Conflict Management - WordPress.com · Leo Kinuthia Conflict Management 2 Introduction One of the issues that human beings have to contend with in their daily living is conflict

Conflict Management

Leo Kinuthia

Leo Kinuthia Conflict Management

2

Introduction

One of the issues that human beings have to contend with in their daily living is conflict.

The word conflict comes from two words; “fligere” (lat.) = to strike and “con” = together. Shawchuck

Norman (1983) defines it by saying that it refers to “two or more objects aggressively trying to

occupy the same space at the same time” (35). When this happens there is bound to be friction and

hence the arising of a conflict. It involves “action, threat and reaction” (35). Commenting on it,

Augsburger David (1992) says, “Conflict is essential to, ineradicable from and inevitable in human

life; and the source, cause, and process of conflict can be turned from life-destroying to life-building

ends (5).

How Conflict is Understood

Shawchuck Norman (1983) says that “in conflict management it is essential to “sort out” the

components which are operating in particular conflict situation” (45). These components of the

operational model are (a) “type of the conflict, (b) dimensions of the conflict, (c) territory of the

conflict and (d) behaviors intended to protect the territory” (45-46).

Type of Conflict

For one to help effectively in conflict resolution and transformation, he must be able to

identify the type of conflict first. There are four different types of conflicts. These are:

(a) “Intra –personal” – This involves “fights” within one’s self. Matters without or within

the person trigger it. Thoughts and emotions are major sources of this conflict. In

Nairobi, the predominantly African community does not freely express their thoughts

and emotions.

(b) “Inter-personal” – People in contact with one another inadvertently get into conflict.

Most Nairobi residents avoid dealing with conflicts and would rather maintain peace


3

other than rock the boat. Some even move to other churches instead of resolving the

conflict.

(c) “Intra-group” – People who have joined together do experience conflict within

themselves though sometimes it could be hard to tell whether it is intra-group

(concerning the whole group) or inter-personal (involving a few in the group). This is

been a major source of splits in the churches as people follow a certain leader as

opposed to others.

(d) “Inter-group” – When a group breaks up, it develops into complete units that sometimes

are hostile to each other. This has been seen where pastors tear into one another just

because they parted ways. Though other conflict types can be destructive if not handled

well, the author of this paper presupposes that this type could be most dangerous since

many people involved.

Dimensions of Conflict

Having known the type, the next step in the operational model is to locate the dimension of

the conflict. The three dimensions of conflicts are:

(a) “Values/traditions” – Each person or organization has a set of values that are held onto

dogmatically and would bring major conflicts if they are to be changed or compromised.

Shawchuck and Roger Heuser (1996) write that these are “the most difficult to resolve

because persons (by definition) place more significance on values than they do on goals or

methods” (258). An example of this dimension is the question of whether or not Western

style dances should be performed in churches and if ladies should be allowed to were tight

holding trousers or not. The conflict is between the liberals and conservatives.


4

(b) “Goals/purposes” – People set out on a mission with particular purposes and goals. They

have an idea of where they are heading and detours or derailments will inevitably result into

conflicts. Some church leaders in Nairobi tend to defy their denomination leadership and

constitution. They fuel rebellion in the church and eventually leave with their sympathizers.

(c) “Methods/policies” – Values and goals (these four terms have different meanings; they

cannot be put into one category) are very crucial to any person or organization. There needs

to be a clear, well thought out method of how they will be achieved. When the method

cannot be agreed upon or is altered along the way, the end result is a conflict. Some policies

are rather outdated and do not serve the church satisfactorily. The old guard wants to

maintain the status quo while the upcoming young people want change. This has led to intra-

group conflict where the two groups can be in the same church but holding separate services

with little or no input from either.

Territories of Conflict

Since conflict has to do with two or objects (people) trying to occupy the same space, the territory in

question needs to be identified. These territories are:

(a) “Psychological” – It is internal and has to do with feelings and thoughts that arise from self-

diagnosis.

(b) “Social status” – In group set-ups, different sub-sets have their own social “spaces” e.g. top

cream of the society, low income earners, a predominant tribe, etc.

(c) “Physical” – People are inherently territorial. Fights erupt as people try to avoid annihilation.

Planting a church in close proximity to an existing one is regarded as intrusion.

