notes conflict resolution

7/30/2019 Notes Conflict Resolution

1/87

MASTERS IN PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

Conflict Analysis and Resolution

LECTURE ONE

THEORIES OF PEACE AND VIOLENCE

Introduction:

This lecture endeavours to define peace as absence of violence. It further discusses the six

dimensions of violence which include: physical and psychological violence; Positive and

negative approaches to violence; the object of violence; the subject of violence; intended

and unintended violence; and manifested and latent levels of violence.

What are the characteristics of each of these moments? In this lecture you will

discuss the manifestation of these situations. You note that in our everyday life we so much

mind about peace of ourselves and of those we interact with to an extent that the concernhas become part and parcel of our existence. Before any kind of engagement with another

person it is so natural that you great each other (good morning, good evening etc)

knowingly or unknowingly. The words used in the greeting involve a question (are you at

peace?) and an answer (yes). If an answer is no then eyebrows will be raised and no

activity will continue till the situation is established and the disturbance sorted out by way

of consoling or advising. A critical look at greeting shows that peace is paramount in the

normal functioning of a human being hence it dominates communication taking placebetween people.

The concept of peace has to do with tranquillity, quietness, sense of satisfaction, a

contusive atmosphere to work and existence friendly. Thinking about Peace therefore

means a sense of satisfaction, accomplishment, a world of plenty without hurry where

laughter and joy tend to prevail.

From the Anglo-Norman pas, and meaning "freedom from civil disorder", the

English word came into use in various personal greetings from BC.1300 as atranslation of the biblical termspax (from theVulgate) and Greekeirene, which in

turn were renderings of the Hebrew shalom. Shalom, cognate with the Arabic

"salaam, has multiple meanings: safety, welfare, prosperity, security, fortune, and

friendliness. The personalized meaning is reflected in a nonviolent lifestyle, which

also describes a relationship between any people characterized by respect, justice

and goodwill.

This latter understanding of peace can also pertain to an individual's sense of

himself or herself, as to be "at peace" with one's own mind attested in Europe from

1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodwillhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodwill


2/87

BC.1200. The early English term is also used in the sense of "quiet", reflecting a

calm, serene, and meditative approach to the family or group relationships that

avoids quarreling and seeks tranquility an absence of disturbance or agitation.

Wikipedia: Last modified on 22 April 2009, at 22:42 (UTC).

Definition of Peace as Absence of Violence

We start by examining two common statements; namely

a) Peace is the absence of war and

b) Peace is the absence of violence.

Right now we can say that the world (and even our own country) is not at war; but are we

at peace?

We are not at peace: we are peaceless. Lets coin the word peaceless that the dictionary

refuses to recognize.

So, we are not at war, but we have lots of violence - at all these levels.

It is therefore easy to be persuaded to accept the statement that: Peace is the absence of

violence, as the more valid statement and we will adopt it for this course.

2.4 Definition and dimensions of violence

This linkage of peace and violence is important. But we need a definition of violence.

So, what is violence?

A narrow concept defines violence as

Somatic (bodily as opposed to mental) incapacitation or deprivation of health with killing

being the extreme form;

In the hands of an actor who intends this to be the consequence. In other words, an accident

cannot seriously be defined as violence; at least not at the human level.

However, if this was all violence was about, and peace was seen as its negation, then

peace as an ideal would have little meaning since many highly unacceptable social orders

would still be considered compatible with peace.

Hence there is a desirability of extending the concept of violence.

An extended definition of Violence

We define violence as

The CAUSE of the difference between what good we ACTUALLY have;

as contrasted with

2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tranquilityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tranquility


3/87

The good that we have the POTENTIAL of having.

(Draw a cup to illustrate the gap between actual and potential good that is caused by

violence)

The Cup of Violence

Potential

Violence

Present good

It is generally human desire to have a full cup, be it of the untouchable goodness or of more

earthly resources such as money, good health, and even power. Whatever increases the

distance between what we actually have and what we are capable of having is, by

definition, violence. In the same way, whatever impedes the reduction of the distance,

between these two parameters the human potential and the currently situation can be

regarded as violence.

