Posts

Restorative Justice at Work: A Practical Route to Healthier, More Productive Teams & An American Best Book Award Finalist

If you think discipline equals deterrence, you are not wrong , you're just missing half the story. Indeed, workplace restorative justice is not some kind of soft option. It's a purposeful, calculated alternative to the knee jerk, punishment model that many Organisations still operate with. Having worked with teams in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane for well over a decade and a half, I know that you lose trust much faster by focusing purely on sanctions than you ever do by simply cutting costs. Restorative practices, on the other hand, knit together the very social fabric that enables firms to bounce back: relationships, responsibility and mutual respect.

What restorative justice means in Business

To break it down: Restorative justice is a system for addressing harm , everything from everyday personal offences to major rule breaking , that centres the people whom the violation affected. It's less along the lines of: "Who has done this?" and more about "Who has been harmed, what do they need and how could the contributor help make them whole?" That reframe alters the tenor of any discussion. It's dialogic, not declarative.

In real terms you will see facilitated communication, circles and victim offender dialogue that has been modified for the workplace as well as restorative agreements to mend harm that are both specific and measurable and time bound. It's not a therapy session. It's not a tribunal. The session is a staged paradigm of exchange, all structured to restore function and trust so the teams can do the work they were hired to do.

Why this matters , the human and business case

There's no point in dressing this up as purely moral. There are quantifiable business results from restorative practices. Unhealthy workplace and unresolved conflict are drivers of absenteeism, presenteeism and turnover. Data from Safe Work Australia has revealed just how significant an impact workplace mental health conditions are having on serious and permanent work related claims; these things do not exist in isolation , they stand as representative of frivolous lost productivity, recruitment cost, legal risk and ultimately people who suffer.

Human damage is more directly addressed, cutting those downstream costs.

Two thoughts you may not want to hear, but need to:

• Restorative justice is, on balance, more effective than traditional discipline in significantly reducing repeated harm;
• Employers still enamoured with "control" as opposed to "repair" are building fragile cultures that will cost them sooner rather than later.

Both are debatable. There are leaders who will say punishment is easier, swifter and more straightforward to mete out. Fair call. But in the longer run, simplification can be a false economy.

Core principles , a leader's checklist

These are the four workable restorative justice principles in organisations:

1. Repair, not revenge , concentrate instead on the needs of those harmed and the obligations of those that did harm
2. Participative , people affected must be involved in healing the harm: participation is not mandatory but is rewarded with authentic outcomes
3. Accountability , the offender takes responsibility and commits to concrete actions going forward
4. Re integration , bringing people back into functional roles when appropriate, with support and clear expectations

These are not airy ideals. They are brought to life through policies, trained facilitators and governance systems working alongside disciplinary processes.

Restorative justice vs traditional discipline: different tools for different results

Traditional disciplinary processes are for when you need to apply clear organisational rules, protect legal obligations or respond to serious misconduct requiring removal. Restorative processes succeed when the aim is to heal, restore relationships and deter repetition. They're complementary, not mutually exclusive.

A reasonable policy employs both: discipline where safety and compliance require it, restorative practices where relationships and reputations can be mended.

Benefits you might actually feel

• Reduced friction over time: teams work out of the frictions and back on to their strengths
• Fewer false positives and bots: focus more investigation time on real, harmful signals, not small great expanding loops of garbage in / garbage signalled out arbitrage
• Less project work distorting goals yet again yr 3 or 5 after an organisation "Worked on this" a couple years ago for six months only to end up with unwelcome side effects

There is a psychological return on investment. Employees involved in a repair process often report feeling more respected and committed afterwards , not because they were let off, but because the process saw them.

How to transition a system of restorative justice without derailing operations

Implementation is an exercise in changing conduct. Here's a practical process that has worked at numerous organisations I've counselled:

1. Begin with small and conspicuous Pilot restorative circles within one team or site. Choose a team with a committed manager and not too many legal minefields. This approach has worked well for public sector teams in Canberra and a number of corporate hubs in Melbourne.

2. Facilitators of the training
   Good facilitation is non negotiable. For the first few stages, internal HR professionals should be trained or outside facilitators brought in. Role play. Script tough questions. Prepare for defensiveness.

3. Embed policy options Integrate restorative pathways into your workplace resolution policy, including specific eligibility criteria and escalation protocols. That gives practitioners a toolkit, not a blank cheque to improvise.

4. Be transparent in communication
   Staff members need to understand when restorative procedures will be employed, what confidentiality means and how decisions are enforced. Transparency reduces suspicion.

