Sen. Mitchell ended his successful 15-year tenure in the Senate as majority leader in 1995, but his work continues as he concentrates on using his negotiation, interviewing, and, probably most importantly, listening skills to resolve conflict.
"Genuine listening is hard to do," Sen. Mitchell said. "In social or other casual conversations, many people focus on their own words or thoughts. I try to focus by telling myself that I'll have to write a summary of the discussion once it's over. Frequently, I do write such summaries, even when I don't have to do, just to keep up my listening skills."
He had to marshal all of those skills during the grueling and complicated Northern Ireland peace negotiations. After the peace talks were finished, Ulster Unionist talks team member Sir Reg Empey told the BBC that Sen. Mitchell had to endure much to reach the final agreement. "I think that anybody who knows anything about the hours he has had to sit and spend listening to us squabbling and arguing must give him good credit," Empey said.
Sen. Mitchell knows that listening leads to valuable interviews and substantive negotiations - vital strengths for fraud examiners. He will share his techniques and his observations on the Middle East, Northern Ireland, the Olympics, and Major League Baseball in his keynote address at the 19th Annual ACFE Fraud Conference & Exhibition, July 13 - 18 in Boston.
Sen. Mitchell spoke to Fraud Magazine from his office in Washington, D.C.
Though the investigations you've conducted are disparate, is there a common denominator in your techniques?
An important attribute for an investigator is to have an open and inquiring mind that questions every assumption, especially those based on "That's the way we've always done it."
How are you able to move an interviewee to the point that he or she is comfortable with you and your questions?
There is no one method for making an interviewee comfortable. How I proceed is highly dependent on the circumstances. Generally, I try to employ a great deal of patience and willingness to listen to whatever is said, however untrue or disagreeable.
As chairman of the peace negotiations in Northern Ireland, the governments of Ireland and the United Kingdom agreed to a historic accord, the Belfast Peace Agreement, in 1998. You must have taken great satisfaction in your efforts. How were you able to bring both sides together to agree on such disparate issues?
I'll discuss this in more detail on July 14, but for now I'll say that it's important in conflict resolution to create a context in which each side can in fact and in perception make its case and have its point of view heard; in other words, listening is critical.
We live in a frenetic society bound up with self-interest. How does an interviewer learn "active listening"? I know you want to save most of your points for the Annual Conference, but can you share one thought on how you can move two differing sides to resolution that still involve concessions?
Genuine listening is hard to do. In social or other casual conversations, many people focus on their own words or thoughts. I try to focus by telling myself that I'll have to write a summary of the discussion once it's over. Frequently, I do write such summaries, even when I don't have to do, just to keep up my listening skills.
Since 2002, you have been a Senior Fellow and Senior Research Scholar at the Columbia University Center for International Conflict Resolution, at which you work in conflict resolution. How can fraud examiners learn from your negotiation techniques?
Each conflict is different, so each negotiation must be different. But there are some principles that apply generally, and I'll describe some of them on July 14.
Can you share just one of those principles?
The first and most important principle is to be patient and let every participant have his or her say. If people feel they haven't had a chance to express their thoughts, they are much less likely to listen to the views of others.
Why did you accept the request of Major League Baseball's commissioner to investigate the illegal use of steroids and other performance-enhancing substances by MLB players? What was your greatest challenge in the investigation?
I accepted the assignment because I like baseball and because I believe that the commissioner was serious in trying to deal with what is an important issue in all sports.
In a sense, the baseball players' illegal drug use is a fraud perpetrated on team owners, fellow players, and the public. Who loses most here?
Among the victims are the majority of players who play by the rules. They're faced with the awful choice of playing at a competitive disadvantage or becoming illegal users themselves. No one should have to make that choice.
You had no subpoena power so in the end you only were able to talk to two current MLB players. (You were able to conduct more than 700 interviews with former players, current or former club officials, managers, coaches, team physicians, and others.) Did you sometimes feel you had your hands tied in the investigation? Why did your investigation focus on the players rather than the teams?
The absence of subpoena power meant that the investigation took a lot longer than I'd hoped. Although most current players refused to talk with me, many former players and a large number of club employees did.
Illegal steroids and performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball (as well as in many sports programs) seem to have been prevalent and incipient for many years. Why is it important that MLB heeds your recommendations? Some say that it's all much ado about nothing, but do you believe the problem has broader implications?
Recent estimates of steroid use by high school age Americans range from 2 percent to 6 percent. Even the lower figure means that hundreds of thousands of our youngsters are endangering their health and their future. Every American, not just baseball fans, should be shocked into action by that disturbing truth.
Your 1999 U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) special commission report on impropriety and alleged bribes in the selection process of the 2002 Winter Games included several nonbinding recommendations for both the USOC and the International Olympic Committee (IOC). You called on President Clinton to declare the IOC a public international organization, and thus make bribing its officials punishable under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Have you seen any of your recommendations adopted in either committee?
Most of our recommendations were adopted by the U.S. Olympic Committee and by the International Olympic Committee.
Since the 1980s, ACFE Chairman and Founder Joseph T. Wells has preached fraud detection and deterrence. In the early years, few heeded his message. But, of course, the Enron and WorldCom scandals, and the ensuing Sarbanes-Oxley Act, have compelled corporate America to impose internal controls. But legislation can't control character. Do we need massive financial frauds every 10 years in the United States (witness the Savings and Loan scandal in the 1980s and '90s and the current subprime fiasco) to jolt businesses and remind them of basic fraud examination principles?
Unfortunately, complacency is a reality in life. These recurring scandals remind us of the need for continual vigilance in combating fraud and abuse.
What advice would you give fraud examiners who are working to detect and deter fraud in corporate, governmental, and nonprofit entities?
Don't ever be intimidated or deterred. Approach every examination with an open and inquiring mind.
You've worn many hats in your career. Two well-worn ones seem to be "negotiator" and "investigator." Which do you enjoy the most and why?
I enjoy them both. In my experience both skills have been necessary.
You seem to have packed at least two lives of activity into one. What's your secret for being able to do so much?
My mother was an immigrant, my father was the orphan son of immigrants. They had no education; my father was a janitor, and my mother worked the night shift in a textile mill. They taught me that hard work, a good education, and the good fortune to have been an American would produce success in life.
But many parents teach these principles to their children. What spurred you to excel and pack so much good activity into your life?
It was a combination of a desire to excel and a fear of failure.
What are your future plans in your "retirement"?
Keep working.
Can you elaborate? Will you do some more writing?
I've written four books and I plan to write at least one more. I also will devote more time to charitable activities, especially the scholarship fund to help needy students to go on to college, which I created when I left the Senate.
Dick Carozza is editor-in-chief of Fraud Magazine.
The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners assumes sole copyright of any article published on www.Fraud-Magazine.com or ACFE.com. Permission of the publisher is required before an article can be copied or reproduced.