Whatever increases the distance, or impedes the reduction of the distance, between these

two parameters can be regarded as violence.

E.g.

a) In the 21 Century, death from preventable disease such as TB - with all the medicaladvances we have today - should be regarded as violence, while it would be hard to

conceive this as violence in 18 th Century.

b) Death from hunger in any part of Kenya today should be regarded as violence because

we have the potential of averting it.

c) A 38% level of adult illiteracy in Kenya (mostly women) is certainly an expression of

violence since our potential after 40 years of independence is much higher.

3


4/87

d) In 2005, the Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in Texas USA. For President Bush and

his government, this was an act of God. However, the deaths in the poorer black

population of that city are an example of structural violence, since their deaths were

related to societal imbalance. Only the black people had homes in that low lying area

that was bound to be hit one day.

In other words, when the potential in a generally highly desired/considered action is higher

than the actual, and therefore an act was avoidable - but it actually occurred - then by

definition, violence is present.

Six Dimensions of Violence

We will analyze violence under six headings

a) Physical and Psychological Violence

b)Positive and Negative Approaches to Violence

c).The Object of Violence

d).The Subject of Violence

e).Intended and Unintended Violence

a) Manifested and Latent Levels of Violence

a) Physical and Psychological Violence

There is need to include in the definition two types of violence

physical and

psychological violence.

While somatic (bodily) violence is easily visible and might even include death,

psychological violence including lies, brainwashing, indoctrination, threats, etc need to

be considered as it reduces human mental potentialities.

b) Positive and Negative Approaches to Violence

One can be influenced not only through punishment when one does what the influencer

considers wrong, but also the opposite by rewarding when the right thing is done

right as determined by the influencer.

c) The Object of Violence

Can there be violence when actually no physical or biological object is hurt?

Consider when a person or nation displays means of physical violence, e.g. throwing ofstones or testing of nuclear weapons. Though no one is hurt, there is the threat of physical

4


5/87

violence, and an indirect mental violence. In fact, since the threat constrains human action

through fear of injury, etc we can term it as violence.

In any case, the whole intention is to constrain human action through display of

power/force that denotes possible violence if this or that happens. (Note the infamous

balance of power between the so-called Big Powers that kept all of us at tenterhooks was

intended to have this very effect)

d) The Subject of Violence

Is there a subject or an actor of the violence? Can there be violence where there is no one

committing direct violence?

Johan Galtung proposes a Conflict Triangle that is based on the assumption that the bestway to define peace is to define violence, its antithesis. It reflects the general theory that

violence is inevitable and the aim of peace action should therefore be preventing,

managing, limiting and overcoming violence.

Direct, structural and cultural aspects of violence

DIRECT

STRUCTURAL CULTURAL

i. Direct (overt) violence, e.g., direct attack, massacre.

ii. Structural violence. Death by avoidable reasons such as malnutrition. Structural

violence is indirect violence caused by an unjust structure and is not to be equated

with an act of God such as accidents and floods, hurricanes, etc.

iii. Cultural violence. Cultural violence occurs as a result of the cultural assumptions

that blind one to direct or structural violence. For example, the rich could be

socialized to be indifferent towards poverty or homelessness or the street families

and could even consider their expulsion or extermination a good thing.

Each corner of Galtung's triangle can relate to the other two. Ethnic cleansing can be an

example of all three.

5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_Galtunghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Godhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_Galtunghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Godhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing


6/87

i) In all these cases, individuals may be killed, hit or hurt, or manipulated in terms of

stick and carrot strategies. For example, if people are starving when this could

have been avoided then there is violence, even if there is no direct subject-action-

object relationship, e.g. during a siege or the way the world economy is organized

today with haves and have-nots.

ii) When life expectancy for the upper classes group is twice as high as those in the

lower classes, then structural violence is being committed (though no one particular

person can be named as the perpetrator of the violence or no one person is being

killed directly)

iii) Another example of the distinction:

If a husband beats his wife, then a visible and recordable subject-action-object relationship

is established; as opposed to.

