Moderating a Conflict Resolution Session
Stephen Shields
Analyzing a conflict resolution session into steps runs the risk of diminishing the process to mere technique. No technique - in and of itself - guarantees the happy resolution of any conflict. The most critical factor in most conflict resolutions, that no technique can guarantee, is the degree to which either party is willing to genuinely attempt to understand thoroughly the position of the other party. Nevertheless, a listing of steps is helpful in assisting the moderator in understanding the flow of a conflict resolution session that stands the greatest chance of succeeding.
As the moderator your principle job is to foster each party's focus on the other person's position (see Resolving Conflicts).
For the purpose of illustration, I will here refer to the conflicting parties as Peter and Paul. In some cases, conflict resolution sessions will involve more than two parties. If that is the case, it's helpful to designate a spokesperson from each group.
1 - Encourage the parties to take time before the scheduled meeting to read, meditate, and pray over Philippians 2:1-8 with special consideration being given to verses 3 and 4. Encourage them to even envision the faces of the people with whom they're disagreeing as they do this. This is the most important step in the process.
2 - For at least 20 minutes Peter will share his concerns. {Sometimes, conflict will be between someone in a power position and a subordinate. If that is the case, it's important that the person lower in the hierarchy speak first). During Peter's sharing, it's critical that he only be interrupted if Paul or anyone else who is present literally doesn't understand something he's saying.
3 - For at least 15 minutes, Paul has the responsibility to ask Peter questions about his position. The focus should be on why Peter believes as he believes. Paul's goal should be to attain such a knowledge of Peter's position that he could convincingly argue Peter's point of view before a third party. It is critical that during this phase of the session that Paul not advocate for his own position through confrontive or rhetorical questions. Paul's sole purpose to to come to a thorough understanding of Peter's position and his reasons for it.
4 - After Paul believes that he has achieved such a thorough understanding of Peter's position, he then will take 5-10 minutes to summarize Peter's position. Peter then has the responsibility to sign off on Paul's understanding of Peter's position. If Peter is not able to agree that Paul understands what Peter is saying, then Paul goes back to step #3 until he feels ready to re-attempt #4. If Peter concludes that Paul does seem to understand his position, then everyone can move on to step #5.
5 - Now for at least 20 minutes Paul responds to Peter, laying out his position.
6 - Then for at least 15 minutes, Peter questions Paul about Paul's position until he comes to the point that he feels confident he could accurately and effectively advocate Paul's position to a third party.
7 - Then Peter will summarize Paul's position and his reasons for holding his position. Paul is responsible to certify Peter's understanding. If Paul is unable to agree that Peter understands his position, then they move back to step #6 and then a retry of step #7.
8 - At this point, the parties can simply enter into open discussion of any outstanding issues until they either come to agreement or agree to disagree on some or all of the outstanding issues.
After step #8, genuine disagreement will sometimes still exist on some issues. However, it has been this writer's experience that disagreement often exists at the level of the presuppositions behind the variant positions. An example would be helpful:
Peter wants 15 more minutes of music in the morning service and Paul believes that is too much. Egos can easily cause Peter and Paul to lock into their respective positions which precipitates a relational breakdown exacerbated when others chime in (pardon the pun!). But, through this process, exploring Peter's presupposition that what is actually needed in the church is more opportunities for musical worship leads to the formation of a bi-monthly weekday evening service that focuses almost exclusively on worship through congregational singing. Peter had not previously considered this alternative because he did not know Paul would be open to the creation of such a service. This process generated this creative alternative.
To summarize, the value of these seven steps is that they empower the conflicting parties to get to the presuppositions of their opposite's position.This understanding then facilitates the generation of creative alternate solutions - solutions that often did not seem apparent until everyone's concerns had been brought to the table.
Copyright © 1999 by Stephen Shields
|