(d) “Positional” – Perhaps this is one of the greatest causes of conflicts in an organization.

Deceit and backstabbing characterizes the dirty fights in the churches.


5

When persons face a threat to their territories, they result to certain behaviors. These

behaviors are defining moments that greatly affect the results of the conflict.

Behaviors Intended to Protect Territory

“The conflict behaviour or actions are those visible, measurable steps taken to fulfill the perceptions

and move towards the goals” (Augsburger 1992, 67). He further writes that these actions “seek to

deprive the other of the goal or to eliminate the competitor” (68). The behaviors are:

(a) “Withdrawal/divide” – This behaviour is characterized by churches splitting or some

leaders/people transferring to other churches.

(b) “Share/give” – In this behaviour, someone bends a little backwards to accommodate others.

The old guard might allow the young to hold dance competitions in the church building.

(c) “Trade” - This is a give-and-take action. The parties seek win-win solutions. This seen in dishing

of positions to opponents so that they can be silenced.

(d) “Take” – Force is exerted and the other weaker party loses. This happens when the leadership

does not want to be accountable and they kick out anyone who questions them.

(e) “Withhold” – The concerned party employs all the tricks in the book to preserve his territory.

Some even employ unorthodox means so as to malign their opponents.

(f) “Redefine” – The person(s) involved draw new boundaries around their turf. In this case some

congregants may choose to seek assistance from some pastors and not others.

Unique Issues of Culture Related to Conflict Intervention in Nairobi, Kenya

Cultures are categorized as high context or low context cultures. The author of this paper feels that

some communities or individuals in Nairobi experience both contexts at different times. This is

precipitated by rural urban migration, schools that follow International Curricula, students who


6

study abroad and expatriates in the business and international missions. Some of the city dwellers

live in enclosed places with little or no interaction with their neighbors (low context) yet they are

regarded as part of their rural communities (high context).

There are factors that determine how a conflict is dealt with in the two cultures. Augsburger (1992)

discusses these factors under the questions of “where, why, what, and which” (28) and their

contrasts in different cultures.

Where. Context in which a conflict occurs determines its direction and how it will be

resolved. “Individualistic (low context) cultures prefer directness, specificity in stating demands,

confrontation, and open disclosure.” In contrast, “collectivistic (high context) cultures tend toward

indirect, ambiguous, cautious, non-confrontational, and subtle ways of working through

communication and relational tangles” (28). The former looks at conflicts through an individual’s

lens while the latter filters it through the community lens. It is not just about an individual but a

community. Nairobi residents live in a high context culture. (Urbanization and globalization has

caused city dwellers to become more low context but many retain their high context view of life.

Why. Each conflict has a reason behind it. These reasons are either “expressive (arise from a

desire to release tension, express frustration, and discharge emotion) or instrumental (arise from a

difference in pathways or goals)” (29). Under this categorization, low context cultures are “more

likely to perceive conflict as instrumental while those of high context “perceive it as expressive” (28).

The former tend to separate people and issues while the latter considers everything i.e. the people

and problems together. In addition, low context cultures are open with words and tend to literally

drive the point home while high context cultures “beat around the bush”. The latter has a “rich and

elaborate code of system of metaphor and simile” (31) that may spice up the style of handling

conflicts. People living in Nairobi and indeed the Church members have to contend with the two.


7

Churches with main population coming from the low income bracket fall in the high context while

middle and upper congregants falling under low context.

What. People involved in conflicts will bring with them attitudes and biases. “People in

individualistic low context cultures are much more likely to utilize a confrontational, direct address,

one-to-one negotiating style” while those from high context “are more likely to possess a non-

confrontational, indirect, triangular resolution style” (32). When it comes to disputes, the churches

in Nairobi that have faced some serious wrangles have sought the intervention of secular judicial

systems. In dysfunctional systems, the church may try their best to keep the conflict covered and if it

comes to a mediator, a high sense of co-dependency is experienced.

Which. The two cultures use different patterns to resolve conflicts. Low context cultures

“method begins with the visible data and selection of important facts and inductively move toward a

conclusion in linear, sequential reasoning based on logical inferences (factual-inductive method).”

Contrastingly, high context cultures use “affective-intuitive method” which is “based on relational,

emotional and personal perceptions of the situation and on the hunches that arise from these

perceptions” (33). Other factors rather than what seems obvious are considered when the latter are

dealing with a conflict. Conflicts are seen as entwined with people and people in Nairobi find it hard

to separate personalities and issues.

