Conflict Resolution: Practical Tools and Techniques

Conflict resolution Practical tools and techniques

November 13, 2013

Omar Pidani ([email protected]) Haluoleo University, Indonesia

Goal of this session Practical strategies for analysing and then responding to conflict If you are asked to act on/in a conflict, consider carefully: - Should you be the person trying to resolve the conflict? - Should an independent mediator/negotiator be brought in? Knowing good tools and techniques for understanding conflict can help you act more constructively in a conflict situation – whether as a participant or a mediator/negotiator Note: this applies to many participatory processes which often involve some conflict between participants

Responding to conflict n  If wanting to address conflict based on functional conflict

theory (ie use negotiation/mediation/ADR instead of courts, power struggles) we need tools to help negotiate/mediate

n  Whether a neutral third party used or not, need to:

n  Be aware of common conflict behaviours

n  Be able to analyse conflict and understand it

n  Have strategies for working constructively to resolve conflict issues

n  We will discuss application of each method/tool to Franklin below Gordon river conflict

Conflict behaviours – when and why do we act in the following ways?

n  Avoidance: Ignore/withdraw from a conflict instead of facing it n  Accommodation: Give in to the will of others to appease/please them n  Passivity: Pretend nothing is wrong n  Compromise: Ensure each party gives something & gets something,

although no-one completely happy with outcome n  Aggression: Defend own position aggressively; sometimes associated with

threats, violence, war, or with little/no respect for other parties views n  Assertion: Address own and other parties issues with equal respect n  Collaboration: Want to satisfy all concerns of all parties, motivated to meet

both own needs and those of other people involved n  Problem solving: Person who seeks common ground and creative

solutions to conflict

Each can be an appropriate behaviour in certain circumstances eg if issue not important, avoidance, compromise may be appropriate

Modifying conflict behaviour

n  First step is understanding your normal conflict behaviour

n  Critically evaluate whether it is appropriate for the situation

n  Identify what behaviour is best

n  Plan strategies for implementing that behaviour

Analysing and responding to conflict – the ‘conflict models’ approach

n  Different models explain conflict in different ways

n  These explanations can be used to develop strategies for responding to conflict

n  We will look at the following models:

n  Circle of conflict

n  Triangle of satisfaction

n  Boundary model

n  Dynamics of trust

n  Dimensions of conflict

Each is useful in different ways – it’s not a case of picking one, but using each when it is most appropriate to the conflict you are involved in

Circle of conflict

n  Goal: Analyse underlying causes/drivers of conflict n  Theorises five main underlying causes/drivers (values,

relationships, externals/moods, data, structure)

Circle of conflict Relationships n  Negative past experience n  Stereotypes n  Poor/failed communication n Repeated negative behaviour

Values n  Belief systems n  Right and wrong n  Good and evil n  Just and unjust

Externals/moods n  Factors unrelated to substance of dispute n  Psychological or physiological n  “Bad hair day”

Data n  Lack of information n  Misinformation n  Too much information n  Collection problems

Structure n  Limited resources (time, money) n Geographic constraints n Authority issues n Organizational structures

Circle of conflict – strategies for resolving conflict

n  How do you deal with each issue? n  Difficult to directly solve values, relationship, mood/external issues n  Focus conflict on data, structure, interests instead n  See strategy questions in handout


Data: n  Jointly assess data n  Each party explains, challenges, corrects data n  Identify & challenges assumptions people are making about

data n  Jointly gather data each party agrees to accept and rely on Structure: n  Identify structural issues & jointly seek solutions n  Agree who needs to attend to ensure issues can be solved

at adequate authority level n  Agree on how best to use scarce resources


Interests:

n  Identify full range of each party’s interests in the conflicts (interest = what party is wanting/hoping/needing/fearing; need to dig below surface claims to identify underlying interests)

n  Identify and focus on common interests

n  Identify solutions that maximise each party’s interests

n  Problem solve by trading low-priority interests for more important ones

Circle of conflict – strategies for resolving conflict Values: If can’t get conflict past values issues

n  Have parties share information about values

n  Identify any common values

n  Agree to disagree on incompatible values and shift discussion to interests

n  Gently identify and encourage parties to face any conflicting values they hold (both within and across parties)

Relationships: If can’t get conflict past relationship issues:

n  Take a future focus on what needs to change

n  Find out what would help each party change view of other and commit to making those changes

n  Focus on interests

n  Identify small steps to build trust and start changing perceptions of relationship


