So You Want to Understand the Conflict Thing? Elementary Survey of Conflict Analysis, Management and Resolution

The Lowdown

What is conflict

·     Conflict was considered a fight, which often means a physical confrontation between two parties or violence (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 5).

·     In an addition to violence/physical confrontation, it can be a disagreement or opposition to interests, ideas (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 5).

·     “conflict means perceived divergence of interests, or a belief that the party’s current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 5)

·     Conflict is a struggle between opposing forces: it implies the issues are more serious than those related to disputes; differences lie in physical confrontation (Burton, 1990, p. 7).

·     Conflict is experienced as an emotional reaction to a situation or interaction; it uses descriptive words such as: angry, upset, scared, hurt, bitter, hopeless, determined and excited (Mayer, 2012, p. 5).

·     Conflict can be experienced as a direct attempt to make something happen at someone else’s expense such as power, violence, and destruction. Associated behavior can also be conciliatory, constructive and friendly. The goal is to get one’s needs met or express conflict (p. 6).

Levels of Conflict

·     Interpersonal

·     Community

·     Group/Organization

·     International

What are common causes of conflict?

·     Evidence shows that conflict and violence are triggered by conditions such as “childhood environments, absence of job opportunities, insecurities experienced because of a minority status, resource deprivations, and postcolonial boundaries that cut through ethnic communities” (Burton, 1990, p. 1).

·     Often conflict has multiple sources: human basic instincts, competition for scarce resources and power, human created structure of society and institutions, flawed communication and struggle between classes (Mayer, 2012, p. 9)

·     Wheel of conflict suggests needs (survival, interests, identity) are at the center surrounded by structure, values, emotions, communication, history with the outer layer being power, culture, data, and personality (Mayer, 2012, p. 10).

So what’s good about conflict?

·     Conflict is thought to be a catalyst for social change (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 7).

·     People/parties are forced to move out of their comfort zone and find a new way of addressing change.

·     It facilitates people/parties working together to find a way to reconcile differences and legitimate interests (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 8).

·     It fosters unity, people need to work together otherwise they split apart and nothing gets resolved (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 8).

So why is conflict bad?

·     It can cause lots of problems in society

·     Harmful consequences- death, destruction, starvation

·     Insult or belittle the other

·     Violent- parties can be physically hurt which can prevent them from working, going to school, etc.

Conflict is costly

·    In time,

·    Money,

·    Relationships,

·    Physically and mentally.

Sources of conflict

·     Interests- people’s feeling about what is good and acceptable, what is desirable (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 11). Other words for interests are values and needs. They seem to be primal, foremost in their minds and are demonstrated in their actions, forming the foundation of “attitudes, goals and intentions” (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 11). People can clash when these interests are translated into aspirations. Aspirations come from one’s own past achievements, the achievements of the other and perceived power differences (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 12). Conflict begins when aspirations appear to be incompatible.

·     Relative deprivation- interests incompatibility often is the result when a party fails to achieve their aspiration. It has two effects: the party first is made aware there is an incompatibility in interests; and the resulting frustration and indignation are a fuel of energy, which spurs coping behavior along a continuum. (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 15) Hopelessness can be a by-product. Some feel relative deprivation is synonymous with conflict. Trust in this context means the other party is concerned about the party’s interest (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 16). In contrast, distrust is a belief the other does not care about party’s interest or may be hostile towards those interests (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 17).

·     Intergroup- individuals who ban together for a common good; a sort of bonding takes place. “People like better, think more highly of, and discriminate in favor of other people with whom they are classed, regardless of the basis for the classification; it can be called social categorization or “minimal group” (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 17). Social identity supports intergroup relations.

When is conflict likely to occur?

·     After a period of expanding achievement if there is a slow down or reversal of the achievement (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 19).

·     Ambiguity about relative power- when there is an unclear power structure so that a party concludes through “wishful thinking” it has more power than the other (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 19).

·     Invidious comparison- when a party becomes aware that the other is of no greater merit or importance than the party. Aspirations rise for both realistic reasons and idealistic reasons. (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 19)

·     Status inconsistency- happens when multiple criteria for assessing party’s merits or contributions, some people may be higher on one criterion while lower on others. When these people work together, each is likely to feel more deserving of rewards than the others (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 19).