Augsburger (1992) discusses further differences regarding conflicts between low context and

high context cultures (73-186). Face is highly valued in high context cultures. “Honor is associated

with a hierarchical order of society, the codes of chivalry , the structures of feudalism, and the

surviving guilds such as the military, the law, and medicine” (107). Those in position are honored or

expect to be honored by the mere fact of those positions. Congregations are so timid and the

ministers silence them with threats of a backlash from God by using verses such as Psalms 105:15

which says, “Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm.” (NIV)


8

Anger is a socially constructed response that helps regulate interpersonal retaliation through the threat of retaliation for perceived wrongdoing, and that is interpreted as an impulsive passion rather than a deliberate action so as not to violate the general cultural prescription against deliberately harming another person. (Augsburger 1992, 128)

It is sad that in many instances, anger has not been rightfully managed in the churches leading to

acrimony displayed in physical and verbal abuses, splits and excommunications. Some leaders are so

insecure that anyone who questions their character in matters of morality, financial accountability

and leadership style is perceived as a threat and plans are made immediately to “deal” with him. In

cases where anger has been bottled up for a long time, the disputants throw all caution to the wind

and tear into each other not caring whether they will be ashamed or not.

Facework in high context cultures is highly concerned with how others “see” the individual’s

vis-à-vis the whole community. Augsburger (1992) says,

Facework is a universal human experience, a ubiquitous concept that occurs in all cultures.” “Face is a psychological image ... the public self-image that every member of the society wants to claim for himself or herself ... [It] is an identity defined conjointly by the participants in a setting. (85)

The need to maintain face has led to splitting of churches as some people seek to leave their

churches instead of confronting issues. In other cases, leaders choose to resign from their leadership

positions instead of risking being sacked. All these are intended to save face.

Those regarded as juniors in terms of employment, academic or social classes are trampled

upon by the “big shots” in those fields. Such perspective of conflicts has led to one too many social

injustices. In churches those who tithe big amounts enjoy favors with the church leadership and

may even have some of their sins overlooked. It is goes without saying that “more money more say,

no money no say.” The elite get leadership positions regardless of their skills at the expense of the

others who are not well connected.

The community the author hails from is highly patriarchal. It would be expected that the

Church would be different, but this is not the case. Many churches have exclusive male leadership


9

with women taking up women and children’s ministries. The traditional chieftain leadership style has

been perfected in the churches with the women relegated to lesser positions in the Church even

when they are qualified. It is not amazing to hear demeaning remarks being made against them.

Theological Considerations in Conflict Intervention

Shawchuck Norman (1983) defines theology as “the prayerful process of discerning how

God may think and act in a given situation” (8). Theology of conflict has everything to do with how

God understands and acts in the midst of conflict. This understanding is vital for every Christian

since it will shape his own understanding and behaviour when faced with conflicts.

Though not explicitly mentioned in the Scriptures, “the first conflict was in the heavenly

realm when Satan led some of the angels in an unsuccessful rebellion against God” (Ronald

Sommers 2006, 15).

Shawchuck (1983) explores the theology of conflict under different subtitles. He deals with

(a) “the trail of conflict throughout Scripture, (b) “understanding conflict from a biblical point of

view”, (c) “basic types of conflict among God’s people” and (d)”biblical understanding of the results

of conflict” (8-12).

The Trail of Conflict Throughout Scripture

The Beginning of Conflict: Genesis 3. When God created Adam and Eve, He gave them freewill

so that they could make choices. Eve was cheated by Satan and ate the forbidden fruit which she

also shared with her husband. Disobedience brought conflict between the two and God and

between themselves as evidenced by the blame game they resulted into. Their fall precipitated

conflict for all other generations that followed. God was involved in the conflict and had to provide

a way out for the two though he was grieved and had already pronounced curses against them.


10

God did not shy away from the conflict. He stepped in and took control of the situation.

The Christians should not bury their heads in the face of conflict. Neither should they wish it away

quickly when it happens and consider it as a “sin” to be swept under the carpet. Christians have

sometimes been accused of “being too heavenly minded to be of earthly good.” The first conflict

and God’s involvement tells every believer that conflicts will arise and when they do, the way is

manage them constructively.

