Jane, the Executive Director of a national pediatric cancer research nonprofit, had been losing sleep for weeks over looming funding cuts. She clung to hope that the rumors were wrong and that her team could continue its groundbreaking work, saving thousands of lives.
Then, in the middle of a national clinical trial, the unthinkable happened. The government confirmed it would slash nearly all funding by June 30, effectively wiping out 75% of the nonprofit’s revenue. The remaining revenue came from a mix of foundations, donors, corporate sponsors, and a few grateful patients.
Their options were stark: Lay off staff, shut down the trial, scramble for emergency funding, merge with another organization, narrow the mission, or close entirely.
Grant, the Board chair, called an emergency executive session. He pushed for swift, across-the-board cuts, including the staff running the clinical trial. Jane disagreed. She backed a more surgical approach, aiming to preserve the trial team and buy time to secure new funding.
By the time the Board met, Jane and Grant were at a standstill. No one knew how the rest of the 10-member Board would vote. It was their first serious disagreement, and it came at the worst possible time. As the meeting loomed, Jane remembered some helpful principles from a graduate class in conflict resolution, illustrated below.
“Win-Win Principles” from the Federal Mediation and Reconciliation Service
- Focus on issues, not personalities. Attack the problem, not the people. In this case, the main issue is how best to maintain the mission and spirit of the organization in the face of drastic funding cuts.
- Focus on interests, not positions. Positions are the opening demands someone makes. Interests are “why” behind the demands, which reflects their desires, concerns and fears. In this case, those who want to make immediate wholesale staff cuts may believe that this move may prevent the loss of even more funding. Those who support a more strategic approach to staffing cuts may be concerned that if they halt the clinical trial, years’ worth of work may be lost and patients may die unnecessarily.
- Create options that satisfy both mutual and separate interests. Mutual interests are shared goals that both sides have. In this case, both sides want to be able to maintain the viability of the organization over the long-run and preserve its mission of saving kids’ lives through targeted cancer research.
- Evaluate options with standards, not power. For example, Jane might provide early results from the clinical trial and show the possible upsides in terms of lives saved and positive financial outcomes if the trial concludes successfully. Grant might show how similar nonprofits have fared reasonably well by being more proactive about staff reductions in the face of funding cuts.
Tips for Planning and Running a Meeting to Create Win-Win Outcomes
- Engage a neutral facilitator to guide the conversation
- Start the conversation by getting buy-in for the “Win-Win Principles” stated above
- Ask both groups to identify mutual interests, and record them visibly
- Set up two breakout groups, each representing a particular position, where each identifies what they see as the interests of the other group
- Bring everyone back together to share their perspectives, where people have a chance to clarify, correct or add other interests that may have been missed. Here’s an example from this case:
Grant’s Perception of Jane’s Interests
- If we stop the clinical trial, we may not be able to restart it
- Hundreds of person-years may be wasted if we can’t complete the trial
- We may save countless kids’ lives if the trial is successful
- Shielding certain staff from cuts will increase the likelihood of a successful trial
- Making across-the-board cuts may starve the organization from the most needed talent
- It will be harder to obtain donor and foundation funding if we abandon this trial
Jane’s Perceptions of Grant’s Interests
- We can’t delay making drastic cuts – we’re bleeding money
- The clinical trial would be nice to have, but we can’t afford the people or the program dollars in light of these cuts
- If we maintain the clinical trial at any cost, we risk losing the rest of our entire staff and operations
- We’re not even sure if the trial will be successful, so we could be firing other valuable staff members for no reason
Ask the large group to jointly create shared options that might satisfy both sets of interests, using financial data, current and pro-forma; employment data; clinical trial results, timelines and staffing requirements; possible additional funding resources; potential organizations to partner with; and the status of current court cases.
Shared options in this case might include:
- Agree on a milestone the clinical trial must achieve before cutting any related staff
- Calculate the financials to determine what kind of severance package, if any, can be offered to staff members who resign voluntarily
- Alert potential donors and funders about the possibility of closing the trial early and ascertain their willingness to provide meaningful funding
- Determine which job functions can be cut immediately without unduly jeopardizing the mission of the organization
- Determine in advance whether meeting participants will vote in this meeting, strive for consensus or otherwise weigh in. Make sure to set expectations appropriately prior to and throughout this meeting.
- Clearly communicate who will make the final decision and when it will be announced.
Collaborating to create a win-win solution takes thoughtful planning, including setting clear expectations up front. Collaborating to address a disagreement almost always results in better outcomes and healthier relationships than some of the other most popular tactics for handling disagreements, like avoidance (agreeing to disagree), accommodation (simply letting the other side win), compromise (which can give neither party what it wants), or competition (seen as a zero/sum game). To get started, bring both parties to the table, gain agreement to go by the four “Win-Win” principles, and identify shared interests. You’re on your way.
Links
Downloadable resources from Guided Insights
- Values in Practice – Assessment and Action Planning Assessment Template
- Team communications matrix for hybrid and virtual teams
- Sample meeting structure and activities for creating win-win solutions
- Guidelines for Successfully Managing Conflict
- De-escalation triage model tip sheet to help you recognize, assess and intervene when meetings are in danger of being derailed due to unproductive conversations, regardless of your role.
- To give you and your team a head start on creating draft principles, download this checklist for creating strong principles and meaningful team norms.
Past Communiques from Guided Insights:
- 8 Steps for Facilitating Constructive Conflict, Virtually
- Can’t We All Just Disagree? Reviving the Lost Art of Civilized Disagreement
Training and Facilitation Resource for Operating in a Polarized World
Braver Angels, an organization to give people the skills and tools to depolarize difficult conversations