·     Zero sum thinking- a view that a gain by the other mean loss for the party and vice versa. The pie is a fixed size. Happens often when there are limited resources. In escalating conflict when a “party’s aspirations shift from doing well to avoiding doing poorly, to harming the other as much as possible” (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 20).

·     Communications among group members- when groups of people are close in proximity to one another involved in common activities and have access to communication technology (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 20).

·     Availability of leadership- “when leaders feel a sense of fraternalistic deprivation and are ready to organize its members into a struggle” (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 20).

Nature of strategies used in conflict

·     Contending- strategy of conflict involving a set of tactics/moves in order to settle a conflict; its an attempt to force one’s desired solution on the other side/party (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 3)

·     Yielding- strategy of conflict involving a set of tactics/moves in order to settle a conflict; reducing one’s goals and being willing to take less than one originally hoped to obtain (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 3)

·     Problem solving- strategy of conflict involving a set of tactics/moves in order to settle a conflict; pursuing a different course of action that will satisfy both parties/sides and meet their goals.

What can discourage conflict?

·     Consensus about norms- communities that have low conflict often have broad consensus of norms about goals, rules of conduct, role definitions, procedures for decision making, authority and status systems (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 21).

·     Lack of information about the other’s attainments- concealing information about rewards, avoids invidious comparisons (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 21).

·     Physical and psychological segregation- “divide and rule” (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 21). Two forms of separating peoples are psychological-social groups do not identify with one, generally self-imposed; and physical are arrangements where peoples do not come in contact with one another and can either be self-imposed or imposed by the community (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 22).

·     Existence of a strict status system- they eliminate status inconsistencies and lessen comparisons between groups of different status; more effective when bolstered by myths which show that one party is more deserving than the other (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 22).

·     Social mobility- both social mobility and myth of social mobility lessen conflict when strict status systems do not exists. They myth of social mobility says anyone with ability can advance (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 23).

·     Physical and social barriers to communication- when a barrier to communication exists and especially among likeminded people, conflict is reduced. Keeping people physically separated has the same affect. There seems to be a contradiction: segregating people of low status from the rest of society has two different effects- reduces social comparison with high status people making the lower status content with “inferior rewards” and the close association of segregated people makes it easier for them to find common goals and causes, organize for struggle leading to increased conflict (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 24).

·     Blocking outside support- often struggles of a group depend on support from the outside, beyond their community. Communities are less stable when there are national or international movements consisting of struggle groups; once it gets started it is very difficult to stop (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 25).

Strategies of Conflict

·     Dual Concern Model- it depicts two types of concerns- concern about Party’s own outcomes and concern about Other’s outcomes. It can also be thought of as a conflict style (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 30).

High               Yielding        Problem

                                               Solving

Low                Avoiding       Contending

                       (Inaction/withdrawing)

Concern about Party’s outcomes

 

                                                                                                                                                                                  Low                High

·     Problem Solving- the more likely alternatives that can satisfy the aspirations of the Party and Other can be found the more likely they can problem solve (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 38).

Benefit to Party

 

Conflict Categories

Structural Conflicts

·     Unequal control, ownership, or distribution of resources

·     Destructive patterns of behavior or interaction

·     Unequal power and authority

·     Geographical, physical, or environmental factors that hinder cooperation

Violence and war

Armed exchanges

Foreign: i.e. WW I, WW II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Desert Storm, Iraq, Afghanistan

Domestic: i.e., Waco, Oklahoma City, New York City/Pentagon

Religious

I.e., Israel, Lebanon, Tibet, North Ireland, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Sudan, The Great African War

Conflict Development /Stages

·     Escalation- may be signaled by use of heavier tactics and or an intensity of the conflict as a whole