The End of Conflict. Perhaps the greatest misdeed the first parents did was the disobedience

that started off a spin of conflicts throughout all generations. That one act has led to a perpetual

state of human-human and God-man conflicts. Satan also takes advantage of the fallen nature by

continuously dangling temptations that man finds hard to resist unless he has Christ in his heart.

“This is the curse of humanity. A curse which is finally corrected in Revelation 21 and 22 with the

coming of a new kingdom” (Shawchuck 1983, 9).

As long as Christians are on this side of the sun, conflicts will continue. Only when Christ

comes in glory shall the Christians escape the cycle of frictions. Each Christian should have he

attitude that conflict will arise at one time or the other in his life.

In the “Meantime”. “Conflict has become a normal part of human relationships” (Shawchuck

1983, 9). It is like everyone is born with his own share engraved on his forehead. The Scriptures

record cases of conflicts such as Cain with Abel, God and the Israelites, Moses and the Israelites,

David and Bathsheba, etc. Jesus too engaged in conflict.

Sometimes he started conflict, such as the cleansing of the temple, Matthew 21:12-16. At other times He resolved conflict, such as the situation with the woman found in adultery, John 8:3-11. At other times, he avoided it, Luke 4:28-30. (9)

This is a good example for the Christians. Since their Master could not escape conflicts, they too

should be ready to face them and bring reconciliation where need be.


11

Regarding conflict in the Early Church, Ronald Sommers (2006) writes of conflicts in Acts 5

(Ananias and Sapphira), Acts 6 (Gentile’s salvation and baptism of the Spirit) and Acts 15 method of

salvation for the Gentiles) (16). All these should be an encouragement to the Christians in the

Nairobi churches that conflicts are not strange in the Kingdom of God. They are not necessarily

sinful by themselves (Shawchuck 1983, 9) but the way they are handled will determine whether

results will be sinful or not.

Understanding Conflict from a Biblical Point of View

Conflict as a Result of the Struggle to Understand God’s Direction. One of the greatest struggles of

human beings is to know the will of God regarding a certain situation. It does appear that,

sometimes, there are many options open (not sinful) for the minister to follow. An example of this is

found in Acts 15:1-35 regarding “the necessary conditions required for salvation and membership in

the church” (10).

An equivalent of the above is seen in churches that demand that one must be saved before

they can attend a service there. Another is whether babies of single parents should be dedicated in

the church or not.

Conflict as a Result of Differences Between Persons. Interpersonal differences are major causes of

conflicts. God has created each person uniquely leading to differences in intellect, perspectives and

opinions. Acts 15:36-41 records a major conflict between Paul and Barnabas. Theirs arose out of

personality differences resulting into two teams; Paul/Silas and Barnabas/Mark.

Some of the leadership wrangles in Nairobi churches have arose from personality

differences. Leaders fail to appreciate the talents and gifts of one another and tend to uncouth and

unholy means of maintaining control and protecting their turf. Such leaders suffer from serious

“bouts” of insecurity and see other as a threat to their survival.


12

Conflict as a Result of Sinful Motives. Jeremiah 17:9 says “The heart is deceitful above all things

and desperately wicked” to illustrate the sinful motives that are conceived and processed in the

heart. The conflict that David found himself in (2 Sam. 11) was a result of his sinful motives.

The sinful nature has time again brought friction in the Church. An example is preachers

who will ask the congregations to give sacrificially by promising them miracles yet their motive is to

enrich themselves.

Basic Types of Conflicts

Conflicts over Purposes and Goals. Leaders have to contend with wrangles over purposes and

goals. In Acts 10:9-11:18, the apostles had to sort out God’s purpose a far as the Gentle converts

were concerned. They had to answer the question of whether the Gospel was exclusive or all-

inclusive.

Some churches in Nairobi were started after a vision or call of the senior pastor. Some of

these leaders started as evangelists but after sometime they plant churches where many gather to

worship. Such churches run on the vision (or whims) of the senior pastor. Challenging his goals is

seen as a personal affront and an outrageous act. Their say is final and “infallible.”

Conflict over Programs and Methods. Out of the uniqueness of people, different programs and

methods are employed to achieve different or same goals. This is a fertile ground for conflicts as

each person or group may consider a certain path as the “ordained” way. The apostles had to deal

with a conflict over program in Acts 6:1-7 when they were faced with the issue of Grecian Jews.