When thousands of husbands keep their wives ignorant of world events, then there is

structural violence that in some communities would be justified as legitimate cultural

practice.

e) Intended and Unintended Violence

In both Judeo-Christian ethics and in Roman Jurisprudence (both of great influence

in our country), guilt is tied more to intentions rather than the consequences.

(Hence the distinction between manslaughter and murder even though someone was

killed)

However, our definition of violence and peace (being the absence of violence) are

located entirely on the consequences side.

The concentration on who does what instead of what was done, to whom and by

who will most likely let off the masterminds (and acts related to structural

violence) and catch only the small fish.

If our concern is peace - and peace is the absence of violence then action shouldbe direct, as well as structural and cultural violence.

6


7/87

f) Manifested and Latent Levels of Violence

i) Manifested Violence whether personal or structural or cultural is observable;

ii) Latent violence is something not there, yet it might come up anytime.

For personal violence, this means that a little provocation could lead to a flare up leading to

killings, etc as is the case with racial or religious confrontations. This indicates a situation

of unstable equilibrium.

Similarly, for structural violence, we may think of systems that are insufficiently protected

against sudden external/internal forces, and that could flare up with very limited

provocation.

(End of the Six Dimensions of Violence)

A Widened Perspective

Perspectives

As we have noted, violence can be regarded in several ways:

a) The traditional thinking of violence to cover personal violence only;

b) Physical vs psychological or cultural violence;

c) Intended and unintended violence; etc

It is however urged that in making the distinction between personal and structural (to

include cultural) violence the basic type of violence has advantages:

i. It gives us a unifying perspective the cause of difference between potential and

actual realization; and

ii. It places structural and cultural violence at the same plane as personal violence since

both are as harmful.

Why is making this distinction necessary?

Note

a) That personal violence has come to the fore because it shows; it causes noticeablesuffering, usually on identifiable culprits. The culprit may complain and perhaps action

taken.

b) On the other hand, structural/cultural violence is silent and evasive. Although there is

no violence on the surface, the situation harbors systematic oppression and injustice

that is seen as natural and as the order of things.

7


8/87

c) But also note the converse and related facts. The thinking and the fight against personal

violence has

d) largely taken form in what we would call static societies basically Western

capitalistic ones based on Judeo-Christian philosophy,

e) Where individual freedom has always been emphasized,But also where such violence

gets accepted as part of the order of things - (people will fight; a wife will be beaten,

etc )- and then the law will take its course, as opposed to the idea that all is well

culturally.

d) The fight against structural violence has arisen from

i) What we would call dynamic and unstable Eastern European societies, and that is a

central African philosophy

ii) Where the ideals of the philosophy of the society/people (the so-called masses)taking preference before the individual were paramount, and

iii) Where re-distribution of resources was essential for sustainable peace ;

e) This is a key consideration that has divided the world and has been a major cause of

conflict and violence. The question is:

i) Can ideals of individualism and capitalism as embraced by the West, vis--vis

Socialism/communalism/the people first concept a key African and also

Eastern concept exist in harmony side by side?

ii) Another question that is key in a course such as ours where justice is key: when

will the world whether western or the rest give tackling cultural violence

with the seriousness it deserves?

i) Physical and psychological violence

ii) Positive and negative approaches to violence

iii) The object of violence

iv) The subject of violence

v) Intended and unintended violence

vi) Manifested and latent levels of violence

8


9/87

LECTURE TWO

THE CONFLICT THEORY AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

a) We all have extensive experience of conflict as it is part of human very existence

b) We are always trying to manage conflict one way or other (including even avoiding

it at all costs);

c) Generally however, we have few skills of dealing with it

Defining Conflict

Note that

a) Conflict involves people (and other animals too on whom more and more studies

are coming up)

b) Conflict is a state of interaction between two or more parties or even two or more

parts of ourselves

c) Conflict is a state of human interaction where there is disharmony

It emerges when parties compete over perceived or actual goals, values or

interests

It occurs when parties confront each other with opposing actions and counter-

actions

It is an indicator that something is changing, has changed or needs to change

Basically it is an interaction that aims at beating the opponent

We should therefore expect many definitions of conflict depending on ones

perception or concentration.

