MEDIJATOR Andrew Grossman

Guest Andrew GrossmanHosted by Srđan ŠimacMay 3, 2026

Andrew Grossman

About this episode

What you'll hear in this conversation

Why do businesses and individuals lean so heavily on contracts, only to find themselves trapped by their rigidity when real-world problems emerge? Andrew Grossman, a seasoned expert in conflict resolution, challenges the prevailing Western view of contracts, arguing that our exhaustive attempts to predict every negative contingency often miss the point entirely. A former architect who pivoted to mediation, Grossman has spent over two decades with CEDR (Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution), helping integrate mediation into legal systems and business practices worldwide. He argues that true resilience in agreements comes not from anticipating every failure, but from valuing the human element and building flexibility. This conversation will make you rethink the very purpose of your business agreements and how you approach conflict, not just as an event, but as a continuous skill.

Insights from the conversation

What to take from this episode

Andrew Grossman spent 15 years as an architect before pivoting to conflict resolution, stating he "hopes I've got more to give the world of conflict resolution than I do to architecture." A significant career shift isn't a rejection of past skills, but a re-allocation of impact; the new field is where you believe your contribution will compound most.

CEDR's original mission in 1989 was to introduce mediation into the UK civil justice system, succeeding to the point where it would be "very rare" for a lawyer to not understand it. True system change isn't just about offering a new solution; it's about making that solution so integral that its absence becomes unthinkable.

What was once seen as a "one-day event" for litigation, mediation is now recognized as a broader "skill set" for mitigating workplace conflicts before they escalate. The real value of conflict resolution isn't just in resolving disputes, but in proactive prevention and fostering a continuous culture of understanding.

Western businesses often spend so much time drafting contracts to anticipate every variable and assign risk that the contract itself becomes "almost as if it's the project itself." When the agreement becomes the focus, rather than the work it enables, you've confused the map for the territory.

While Western contracts attempt to predict "all the things that are likely to happen" – like a river rising during a bridge build – Grossman points out "you can't predict for everything." Over-reliance on exhaustive contractual foresight creates a false sense of security, as real-world variables inevitably exceed any document's scope.

In contrast to the Western approach, contracts in Asia and China are seen as "general guideline frameworks" that are more flexible. The true strength of an agreement isn't its rigidity but its adaptability, recognizing that the human element and evolving circumstances are more important than an exhaustive list of contingencies.

The Asian approach emphasizes that "it's the people that make the contracts," shifting focus from legalistic enforcement to relational dynamics. The most durable agreements aren't those that can be enforced in court, but those upheld by mutual respect and a commitment to working things out.

Explore further

ScenariosBusiness challenges CardsEducational cards TimelineTopic evolution