Splits have happened in come churches out of differences in methods and programs. Some

churches bend towards social lift (give people bread and they will receive the Word) while others

stick to the gospel as the only way to change lives (give them the Word and God will give them the


13

bread). Some pastors will not set foot in a Bible School. They consider that to be carnal and a

nullity for they are “students of the Holy Spirit.”

Conflict over Values and Traditions. Societies comprise people who differ on values and a blend

of traditionalists (conservatives) who are wiling to lay down their lives to maintain the status quo.

When David sinned with Bathsheba (2 Sam. 11), he was more concerned with his honor than

admittance and repentance of his sin. In Matthew 15:2-6, Jesus Christ reprimanded the Pharisees

and scribes for seeking to keep the traditions at the expense of obedience.

There are some churches that embrace Western style of music and fashion while others see

that as “bringing” the world into the church. Conflicts in the former are a “daily cup of coffee” since

the young people fail to fit in and move out or clandestinely oppose the traditionalists.

Biblical Understanding of the Results of Conflict

Negative Results. A conflict that is not managed constructively results in unpleasant results.

Relationships are destroyed and sin creeps into the church. In such places, the environment

becomes conducive for the devil and the flesh to reign.

Some negative results from conflicts in Nairobi Pentecostal churches are splits, court cases,

excommunications and falling away of believers. In other cases, the Church is discredited and Christ

is blasphemed.

Positive Results. According to Shawchuck, a well-managed conflict will result in a “greater

clarity of God’s will, “greater unity among God’s people and “greater ability to deal with future

conflicts.” This builds relationships and grows the Kingdom of God.

Not many churches have got to that level of positive results. Some however, seem to

oscillate between destructive and constructive conflict management. It is sad that some leaders are

so blinded that they consider themselves constructive while in the actual sense they are destroying.


14

What the Author of this Paper has Discovered About his own Conflict Management Styles

People universally have a unique style of handling conflict. Some continuously employ a

certain style unknowingly while others are fully aware of their styles. Shawchuck 1983 says,

The behaviors you employ in conflict have been learned over time and are consistent enough that others come to expect you to act in certain predictable ways whenever you experience conflict. Because conflict management styles are learned, they can be altered or replaced by new styles. (21)

Most important of all changes in conflict management style is the one that occurs when one submits

to the Holy Spirit. He gives wisdom generously to all who ask (Jas. 1:5).

“Person/task values are most obvious in the way your conflict management styles affect

both harmony between people in a group or organization and the way the organization’s

effectiveness is nurtured through or hampered by the presence of conflict” (Roger Heuser and

Byron D. Klaus 1999, 17). As discussed earlier, conflicts are inevitable and the way they are

managed will either bring “death” or “life” to the people or organizations involved. Shawchuck

(1983) discusses five styles of conflict management. They are “avoiding, accommodating,

collaborating, compromising and competing” (21-32). To help students discover their preferred

style, he has developed an inventory on “conflict styles survey” (13-19).The author of this paper

scored highest in collaborating style with compromising coming as his back up style.

Shawchuck (1983) says that the “intent of [collaborating] style is to get all parties fully

involved in defining the conflict and in carrying out mutually agreeable steps for managing the

conflict” (25). This styles place high value on “relationships and personal goals” (31). The author of

this paper highly values people and was not in any way surprised when he scored highest for the

collaborating style. Over the times he has been involved in conflict management, he has aspired to

bring people on board and have them participate. Sometimes, he has inclined towards maintaining

relationships to the detriment of the goals. Due to his flexibility, some people have thought he is not


15

assertive enough and tried to undermine him. Time and again, he has had to lovingly let his teams

know that he has not lost control. In situations where collaborating has not worked, he has resulted

to compromising.

The “intent of compromising style is to provide each side with a little bit of winning in order

to persuade each to accept a little bit of losing” (26). It is “moderate on both goals and

relationships” (31). It seeks a common ground where parties involved lose some ground and yet still

feel that they have won. Notably, compromising should not in any way be confused with an

opportunity to sin for the sake of maintaining relationships or achieving goals. Christians should

never compromise their faith. However, in matters that neither makes them “saints” or “sinners”,

they should be ready to compromise. The author of this paper has occasionally sought ideas and

opinions of others when dealing with conflict. He does not like confrontational arguments and

desires to bring disputants into a place where each feels he has won some ground. Some people have

considered him timid and think they can push their personal agenda regardless of others’ concerns.