·     Tactics

o  Ingratiation: the Art of Relationship Building: Other is ignorant of party’s ultimate plans; easiest to achieve when least needed; flattery, “opinion conformity”, giving favors, and “self-presentation” are tactics used

o  Gamesmanship: the Art of Ruffling Feathers: Induces upset or unrest that effectively lowers other’s resistance to yielding; lowers the other’s suspicions and resistance allowing Party to penetrate the wall; creating a “muddled fluster”; deflects other’s suspicion by acting in a way that appears to be helping other; running late, forgetting necessary equipment, delay answering bell, and stalling are tactics used

o  Guilt trips: often disguised by innocuous observation of reality; other knows something has been said or done by party to make other feel bad (guilty), but party can deny an intention to make other feel guilty; as parents we are masters of this tactic, guilt trips often work; 3 ways to make other feel guilty-   

o  Remind other of past sins that have long been atoned for

o  Making others small mistakes loom large

o  Making it appear other is responsible for a wrong that they didn’t commit

·     Persuasive argumentation: induces other to reduce their aspirations; party convinces other to give up something it is fond of and that party really wants; party may try to persuade other party has a legitimate right to favorable outcome in the conflict; party convinces other that lower aspirations are in the other’s best interest

·     Threats: messages given by party with the intention being detrimental to other depending on what they do or not do; dominant from of influence; signals how party intends to act, often do not cost party anything; are highly effective; work even if threat is not carried out; have a sense of justice and rectify wrongs; unfortunately they tend to elicit similar behavior from the other leading to counter threats

·     Irrevocable commitments: party promises to continue behaving in a way and the coercive commitment seems to be irreversible; game of chicken; non violent resistance; if effective shifts responsibility from party’s shoulders to other’s for what happens; serves notice to other about party’s commitment to aggressive behavior; can force other to do the work of producing the agreement                                                          (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, pp. 47-66)

Conflict Spiral Model- results from a vicious circle of action and reaction; party’s contentious behavior encourages contentious behavior from other, provoking yet even more contentious behavior by party with other responding likewise; (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, pp. 74-77)  

5 types of transformations occur during escalation

Light → heavy

Small → large

Specific → general

Doing well → winning → hurting other

Few → many

Escalation Stops- at some point conflict always ends; five possible reasons escalation stops:

·     “Party succeeds in overwhelming Other

·     Party is able to take unilateral advantage of other

·     Party yields to other

·     Party avoids the conflict

·     Stalemate emerges as Party finds conflict unacceptable                                                (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 151)

Stalemate- party starts to believe the conflict as unacceptable, something that should be ended as soon as possible; there are four reasons for a stalemate emerging:

·     “Failure of contentious tactics

·     Exhaustion of necessary resources

·     Loss of social support

·     Unacceptable costs”                                                                                                                    (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, p. 152)

De-escalation- begins when Party grudgingly realizes it will not win but yet is unwilling to cede victory to other through yielding or withdrawal.

·     Party may feel trapped, feels its invested lots of energy and ego in the conflict so doesn’t want to quit; yielding is a shock to Party’s pride and could likely experience humiliation.

·     Withdrawal means giving in which is unacceptable. The only thing left is problem solving. Party understands it will not get what it wants without Other’s consent. 

Strategies used:

·     Negotiation

·     Contact and communication

·     Cooperation on other issues: superordinate goals

·     Third party intervention

·     Unilateral conciliatory initiatives

·     Constructive use of entrapment                                                                                           (Rubin, Pruitt, & Kim, 1994, pp. 158-166)

Toward Resolution

Toolkit of Conflict Management and Resolution

·     Third party(s) neutrals

o  Do not judge or take sides, structurally neutral and impartial

o  Help parties approach conflict in a more constructive manner

o  Remain fair, unbiased and impartial  

o  Promotes a process

·     Mediation

o  Led by a qualified trained person(s) to facilitate a discussion between opposing parties

o  Assures participants are volunteering for the process

o  Administer a process in a fair and balanced manner

o  Help parties find their voice

o  Assess throughout the process if this is the best method

o  Attentive to competing points of view and interests

o  Uses paraphrasing, summarization and careful questioning to assure all relevant information is brought forth

o  Helps parties to draw up a collaborative agreement and conducts reality testing to assure agreement is what parties want

·     Facilitation

o  Guides group to improving their interaction

o  Process to help group identify the conflict bringing out behavioral components that are suppressed or hidden because of power imbalances

o  Helps a group to accomplish its goals through consensus

o  Takes a longer range view in considering wider social implications of any agreement if that is the purpose; however, not all facilitative group sessions are to find an agreement

