How I extend my practice
This overview outlines the topics I cover when invited to lecture or facilitate sessions. The focus remains on negotiation, escalation and the strategic design of dispute resolution processes.
Each engagement is developed in consultation with the requesting party and tailored to the specific context and audience. Sessions are preceded by a focused preparatory conversation to ensure depth, relevance and clarity of purpose.
-
I examine why settlement advice often fails at the decisive moment. The choice between continuing to negotiate and proceeding further is rarely framed with sufficient rigour. I outline a structured decision framework that integrates legal exposure, behavioural dynamics and reputational risk, offering advisers clearer footing at the edge of escalation.
-
Mediation is frequently approached either too aggressively or too cautiously. I challenge both tendencies. I present a strategic preparation model that helps counsel remain persuasive without litigating the room, and use mediation as a deliberate instrument rather than as a procedural afterthought.
-
Adversarial training is an asset, but it can also narrow strategic range. I explore how wintered negotiators can expand their negotiation repertoire while maintaining analytical discipline. The focus is on calibrated positioning, concession architecture and dealing with entrenched counterparts under real pressure.
-
Many disputes harden because difficult conversations were postponed or diluted. I argue that professional responsibility includes structured expectation management from the outset. I discuss how to conduct disciplined risk conversations that preserve trust while preventing unnecessary escalation.
-
High stakes professional conflict is not resolved by technique alone. I examine how authority, sequencing and framing influence escalation. I offer a structured approach to de escalating conversations without drifting into therapeutic language or losing professional footing.
-
Cross border disputes are often misdiagnosed as purely legal disagreements. I analyse how hierarchy, communication norms and institutional expectations shape negotiation behaviour. I introduce an analytical lens for distinguishing cultural friction from substantive conflict, and for responding appropriately to each.
-
Europe continues to underuse commercial mediation relative to other jurisdictions. I examine what the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Singapore have done differently, and outline the structural and professional shifts required for meaningful change.