5. Monitor and iterate Collect qualitative and quantitative signals , repeat rates, mental health claims, absenteeism, satisfaction survey data , and iterate.

Training and education , building the muscle

Restorative justice requires muscles that most workplaces don't build: listening, non violent communication, consciousness of trauma and negotiated agreement writing. Short workshops won't cut it. Good training is a mix of theory, simulation and coached practice. We run sessions where it's actual role play, and we then coach the supervisor; that is where muscle is built.

Running circles and dialogues , the heart of practice

Restorative circles can seem misleadingly bare bones: a specific set of questions, speaking norms, and a facilitator. They establish a reliable, official container that can accommodate honest, sometimes even hurtful conversation. In a typical circle, the central question is: What happened? Who was hurt? Where to from here to right the wrong? Who will do it, and by when? Everyone leaves with a plan.

Managing power imbalances , the sticky bit

Here's where many programmes fall flat. Simply put, power imbalances , manager underling, more senior junior , can mute people. You must use processes that counteract power: neutral facilitators, pre circle preparation, written alternatives for input and, where necessary, separate preparatory sessions with the less powerful party. You take out power dynamics, the whole thing's a tokenistic process.

Dealing with resistance , natural and fixable

Resistance in organisations or systems tends to sound like these: "We don't have time for feelings" or "This is too soft." The answer is practical: restorative approaches take time at the outset but actually save time over the medium term by avoiding further incidents, lawsuits and resignations. (Pilots and "early wins" are the way to show that ledger.) Maintain the punitive option in your policy, visible , restorative justice should not be framed as a replace all but an alternative.

Evaluating success , what to measure

A good programme measures hard and soft outcomes:

• Hard: reductions in repeat incidents, absenteeism, mental health claims or turnover; and
• Soft: employees perceptions of fairness, the quality of interpersonal relationships as well as their willingness to speak up

If the only thing that you measure is "satisfaction", you will miss what is really happening with your finances. "Cost" loses the humanity. If you are only counting "costs", then you don't look at the human cost. Both matter.

One true statistic worth knowing

The population of the workplace is a live business risk: mental health. Safe Work Australia says, and highlights why tackling harm between colleagues is important not just from an ethical but a financial perspective.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Over correcting before listening. Repair plans need to be co created
• Restorative language being slapped over the top of punishment as a shallow disguise
• Ignoring legal commitments , some things still require formal investigation
• Bad confidentiality practices that breach trust

Where restorative justice excels , and falls short

Excels: for an Organisation where one person needs to go on record and the other just needs to be heard; in a situation of workplace bullying, harassment or discrimination where there is value in redeeming the working relationship; broken teams that interfere with performance delivery; misconduct driven by poor communication instead of malicious intent.

Doesn't fit: criminal behaviour that needs law enforcement or unsafe situations, where a party definitely says no when given adequate offers.

Two other slightly uncomfortable views

• That work places should be far more willing to give people a second, controlled chance if safety permits. No, it's not about putting up with repeated misbehaviour
• Compassion is a long term asset, not a liability. Empathy may be trained and specified

These are divisive comments in the boardroom. But the evidence, and experience, all point this way: Communities and organisations become more resilient when repair is a priority.

Leadership's role , no ifs ands or buts about it

Leaders determine the climate. A CEO (or anyone else) that talks about "zero tolerance" without enacting and modelling restorative behaviour will be his or her own worst enemy. And when you have leaders partaking in restorative processes, that shows seriousness. Leadership must also support resource allocation , trained facilitators, time allocations and monitoring systems.

Some last practical notes

• Don't allow perfection to become the enemy of good. Begin with a clear pilot, iterate fast, scale thoughtfully
• Protect confidentiality fiercely. Trust is the currency here. Lose it and you have lost the programme
• Keep them legal channels flowing. Once the statutory duties are triggered, just do what is right

Conclusion

Restorative justice at work is not an alternative to discipline; it's a raise in the practice of it. It acknowledges people as agents in responding to harm, as stakeholders in restoring justice. That's a bit radical in a business culture that values control. It's also, frankly, good business. We've seen what happens when staff members create this work with their teams , there are far fewer grievances that escalate, morale picks up and people stay. If indeed your Organisation gives a damn about its culture, this is something that you simply cannot afford to be an optional extra. They're a competency.

Sources & Notes

• Safe Work Australia. Work related stress and how to tackle it. Safe Work Australia, 2020,2021. (Statistics cited on fraction of serious workers' compensation claims due to mental health disorders.)
• Latimer, J., Dowden, C., & Muise, D The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Practices: A Meta Analysis. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2005. (A meta analysis of restorative justice effects on victim satisfaction and reconviction rates.)