·     Negotiation

o  Interactions with others to find a way to meet needs or accomplish their goals by reaching an agreement with others who likewise are trying to get their needs met and goals realized

o  Used in problem solving, bargaining, cooperative decision making and communicating; when two are more people are trying to reach agreement

o  Not always voluntary

o  Can be done face to face, through writing or third parties

o  Implies being an advocate for one position or the other, not neutral

(Mayer, 2012) (Burton, 1990)

Communication

All communication involves either speaking or listening

To speak and listen effectively to achieve desired outcome, requirements are:

·     Sensory acuity-being curious and noticing changes

·     Flexible-being responsive to changes

·     Integrity-being whole and complete spiritually, emotionally, physically, intellectually and relational

Representational System & Sensory Acuity: windows to the mind

·     Visual

·     Auditory

·     Kinesthetic

·     Olfactory

·     Gustatory

·     Visual and auditory are used the most; there can be changes in skin color, muscle tension, breathing and voice

Congruence-internal strategies and behavior are in agreement and function together. Opposite of congruence is polarity

Example:

Part                                        Polarity Part

Revenge                                forgiving

Formal                                             casual

Rigid                                      flexible

Independent                                   dependent

Learner                                 know it all

To understand the other party’s representational system characteristics examples:

Visual- see, observe, picture, bright, clear, focus, watch, spy, perceive, discern, notice, distinguish, peer, survey, size up, contemplate, catch sight of

Auditory-hear, sounds like, says, call, speak, talk, listen, time, harmonize, attend, heed, eavesdrop, contact, reach, sound, keep still, keep quiet, register, listen in, give attention to

Kinesthetic-feel, touch, handle, warm, soft, move, rough, grasp, heavy, sad, rub, numb, blunt, sting, thrill, excite, stir, tender, thin-skinned, grave

When building rapport it’s important to mirror the other’s behavior:

·     Body posture

·     Movement

·     Voice pattern

·     Breathing pattern

·     Representational system

·     Value/beliefs

·     Language

·     Emotion

·     Content

Questioning

·     Open-ended- allows for elaboration; does not invite a yes-no response

·     Close-ended- limits the other to short response

·      Challenging questions- confronts the relevance of the content of the communication

·      Clarifying- enables listener to make sure they understand what is being said and meant

Dialogue

v Definition- a communication process that’s goal is to build relationships between people as they share ideas, experiences and information about a common cause or concern. If helps groups incorporate new information and points of view more than ever before to gain a new and broader understanding. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

1.    Dialogue differs from conversations, discussion, training/education or debate.

a.   Conversation- information and ideas move back and forth between people used for self-expression. Things like persuasion or changing another’s point of view may not be the goal with this type of communication

Dialogue’s goal is to broaden another’s point of view of a specific issue.

b.   Discussion- information and ideas are shared aimed at a particular goal/task or to solve a problem.

Dialogue is not concerned with accomplishing a task, but can identify tasks to be followed up on.

c.    Training- assists people with learning something with knowledge being transferred from a trainer to a student/participant.

Dialogue helps people create their own new collective understanding of an issue or situation through exchanges between participants.

d.   Debate- it is basically a contest where there will be winners and losers. Its goal is to point out the other side’s shortcomings and expose them to others.

Dialogue is not interested in hurting others; it’s the opposite of a debate.

(Schirch & Campt, 2007)

2.    Dialogue focuses on participant’s attention to listening for deeper understanding. Listen for what is correct, true and insightful. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

3.    Dialogue is different than any other type of communication. It is generally loose; can be focused, can be heated or even angry. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

4.    Dialogue is a guided process usually facilitated who helps create a safe space by setting ground rules or guidelines that helps the participants focus on listening and working with each other. Facilitators do not declare a winner, or who is right or wrong. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

5.    Dialogue works best when people are open to learning and changing and the facilitator’s role is to encourage the best attitudes.

6.    It helps when participants are curious, want to learn, wonder about others and willing to learn from other’s experiences.

7.    Dialogue participants are asked to be respectful, listen, learn and share with others.

(Schirch & Campt, 2007)

How does dialogue work?

