Indeed, as Peter Thompson, a mediator accredited by the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution and an employment partner at law firm DLA Piper, points out: "Whether it's by nipping problems in the bud or using mediation as an alternative to the tribunal itself, there are not only massive potential savings to the organisation and the taxpayer - but also the opportunity to create a more content and focused workforce."
Thompson's view is supported by the 2008 Acas-CIPD Mediation: An Employers' Guide, which includes survey findings that 82% of managers who had used mediation said their issues had been at least partially resolved. This is supported by other surveys that consistently report a success rate for mediation of more than 70%.
So, why aren't more organisations adopting the approach? Thompson believes there are two problems: "First it's that employer and employees think they know what mediation is ... but they're normally wrong. The process and its benefits to both parties are not normally understood in any great detail. Second, the internal policies and processes to enable appropriate cases for mediation to be identified and dealt with are seldom in place."
That puts the ball firmly in the HR court. But if we can fix these relatively straightforward issues it seems to me that the undoubted - indeed almost magical - benefits of mediation will benefit employers and employees alike. And who knows, in 30 years' time we might all be celebrating both a Great Moment in Employee Relations and a healthier atmosphere in the workplace.
- David Fairhurst is senior vice-president/chief people officer, McDonald's Restaurants Northern Europe.