Externals/moods: If can’t get conflict past external issues:

n  Acknowledge external issues that can’t be controlled and their impacts

n  Bring people who control external factors into the discussions

n  Help each party make a plan for dealing with external issues

n  Focus on interests

Triangle of satisfaction

n  Related to circle of conflict n  Analyses ‘interests’ (wants,

needs, fears, hopes, concerns) in more depth

n  Triangle suggests these interests can be classified into three types: n  Result (substantive) interests n  Process (procedural) interests

n  Emotion (psychological) interests

n  We should work with each type of interest in different ways

Triangle of satisfaction n  Result (substantive) interests

n  What outcomes does each party want to achieve?

n  Process (procedural) interests

n  How do different parties perceive the process used to achieve a result? Is it fair, inclusive, transparent? What are preferred processes?

n  Emotion (psychological) interests

n  What are the emotional goals of each party? (e.g. to win, to save face, wanting to be heard, wanting to achieve status, wanting to feel self worth, wanting revenge, wanting an apology…)

n  Interests shift over time

n  Which type of interest is most important for each party at different points in time as the conflict progresses?

Triangle of satisfaction – strategies for resolving conflict

n  Focus on common interests

n  People in conflict tend to ignore common interests and focus on competing ones

n  Focusing on common interests can prevent conflict escalation

n  Explore competing interests to see if any common interest exist below the surface

n  Work with three types of interests differently

n  Results – tangible issues, can be negotiated directly through collaborative problem solving eg reframing, BATNA, win-win

n  Process – negotiated agreed processes all accept on an ongoing basis. Ensure all parties satisfied with process being used

n  Emotion – These interests cannot be bargained or compromised; are as important to address as other types of interests. Must be ‘expressed, listened to, acknowledged, processed and finally let go when they are satisfied’ (Furlong 2005: 69).

Triangle of satisfaction – strategies for resolving conflict

n  Move parties ‘around the triangle’ to avoid impasse n  Result impasse: get parties to agree on process they will use

to determine the result (eg letting third party arbitrator decide). All agree to accept result of this process

n  Psychological impasse: Try to convince one party to give another a small aspect of desired result, as a means of improving confidence & trust between parties (emotions). Alternatively, change process to one which reduces contact between parties eg parties communicating through third party, to reduce emotional impact of dialogue

n  Result or process impasse: Get parties to share emotional impact of conflict to try to improve understanding of how conflict is impacting on others involved. May lead to parties being willing to re-engage on result or process issues

Boundary model n  Argues that disagreements over boundaries (laws, agreements,

contracts, rules, procedures, conventions etc) cause conflict

n  Another label for this concept of boundaries?

n  Behaviours have four key elements:

n  Defined standards (eg speed limit)

n  Jurisdiction/legitimacy (legal act setting speed limit)

n  Authority/enforcement (police)

n  Norms - degree of tolerance/latitude/variance (you won’t get fined unless speeding more than 5km above limit)

Conflict caused when boundary and its norms are challenged

(eg people start speeding consistently much more and refusing to pay fines)

Boundary model

Boundary model

n  What causes conflict over boundaries? n  Lack of clarity over what the boundary is n  Lack of acceptance of who has authority to

enforce boundary n  Lack of acceptance of who has jurisdiction

over a boundary n  Deliberate expansion of boundary beyond

current norms

Boundary model - strategies

n  Clarify and establish n  agreed boundaries

n  jurisdiction

n  authority

n  norms allowed

Requires negotiation using the appropriate ADR style techniques, until all parties agree on the boundaries

Dynamics of trust

n  Trust between parties a key issue n  Lack of trust cause of conflict n  Increasing trust can help address conflict

n  Trust is complex, has many dimensions: n  Risk – we have to take risk to trust. How

much risk are we will to take n  Motives and intentions – our perceptions of

these affect whether and how much we trust others.

