Sometimes stories say more than numbers or methods. The fable and real-life examples below illustrate what can happen when communication falters - recognizable in many conflict situations we counsel.

Crow and Hippo build a bridge together.

Crow didn't know Hippo very well. He had heard, however, that he was a solid worker, not easily upset and always with his paws in the clay. In short, a good choice for his project: building a bridge.

Hippo did enjoy working with Crow. Crow made a strong impression with his loud voice, sharp gaze and good overview. That he didn't get on the floor much was probably a good sign. And building a bridge, that had "purpose," especially for a Hippo.

At first, things went smoothly. Crow flew high overhead and pointed out to Hippo where to start. Hippo nodded slowly, as he always did when thinking for a moment, then shrugged.

They even said to each other:
"Beautiful how you think and I do."
"Beautiful how you feel and I fly."

After a while, Crow found that construction of the bridge was too slow. Hippo was solid, to be sure, but Crow was still more of the fast results. Fast results: that's what Kraai had shouted to others.
Crow was becoming increasingly annoyed. He also knew that his sharp voice often made things worse. He decided to stay up a little longer, talk a little less to Hippo. He wasn't sure how to discuss it, either. Crow was afraid of making things worse.

And Crow thought, Surely he feels that I am displeased?

Thus his silence filled the air with silent criticism.

Hippo sensed that something was wrong, that Crow was avoiding him. At first he thought he was still doing a good job, the bridge was really progressing, but he began to doubt himself more and more.

Hippo thought, If he doesn't say anything, it must be my fault.

But he wasn't sure. And Hippo didn't know how to start the conversation about this. He slept worse and became more unhappy. It kept grinding in his head, the story got bigger and bigger.
One day, Hippo had to stay home; he couldn't do it anymore. Empty, tired, full of doubt.

And Crow was angry.
Surely he could always be talked to.
His door was literally always open.

The bridge remained half finished, with their story somewhere in the middle.
In the sky it remained silent, in the mud was a large footprint.

And no one knew who should make the first move.

Do you work with a Crow? Or do you sometimes feel like a Hippo? Then a conflict prevention conversation or team coaching might be a first step.

A company has been taken over by a new owner. The former owner remains employed, because it is a shame to lose so much knowledge about the company, the product and the customers! Good agreements are made, but in practice it is difficult for the former owner to take on the new role of employee. The former owner increasingly disagrees with the business and eventually reports sick. The company doctor recommends (exit) mediation because he foresees that they will no longer be able to work things out together. It seems best in this case to come to a severance agreement with the former owner. The mediator establishes that both parties are assisted by a legal advisor and after the necessary mediation sessions at the table they come to good agreements within the framework of end of employment by mutual consent. Former owner reports recovered and the date of leaving employment is set. Good agreements are made about a farewell arrangement, non-solicitation and non-competition clause and mutual treatment. All under the confidentiality that is paramount in mediation.

An employee gets a great opportunity and is promoted to a higher position. During an evaluation, employer believes that employee still does not have what it takes to properly fill this higher position. Employer indicates that improvement must occur or employee will be placed back in his old position. Employee finds this raw on his roof: he tries very hard but he also lacks the necessary guidance he would get to fill his new position. Employer does not have the manpower to give employee so much guidance; he had estimated employee's capabilities to be higher. Employee gets the feeling that they let him "float" and feels undervalued. Employee no longer enjoys going to work, eventually reluctantly and calls in sick. The company doctor hears the story and concludes that it would be good if those involved heard each other's side of the story again and made agreements to create clarity for everyone. Because this has not worked out before, he recommends mediation. The mediator will then lead the conversation to come to good agreements.

An employee falls ill. She goes through a long medical process, in and out of hospital. After six months she would be able to partially reintegrate, but she was very reluctant to do so. During her entire work disability, she received one flower from her colleagues, and that was it. The company doctor recommends mediation: this way the employee can start talking to her colleagues again. The mediator first speaks to the employer and employees involved separately. Eventually a joint conversation follows. Everything seems to be based on a misunderstanding. The sick employee also did not stop by for a cup of coffee during her entire absence. While one did see her in the supermarket. It had also been initially learned that she needed all the rest and energy for her recovery.