Due to his personal dislike of arguments, he has sometimes tended to avoid conflicts altogether. He

has sacrificed goals for relationships and sometimes feels lost on how to handle conflicts that

involve close friends. He has however, learnt that avoiding and compromising are two different

styles and the latter will help manage conflicts better in his ministry.

The author has also used the styles of accommodating and competing to manage conflicts.

With the former, he has been quick to accept wrongs just to make others feel happy. He sometimes

tends to be competitive in pursuit of ministry goals and allocation of resources. In such

circumstances however, he quickly withdraws and accepts reasons given as to why he cannot get

some resources. On avoidance, he seeks to seal loopholes through which conflict might erupt. When

it does erupt, he quickly accepts responsibility and apologizes. This makes the people he is in


16

conflict with miss an opportunity to learn how to constructively manage conflicts. With such people,

he tends to avoid them or steer conversations into areas that will not generate conflicts.

The author has learnt that sometimes the different styles may be employed depending on

circumstances. Shawchuck 1983 says, “For you to become more effective in conflict management, it

requires that you become aware of the styles that are available and of their consequences-and

possibly to undertake a conscious program for change in the way you behave in conflict situations”

(32). Considering Christ who highly valued relationships yet was uncompromising on the mission of

God, one in conflict management must differentiate between “constants” and “variables”. Each

conflict may tear down some goals but care should be taken that peoples’ hearts are not trampled in

the process.

The author has also learnt that he must seek the Lord always when faced with a conflict.

Many a times, he just plunges into the “mire” and ends up not helping much. Since Jesus Christ is

the High Priest who sympathizes with the Christians’ weaknesses (Heb. 4:15), he will seek the Lord

more for insight and guidance. He will seek to develop the attitude of seeing people as very

important and thus not stereotype or brand them as mere troublemakers or “lesser” beings. He now

knows that peace making is not in avoidance but in wisely managing a conflict such that God is

glorified, people are edified and goals are met.

With the equipping and knowledge on conflict management styles, he will henceforth deal

with conflicts confidently without having to shy away, create wrong impressions that all is well or

shove it to another person. Sweeping issues under the carpet will only “swell” the carpet but not

bring solutions. He will seek to learn from each and every conflict that he is involved in or deals

with. Of importance is for him to model constructive management to the teams he leads in the

church. Since followers tend to copy the leader, he has to show the way forward so that others can


17

learn and grow. Though the context in reference is high context, he has to show that relationships

are important but goals should not be sacrificed for the sake of keeping contacts.

Conflict in the Nairobi City Churches

Nairobi, the capital city of Kenya has experienced mushrooming of churches in the recent

past. The freedom of worship accorded in the Kenyan Constitution and the subsequent wide berth

given by the government has allowed this to happen. The Pentecostal Church has experienced a

massive growth in numbers. They are marked by miracles, speaking in tongues and other

supernatural manifestations. Nairobi residents especially those of African origin continue to seek

churches where God is “moving”. Strangely enough, some of these churches have no constitutions

and depend only on the “leading” of the Spirit. Their ministers lack in training as they do not see the

need of attending Bible Schools or other institutions where theology is taught.

With the growth, have come some major conflicts that threaten the very fiber of the church.

There have been complains and fights with some ending in fist fights and nasty court battles. Most

major sources of conflict in Nairobi churches revolve around leadership. They are:

(a). Management wrangles – Some churches lack clear guidelines on succession while those

who have them flout them without batting an eyelid. On contrast the mainstream

churches have clear guidelines that help avert the battles. A major issue that is lacking in

many churches is lack of systematic leadership training, professionalism in the

management of church affairs and transparency in use of resources.

(b). “Prosperity” gospel – The Pentecostal churches have been accused of preaching a gospel

that is too sweet to be real. It promises a blissful life for all who will give sacrificially to

the pastors/ministries. This has led to much maligning by unbelievers and

misunderstanding between the Christian leaders.