Dynamics of trust Dynamics of trust model examines: n  Risk tolerance – affected by

n  tendency to like/dislike risk n  past experience of similar situations

n  Causes and blame: attribution theory and self-serving bias n  Attribution theory: when negative event happens, we attribute cause to

someone or something n  Attribution to self: When we are involved in negative event, we assume we have

done right and outside circumstances are to blame eg other’s orders, lack of information, lack of support

n  Attribution to others: if other people involved in the negative event, we tend to blame them instead of the situation – we blame others for causing the problems

n  These characteristics result in ‘self serving bias’ which affects trust

Dynamics of trust

n  People may make many attributions in a given situation

n  Three are highlighted in the model

n  Situation attribution – we assume conflict occurred due to factors outside our own or other’s direct control

n  Intrinsic nature attribution – we attribute conflict to intrinsic nature of the other people involved (eg their personality traits). Saying they may not consciously want to harm us, but they are due to their nature

n  Intentional/hostile attribution – we believe others are intentionally causing us harm

n  Attribution and blame

Dynamics of trust

Dynamics of trust

n  How do we form attributions? n  Information/data about other groups we have

access to (bias, misinformation etc) n  Preconceptions – our values, beliefs,

stereotypes about others

Dynamics of trust – strategies for resolving conflict 1) Focus on types of trust you can affect n  Interpersonal trust – often difficult to influence n  Procedural trust – you can work to improve trust in process

n  Create safe environment for negotiation n  Often involves initially focussing on getting agreement on process, not outcomes n  This can build confidence n  Encourage unilateral measures to build trust eg one party gives up something in

a show of good faith

2) Attributional retraining n  If lots of intrinsic/intentional attributions occurring in the conflict, directly

challenge each party’s assumptions about other parties n  Encourage reframing of their understanding of each other n  Can help shift to less blaming, more constructive attribution

Dimensions of conflict n  Examines dynamics of conflict – how it develops and changes

along different dimensions n  Three dimensions:

n  Cognitive/perceptual n  How people perceive conflict, themselves, and other parties. Both objective

and subjective.

n  Emotional n  How people react emotionally to conflict and overlay feelings on

perceptions. We can have many unresolved emotions even if we have notionally ‘settled’ a dispute.

n  Behavioural n  How we behave in a conflict and how this behaviour contributes to the

conflict, e.g. all the conflict behaviours discussed earlier (avoid, aggressive, assertive…)

Dimensions of conflict n  First, identify characteristics along each dimension

Dimensions of conflict – strategies for resolving conflict

Cognitive dimension strategies:

n  Gather data

n  Question interpretation of data and move towards shared interpretation

n  Understand how parties define conflict

n  Identify and encourage parties to challenge assumptions they are making

n  Identify data that doesn’t fit with current thinking about the situation

These strategies can help shift perceptions of conflict, help identify what each party needs to change their definition of the problem.


Emotional dimension strategies - help parties process and express emotions constructively:

n  Listen

n  Acknowledge

n  Validate and legitimise feelings

n  Allow venting

n  Build confidence

n  Remove ‘triggers’ for outbursts

n  Reframing – once people feel validated and acknowledged

These strategies can help parties deal with their emotions, recognise them, and see that other parties recognise them. Be careful – should people vent in front of other parties, or to a neutral third party? Wrong approach can deepen conflict.


Behavioural dimension strategies - help parties identify the following types of behaviour:

n  Aggression

n  Avoidance

n  Conciliatory gestures

n  “Triggers” of particular behaviours

n  Other behaviours that escalate or descalate conflict

n  Ground rules for behaviour – establish

n  Agreements – include specific sections on behaviour

By identifying and understanding behaviour, parties can work on changing them. Achieving jointly agreed rules for behaviour particularly helpful.

Other models…

n  Social Style – looks at how personality of participants influences conflict, and how to address different personality conflicts

n  Moving Beyond – ‘looks at emotional process people go through when trying to let go of conflict and move on, a critical process for achieving resolution’ (Furlong 2005: 21)

Is trying to resolve conflict always the best thing to do?

n  Bernard Mayer argues conflict resolution is not always the best way n  Says there is too much emphasis on being a ‘neutral’

conflict facilitator n  Sometimes it may be better to:

n  Help one or all parties gain power so they have equal standing and can negotiate effectively – early resolution might

n  Ensure that each party is heard – give them voices (conflict resolution may sometimes reduce ‘voice’)

n  If you think the cause is right – help them win through strategies for improving their voice, power, effectiveness and advocating other parties change their minds

More information? Models drawn from:

Furlong, G.T. 2005. The conflict resolution toolbox: Models and maps for analyzing, diagnosing and resolving conflict. John Wiley, Mississauga

Reference to Mayer: Mayer, B.S. 2004. Beyond neutrality: confronting the crisis in conflict resolution. Jossey Bass, San Francisco.

Handouts:

Practitioner’s worksheet/strategy for each model, from Furlong (2005)

Presentations & Public Speaking

Conflict Resolution: Practical Tools and Techniques