The word conflict arises from a Latin root fligere - "to strike together" or to engage in a

fight- and can be defined as any situation where one or two parties aspire towards

incompatible or competing means or ends.

Conflict may take place:

within one person,

between two or more people who know each other, or between large groups of people

unknown to each other.

9


10/87

Conflict as a Perception Issue

a) For there to be a conflict, the situation must be perceived as such by the parties

involved. If no one is aware, then there cannot be a conflict.

b) A perceived conflict may also not be real; for example, if in the middle of it all you

discover that all along you have been talking about the same thing. The initial

perception of conflict was all a matter of miscommunication.

c) Conversely, there are many potential conflict situations that never mature. For example,

despite minimum wage legislation, many house servants do not know about and even if

they did, perhaps would never organize to claim their rights.

d) It is the same with many oppressive cultural practices, whereby, though those involved

know these are wrong, they leave the matter to lie to avoid obvious family conflicts.

The Perspective of the Conflict

A conflict perspective is a particular interpretation and understanding of what is happening

in a conflict

by the parties involved in it;

by interested external parties; and even sometimes

by independent observers.

Perspectives are normally standpoints, beliefs, values and views that parties to a conflict

and other people hold about the conflict.

Often perspectives are competing and conflictive, principally because they arise from

differing interests and positions of the parties.

Often also perspectives emanate from deep historical narrations, e,g.

a) Those communities that believe themselves to be warriors in history would act today in

a manner that would justify their past.

b) Other perspectives may also have historical roots that seem to place one group

against the other, with consequential rejection by the other

c) Some perspectives may of course spring fromcurrent needs of the parties.

But whatever the perspective of parties, a careful analysis will discover areas of agreement

that could be useful common ground in conflict transformation process.

10


11/87

The Role of Conflict - Four (4) Views of Conflict

Is conflict useful or not in personal and group relationships? There are a number of views

on the matter:

a) The Functionalist (Traditionalist) View

Conflict is harmful and must be avoided

That conflict is a result of

poor communication,

narrow mindedness,

lack of trust among people, and

failure for the parties in the conflict to appreciate and to respond positively to the

needs of the other parties.

Hence, conflict is bad and must be avoided. Conflict resolution then must be directed

towards identifying the causes of the conflict and putting programs in place to help avoid

future conflicts.

Though much research shows that this approach does not necessarily lead to improved

long-term conflict resolution, many people still evaluate conflict situations from this

perspective.

b) The human relations view

Conflict is natural and inevitable outcome in any group or relationship. A conflict might

even strengthen a group.

Hence it should be welcome as sometimes it is beneficial.

c) Interactionist View

That conflict is a positive and absolutely necessary force in a group for it to perform

effectively. Hence conflict should be encouraged since a friendly, placid, cooperative group

or relationship is prone to a stand still, becoming dull, and unresponsive to the need for

change.

d) Structuralist View

The world is full of conflicts, but the main one is hinged on the way the economy is

organized.

Society is organized in two groups the haves and the have-nots, and inevitably these two

groups have to be in conflict.

11


12/87

The have-nots are the many laborers who produce all the wealth and benefit little

from it;

Then there are the very few investors who benefit most from the wealth so created

and also control its distribution.

In the present day capitalistic world, conflict arise between the employees and

employers. This is because employees receive a tiny fraction of their produce as

compared to the huge earnings of the investors and this has the potential to develop

into conflict at various levels, including demonstrations, stoppages, strikes, etc

2.7. Levels of Conflict

Conflict can occur at four (4) different levels, and at times,

more than one level at the same time

a) Intra-personal: conflict that occurs within an individual

b) Inter-personal: conflicts that occur between two or more individuals

c) Intra-group: conflicts that occur within a group

d) Inter-group: conflict that occur between two or more groups

(IF NECESSARY GIVE EXAMPLES FROM P. 9 - 12 OF Conflict Management For

Peacekeepers OF SCENARIOS ON INTERPERSONAL, INTERGROUP AND

INTERSTATE CONFLICTS)

Conflict Theory

The main theory of conflict involves a critical investigation into the following elements:

The structures and dynamics in conflict situations.