18

(c). Western versus conservative African cultures – Some churches in Nairobi have been

accused of bending too low when it comes to dealing with the infiltration of some

aspects of Western culture which is still considered “evil” by some people. This is

compounded by the “Global Village” phenomenon that exposes young people to

Western culture. The media brings the West will all its lifestyles and ideologies to the

sitting rooms exposing the youth to matters which are deemed as alien by the older

generation.

(d). Doctrine – The lack of pastoral training has led to all kinds of doctrines been

propagated. There are some who teach their own personal views in the name of

revelations exposing the Church to “junk” gospel and cultic influence. There is general

lack of solid teaching of the Word.

Conflict Intervention in Nairobi Churches

Ken Birch defines intervention as “a concrete plan for breaking into the cycle to stop

destructive behavior and to turn the energy of the conflicting parties into more constructive

behavior.”

The purpose of any intervention is to create more healthy persons, relationships and/or organizations. Conflict management is a specific intervention, aimed toward turning self-defeating behavior into habits of self-enhancing behaviour. Specific goals in conflict intervention are to resolve the broken relationships and mange, not necessarily resolve, the differences. (Shawchuck Norman and Roger Heuser 1996, 262)

Intervention has everything to do with building and bringing back life to people and organizations.

A successful intervention results in reconciliation and transformation of people/systems.

“Once begun, conflict follows a five stage progression” (Shawchuck 1983, 38). Each of the

stages build on the previous until the matter is resolved or just explodes on the faces of the


19

disputants. The five stages are “tension development, role dilemma, injustice collecting,

confrontation and adjustments” (36).

Tension development. Proverbs 30:33 says “For the churning of milk produces butter, and

pressing the nose brings forth blood; so the churning of anger produces strife.” Everything has a

beginning which is followed by a logical progression. “All conflict begins as a mere tension in the

relationship” (36). At this stage the conflict is overlooked and little if anything is said about it.

Everyone hopes things will be alright or they play as if nothing is wrong.

The leadership problems in the churches escalate when a confrontational matter is not

handled early enough. The pastors portray themselves as “infallible” and well able to handle any

confrontation that may arise. When such a leader does something that causes tension, the

congregation gives them the benefit of doubt. Other factors like the devil, temptations and enemies

are blamed for the cause of the tension.

This is a great stage to confront the matter. However, followers or fellow leaders who

usually are not at the same level of leadership are bound by fear and talk within themselves but not

with the main person. Failure to openly admit the tension leads to “role dilemma.”

Role Dilemma. At this stage, confusions arise in the roles of disputants and the matter is

avoided instead of been handled openly. There is a lot of soul searching as people try to redefine

themselves. “By now the tensions have increased to the point that communications are beginning to

suffer” (36).

This is seen in Nairobi churches when congregants leave the church without explaining to

anyone why they left. They will cite the “leading of the Lord” and other abstract reasons that cannot

be questioned.


20

On the other hand, the associate pastors may resign or move out to “church plant”. They

argue that things might be better if they are away from the person/system they have an issue with.

Those who remain “simmer” like volcanoes just waiting for an opportune time to explode.

Intervention at this stage would bring the matter out for discussion and avoid the blame

game. If this does not happen, the conflict progresses to “injustice collecting.’

Injustice Collecting. “This is the first dangerous stage. [The] people begin to collect injustices

and hurts which will be used as “artillery” later” (37). Camps are set and they begin to subtly show

discontent. In Christian organizations, the people may do things that are inconsistent with their

faith. They however, find a Scripture to cover up their behavior.

The disputants no longer focus on the issues but personalities. The congregations develop

animosity towards the concerned leader. The ones who feel most aggrieved clandestinely spread

“poison” to the majority and abhor those who refuse to join them or seem to support the leader

who is set for “crucifixion”.

Resolution at this stage requires a third party. This is the only one who is able to look at the

matter objectively. The intervener/mediator must avoid “triangulation” and form a triad that is

“intentional, methodical and purposive” (Augsburger 1992, 154).

Since most of the leaders are removed from the people, they never realize how bad things

are until when it is too late. They might try to resolve the matter themselves just to realize that

camps have been set up, “swords sharpened” and “guns cocked”. Confrontation is the next stage

after injustice collecting.

