I’m a conflict resolution professional. I’m a lawyer with 30
plus years as a mediator. I teach mediation to graduate students and have
trained Appellate judges. I have ombuds training. I’ve worked with sports teams
around conflict styles and helped facilitate team meetings to address issues.
I’m also a former 4-year collegiate soccer player and big sports fan, and, with
this background, let me comment on the Rutgers basketball team situation.
I was on the road yesterday listening to Mike & Mike on
ESPN radio discuss the events around Mike Rice, Rutgers Men’s Basketball coach.
By now most of us have seen the video, or watched the ESPN Outside the Lines
program, or read about the coach’s treatment of the players, or shared some
water cooler/coffee table talk. The discussion between Mike & Mike focused
both on the specific actions of Rice, on the decision by Rutgers Athletic
Director Pernetti to suspend, fine, and order anger management training last
fall, and on the perspective of the players (this was before news of Rice’s
firing). Mike Greenberg (Greeny) wondered why no player had come forward before
and Mike Golic commented that the players are afraid to do so. Further comments, and I summarize, noted that
the players have no power. There is a culture that what the coaches do and say
goes and there is no room for “fighting” back. There is no way to share concerns without
putting your role as a player at risk.
Greeny commented that he would step forward and Golic noted that many
people, many employees would not bring up an issue for fear of
repercussions.
Golic is right. The most common form of conflict resolution
is avoidance. And in large part, people
avoid because they fear. Fear for their job, fear that coming forward will
hinder their career, or in the case of an athlete, fear that their career will
be ruined. As I listened I also heard no solution offered. So, what can be
done? There is an answer – use conflict
resolution skills to create non-traditional lines of communication. This is the
need that is articulated by the Rutgers situation. By Penn State. By UNC-CH.
There is no built in avenue or mechanism for student
athletes or, for that matter, staff, to come forward with concerns in a private
and confidential manner. There is only
fear of repercussion. There is a need for a sports conflict professional, a
conflict coach. This might be someone with a sports background and
understanding of the issues as a player and/or coach coupled with conflict
resolution skills. Perhaps this person might be a mediator or ombuds; however,
having the skills is not enough. To be effective, establishing a line of
confidential communication is imperative.
For example, an organizational ombuds is a conflict
resolution professional connected to a business, university, or other organization
with the mission to help resolve conflicts. To be effective, an ombuds must
have independence within the institution (must have a direct report to the
organizational leadership), must maintain strict levels of confidentiality,
must be neutral and impartial, and must be informal. You can also think of an ombuds as a conflict
coach – able to help an individual think through their choices when in
conflict. These are the core values and focus of an ombuds that helps establish
lines of communication where no lines may exist.
This is the case with today’s student athletes and athletic
staff. First, they fear that making any
type of report will directly impact their place on the team, their relationship
with teammates and coaches, and their entire future in the sport. They can’t go
to assistant coaches or members of the athletic department as any reports to
these individuals are not confidential. Second, athletes see themselves as the
solutions to problems. Give me the ball. Let me take the shot. I can lead my
team. Thus, bringing concerns to the front is not part of a sports
culture. And, most importantly, there is
no institution in place to support and protect the coming forward of
concerns. Enter the conflict resolution
professional – the conflict coach. Such a role should not be a “direct”
reporting contact – it should be informal. Yet the information provided can be
directed to the highest levels of authority in an organization while
maintaining the confidentiality of the source.
Thus, while many institutions of higher learning have an
ombuds, it’s time to bring conflict resolution skills and mechanisms directly to
collegiate sports. This would empower
student athletes and staff to solve problems both on and off the field, to help
maintain the integrity of a program, to help it win on the field of play, and
in developing character and leadership.
It’s time for today’s institutions of higher learning to
bring on the conflict coach!