1.    Three interrelated parts of humanity

a.   Intellect- exposes participants to see the world in different ways, a chance to rethink their understanding and knowledge of others, an issue, event or a group of people (Schirch & Campt, 2007).

b.   Emotions- greater emotional understanding of others and themselves can stir passion and can urge people to act. It can help people identify previously buried feelings toward individuals or others in a group (Schirch & Campt, 2007).

c.    Spirit- nurtures a basic level of human caring for others/participants. Caring can increase people’s “sense of community connectedness” (Schirch & Campt, 2007).

2.    How does it affect the individual?

a.   Personal reflection- helps the individual gain greater understanding into their own points of view, “values”, ways of thinking and “biases” (Schirch & Campt, 2007). Individuals may become more aware of how their experiences can shape their points of view. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

b.   Empathy for others- people likes to be with people who they feel are most like them. When people see others as different from themselves, they tend to set up barriers and see a “we” versus “they” world. The less people interact the more likely they see others as weird, wrong and sometimes evil (Schirch & Campt, 2007).

c.    Increased understanding- during dialogue people will began to understand why people believe the way they believe and context of their stories is at the core. Participants began to understand that both points of view are valuable and that neither are objective. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

3.    How does it affect groups and communities?

a.   Reduced divisions- conflict is part of human nature and can at least temporarily cause divisions between people who have alternate points of view and see the other as thwarting their goals. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

b.   A sense of community- people in the US often live independent lives, infrequently knowing or relating to their neighbors. Dialogue can build relationships between people who otherwise may not have met or relate to others. It can build a connectedness between different people basically because people share their personal experience. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

c.    Improved communication patterns- facilitators encourage participants to broaden their communication skills such as:

                                             i.    Active listening-

                                           ii.    Speaking honestly and assertively-

                                         iii.    Follow group ground rules-

                                           iv.    Identify common ground-

d.   Collective analysis- it is a way for people to collaboratively identify important issues that will or do affect the group; and it may help the group understand why some are and some are not included in on decision making. It can also help people become aware of their own dissatisfaction with a situation or event motivating them to get involved to change the situation or event. (Schirch & Campt, 2007)

e.   Options for collective action- collective evaluation can lead the way to collective action; it often provides an example of how a group worked together during the dialogue and can lay a foundation for working together to change the situation or event.

“Dialogue prepares a group to take collective action- or at least to have a healthy exploration of whether such action is possible” (Schirch & Campt, 2007).

Information Sharing

Communication is the vehicle in which we share info

·     Specific skills under your control

·     Language in the means of communicating through talking, discussing, writing, lecturing, speaking or singing

Steps to becoming effective

·     Know what you want

·     Discover what the other person wants

·     Called “dove tailing”

Being clear about your desired outcome and help the other to articulate theirs helps. Criteria to achieve desirable outcome

·     Specific result-clarify

·     State in positive terms-stated to motivate

·     Specific and measurable using sensory based description-see, hear, feel-descriptive

·     You initiate and control-express benefits of a particular course of action

·     Achievable-can be attained  do not want to frustrate the other

·     Ecological/appropriate- fits with present and future, will not harm

List of words:

Vague                                                                                    Concrete

Productivity                                                              complete assignments

Hope                                                                         my candidate elected

Courage                                                                    go bungee jumping

Love                                                                           find a mate

Pride                                                                          display trophies

Information sharing is when you clearly state thoughts and feelings to another accurately and encouraging the other to share their thoughts and feelings to cause mutual understanding and both are satisfied.

·     Speaking-expressing thoughts and feelings through words and behavior

·     Listening-following the thoughts and feelings of the other, understanding what they are saying from their point of view

·     Rapport building-establishes relation of trust, harmony, affinity or accord w/another

·     Information gathering-asking questions

Bibliography

Burton, J. (1990). Conflict Resolution and Provention (First Edition ed.). London, UK: MacMIllan Press LTD.

Mayer, B. (2012). The Dynamics of Conflict (Second ed.). San Francisco, VA, USA: Jossey-Bass.

Rubin, J., Pruitt, D., & Kim, S. H. (1994). Social Conflict Escalation, Stalemate, and Settlement. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Schirch, L., & Campt, D. (2007). Dialogue for Difficult Subjects. Intercourse: Good Books.