Confrontation. [This] may range from “clearing the air’ to outright violence”. Shawchuck

continues to say “Persons are now confronted with a set of less-than-desirable alternatives; they can

sever the relationship, attempt to return to the way things used to be, or they can negotiate a new set


21

of expectations and commitments” (37). At this point, the only solution is to resolve the conflict;

how it is done determines “life” or “death” to the relationships.

The high context culture of Nairobi Christians makes it all hard to separate issues and

personalities. Conflicts are left to grow without confrontation until they cannot be ignored anymore.

Some churches have resulted to physical confrontation and court injunctions that bar certain people

from attending services. Others result to nasty propaganda and mudslinging. Sadly, when the

Christians in dispute take their matters to secular just systems they contravene the Scriptures. Paul

said in 1 Cor. 6:5-6 that “I am saying this to shame you. Isn’t there anyone in all the church who is

wise enough to decide these issues? But instead, one believer sues another, right in front of

unbelievers!” Christians should resolve matters amongst themselves since they have the Spirit of

God. They are many reputable Christians in Kenya or outside who can help resolve church conflicts

instead of parading them before courts.

Adjustments. [These] “are the changes people make to end the confrontation” (37). They can

be constructive or destructive depending on how the conflict is managed.

A third party would help to bring objectivity and direction. He should avoid triangulation

(being caught up in the conflict) but instead seek a “triad [that] is committed to neutrality, to

availability to each person, to flexibility in offering interventions, and to equal justice for all

concerned” (Augsburger 1992, 154). Both parties must trust that he is able to intervene and bring

transformation.

Management styles that will help are “collaboration (win-win for all parties)” and

“compromising (win a little-lose a little)”. These styles will ensure that the disputants are actively

involved in resolving the conflict.

Since conflicts have a tendency to offend and cause pain to others, forgiveness is a crucial

step to healing of the parties and restoration of relationships. Augsburger (1992) says, “Forgiveness


22

has many faces. Each culture shapes its understandings of forgiveness from its central values.” He

adds, “Forgiveness and reconciliation are difficult for all human beings” (262).A well managed

conflict will result in forgiveness and reconciliation. Sometimes conflicts will end with an ‘agreement

to disagree’ and go separate paths, such as Paul and Barnabas at the end of Acts 15.)

Disputants in Nairobi churches must practice the discipline of forgiveness. Many hold

grudges and break up relationships even when intervention has been successful. To help rebuild

relationships the disputants need to “celebrate together” in the Lord’s table (Shawchuck 1983, 39)

and write down a covenant “as their faith commitment to lay down the fight and to live in trust and

harmony” (Shawchuck and Roger 1996, 267). Lewis Smedes (1984) gives the four stages of

forgiveness as “hurting, hating, healing, and beginning again.” Conflicts inevitably bring with them

the four stages and hence the need of forgiveness and reconciliation.

The above will help to resolve the leadership disputes in the churches and set an example for

believers to follow.


23

REFERENCES

Augsburger, David W. 1992. Conflict Mediation Across Cultures: Pathways and Patterns. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster/John Knox Press.

Heuser, Roger. Key Steps In Assessing Conflicts. An Unpublished Classroom Handout.

Ken Birch. 2007. Class Notes.

Ronald, Sommers I. 2006. Managing Conflict: Training Strong People to Pull Together In the Same Direction. Ph.D. diss., Assemblies of God Theological Seminary, Springfield, Missouri.

Roger Heuser and Byron D. Klaus. 1999. Conflict Management: Graduate Study Guide. 1st ed. Global University, 1211 South Glenstone Avenue, Springfield, Missouri.

Shawchuck, Norman. 1983a. How to Manage Conflict in the Church: Understanding and Managing Conflict, Vol. I. Leith, North Dakota: Spiritual Growth Resources Press.

________. 1983b. How to Manage Conflict in the Church: Conflict Interventions and Resources, Vol. II. Leith, North Dakota: Spiritual Growth Resources Press.

Shawchuck, Norman, and Roger Heuser. 1996. Managing the Congregation: Building Effective Systems to Serve People. Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press.

Smedes, Lewis B. 1984. Forgive and Forget: Healing the Hurts We Don’t Deserve. San Francisco: Harper Collins.

Documents

Conflict Management - WordPress.com · Leo Kinuthia Conflict Management 2 Introduction One of the issues that human beings have to contend with in their daily living is conflict