The actors, and

The root causes of conflict.

This analysis is important in determining intervention mechanisms, the management

and resolution of conflict.

a) The structure and dynamics of the conflict

(The background and context of conflict

Three related dimensions

The distant past may span decades or even centuries

Immediate past context that may show deterioration of relationships among parties,

including the trigger that sparked the violence

Current events arising from divergent views

12


13/87

Historical background enables us to understand the genesis and dimensions of the current

events in the conflict, that is, the causes, the background and framework within which the

causes have emerged and matured.

But note that the parties involved will contest any conflict. In other words, you will get

different versions of the events.

This contest by the parties is important as it

Exposes the parties involved and highlights their interests

Exposes the causes of the conflict, and

Gives the conflict intervener valuable knowledge to use in the intervention process.

Any conflict will be informed by a number of factors:

(see figure on p.20 Conflict Management for Peacekeepers)

i) The personalities and the personal perspectives of the individuals involved, i.e. their

relationship with the adversary, communication skills, values, interests, needs,

fears, etc;

ii) The social, cultural, political, economic, legal, and/or religious context within

which the conflict is set

iii) This context will be affected by the interests, position, power, rights, feelings of,

and outside pressures on, the parties.

Conflict Analysis

Whoever you are, and whatever reason you are involved in a conflict either as an

intervener or a direct party you need a deeper understanding of the conflict to be of value.

You consider three aspects:

a) The story of the conflict: What happened? What was the context? What is the time

line?

b) What are the root causes of the conflict?

c) Who are the parties in the conflict? What are their roles, interest, etc? How can you

use these parties to bring to an end or reduce the conflict?

Draw the triangle on p.18

a) The Story

(Also known as stages of conflict process or conflict progression)

A factual account of what has happened that requires talking to those involved (and

other peripheral parties); doing background research; visits of observation; etc

Background and the context: why the conflict? What are its causes? etc. Note that these

facts will be highly contested by the parties, each with own true story

13


14/87

A timeline of the events

Stages of conflict

Each conflict has its dynamics, characterized by different stages and phases of change and

transformation.

i) Pre-conflict a period when goals between the parties are incompatible and

which could lead to open conflict. At this stage the conflict is not well known

since the parties try to hide it from public view, but communication is

undermined between them

ii) Confrontation the conflict becomes open or manifest. Characterized by

Occasional fighting,

Low level of violence, and search for allies by warring parties,

Mobilization of resources,

Strained relations and polarization.

iii) Crisis peak of conflict. In violent situations, this is the stage of intensive

fighting, leading to killings, injuries, large scale population displacement, and

the use of small arms, etc

iv) Outcome there is an assumption that all conflict will pass through this stage

somehow:

one side will win/another loses;

cease fire may be declared;

one may surrender; or

a stronger third party may impose a solution and thus stop the fighting.

Reduction/Cessation of conflict is the main issue here to allow discussion and search

for other means of restoration of peace.

ii) Post-conflict violence has ceased or reduced considerably and the parties have

gone beyond the crisis stage.

Now is the time to address the root causes of the conflict - such as the needs and fears

of the parties. If not tackled now, conflict cycle may be re-enacted and a return to pre-

conflict stage, with the consequent re-eruption of conflict, being a possibility.

Now it is also the time meant for rehabilitation of destroyed infrastructure, etc

(See UNDP work in this connection and the challenges)

14


15/87

b) Parties in a Conflict

In conflict analysis, it is useful to identify and to ascertain ALL the parties involved in a

conflict, even those who seem not too important. Parties are

Individuals

Groups, and

Entities (organizations, states)

They participate in a conflict either directly or indirectly depending on feelings that

They have interests to pursue,

Something of value is at stake, or

They believe that their interests, positions or needs are threatened in one way or other.

Indirect parties may be helping their allies and friends achieve their own interest to which

they may have long-term secondary interest.

There usually are three categories of parties to a conflict; and it is important to know their

relationships and their common and opposing interests.

i) The primary parties

those directly involved in the conflict;

are most visible and commonly known, and

who must be involved in any negotiations. For example, clans, warlords and Islamic

Courts in Somalia; main political parties in Kenya, etcii) The secondary parties those who are directly affected by the conflict; and those with

the ability to destabilize any agreement they do not agree with.

iii) The peripheral parties: those on the outside but still have an interest in the outcome

of the proceedings. These indirect parties (commonly referred to as shadows) could

complicate the situation:

They are not very visible in the conflict,

Their identity and roles are difficult to determine

They operate by proxy and may heavily influence either party in the conflict

positively or negatively.

They could also be your allies in the negotiations, as they have no direct interest.

For example

i) In what category are Ethiopia, Al Qaeda, Kenya, America, Eritrea in the Somali

conflict and what is their roles?

ii) Who is who in the Mungiki saga in Kenya; and what are their roles?

15


16/87

Note:

i) It is necessary in conflict analysis to capture these parties so as to include them

in conflict transformation and resolution.

ii) Failure to include them might lead to the derailment of the peace plan.

Positions, Interests, Needs and Fears

In most conflicts, the different parties will be pursuing either one or a combination of the

above factors, whether consciously or not.

Where the goal is to reach conflict resolution, it is important to work with the parties

involved to identify and then highlight these elements as the basis for intervention

aimed at the transformation of the conflict.

i) Exactly what do you want? This question will give you the partys positions.

Although this is seen as the tough and uncompromising stand, it is only a

preference that could change.

ii) Why do you want this? This will give you the partys interest. Interest is the

tough one - normally hidden and might take time to find out exactly is behind

the partys seemingly tough position.

iii) Could be unexpressed needs (to also share the cake) and fears (if they are in

they will squeeze our people out, etc

c) Root Causes of Conflict

At the end of the day, all conflicts emanate from competing interests.

The Circle of Conflict is a useful tool for identifying the root causes of conflict covering:

i) Relationship Conflicts: Caused by misconceptions; poor communication; rivalry

or competition in the relationshipii) Information Conflicts: Caused by lack of information; different interpretation of

data; different procedures for information assessment; different views of what is

important

iii) Interest Conflicts: caused by different needs/wants; hidden interests, etc

iv) Structural Conflicts; caused by unacceptable status quo; structural social

injustices or discrimination; unequal power/authority; unequal access to/and

control of; external influences.

v) Value Conflicts

16


17/87

LECTURE THREE

CONFLICT AT WORKPLACE

Introduction

We start by noting five important points about the workplace

a) We spend at least one-third of our adult lives in the workplace, and in very close

proximity with all sorts of people our co-workers of various levels and types; our

bosses, also of various ranks and who have power over us; and also many types of

clients customers, suppliers, inspectors, and even idlers.

b) The effects of conflict in the workplace are widespread and costly to the firm and to

individuals in it. A number of studies estimate that 30% to 40% of a managers daily

activities are devoted to dealing with some form of conflict.

c) Equally, employees inability to effectively deal with anger and conflict in the

workplace could be very expensive; leading to decreased productivity, increased stress

among employees, hampered performance, high turnover rate, absenteeism, and at its

worst, violence and death.

d) Failing to address such conflict usually has implications far beyond the office and into

our non-working lives.

e) It is hence important that we all employees, managers, owners of businesses, and

even the state understand how conflict arises in the workplace, and what steps we can

take to deal with such conflict.

Calculating the Cost of Conflict: An Exercise

Agree on the following as a group on your work in the last 1 year

a) Average time you spend on workplace conflict (your own, interpersonal,

organizational, etc.) = _____ hours/week

b) Your rate of pay = K.sh______ per hour

c) Multiply a)_____ x b) ______ = K.sh _______per week

17


18/87

d) Multiply (c) __________ x the number of weeks you work each year_____ =K.sh________ = total cash spent by you, alone, in conflict management.e) Now calculate the cost to the whole of your organization on time and weekly payspent on solving (often unproductive) conflicts. Comment on your finding.

The Nature of the Workplace

It has been claimed that the work place is designed to be a very fertile ground for conflict.

Such elements which you have described are normally grouped into two: institutional

and personal factors.

1) Institutional Factors may include

a) The nature of the firm and how it is organized: size with branches or sections all

over the place that may make communication difficult and even contradictory.

b) Differing or interdependent activities for example when some section must wait

for others to complete their role for them to act;

c) The need to satisfy conflicting interests, for example, a speedy delivery that might

interfere with quality;

2) Personal Factors

a) The work place is organized in such a way that there are too many people men

and women, with the usual emotions and jealousies; persons of different religions

and cultures; people with differing temperaments; people of different ranks; etc, etc

- all working on limited space and required to share this and other facilities,

transport and equipment

b) How the firm treats its employees; like human beings- ( with feelings and needs ),

or just figures (robots even these need regular oiling, greasing and updating!), etc

What causes conflict at work place?

Understanding how conflict arises at work can be very helpful for anticipating situations

that may become turbulent.

While it may seem, at times, that anything can start a conflict where you work, conflict

typically stems from a limited number of causes.

1) Incompatible Goals

18


19/87

One such cause is incompatible goals between individuals or between groups of individuals

at work.

For example, conflict between orders by line manager for rapid service (e.g. serving many

customers), while the community relation's director instructs all employees to focus their

efforts upon quality customer contact.

One can imagine how quickly problems could arise between the teller and the head teller if

speed is sacrificed for quality time with the customer.

2) Different Personal Values

A second source of conflict is the different personal values we bring to work. It takes very

little time, for example, for employees who enjoy going for fun after work and those whoprefer to get home to their family to begin segregating work.

Such distancing often carries with it gossiping, suspicion, and ultimately, conflict.

What about when an employee has personal goals and values at odds with those of the

company?

3) Unrealistic Expectations

Other scenarios include the employee having unrealistic expectations of what their job

position really is, or of being misunderstood in the workplace. Others may feel that they are

being taken advantage of we work too hard and get too little out of that and why can

they not see this? It is worse in the public service where there are no individuals only

numbers and grades. Extra work or brilliance is not generally rewarded.

This might happen when a perfectionist boss demands the same dedication andcommitment from employees as he or she exhibits, but does not compensate them for the

late or weekend hours.

4) Dependency upon others to complete our work

The extent to which we depend upon others to complete our work is a third factor which

can contribute to conflict. Certainly, conflict would be rare if your task is to copy a report

and file it, and you have your own copy machine.

19


20/87

However, if you are waiting for someone else to make the copies, and someone else is

pressuring you for the report, one could see that the opportunity for conflict begins to

expand.

5) Scarce resources

Scarce resources are a fourth source of conflict in the workplace. Whether the resource in

question is office space, supplies, the boss time, or the budget fund, - we all require our

share in order to meet job demands.

Just ask yourself what happened the last time you were unable to gain access to

something you needed at work.

6) Power distribution at work

The power distribution at work can be a fifth source of conflict.

Those who seem to wield their power in inappropriate ways.

Even those individuals who sometimes step on others toes inadvertently as they

try to complete their own tasks do bring conflict

In addition, some individuals or even entire departments may be viewed as providing amore valuable service to the organization than do others. In such a case, resentmentcan

often arise, laying the foundation for conflict.

7) Continually changing policies

A final source of conflict to be addressed here is one with which most people can readily

identify unpredictable policies. Some organizations seem notorious for continually

changing their policies.

Others have no policies at all, or so it would seem. You may experience this in the form of

regular office meetings becoming irregular, or being told that you are violating a policy

which you thought you were abiding by a week ago such as the way you dress.

In any case, the absence of clear policies, or policies which are continually changing, create

an environment of uncertainty and subjective interpretation which can leave one feeling

vulnerable and helpless.

20


21/87

Causes of conflicts at workplace include:

a) Incompatible goals

b) Different personal values

c) Unrealistic expectations

d) Dependency upon others to complete our work

e) Scarce resources

f) Power distribution at work

g) Continually changing policies

21


22/87

LECTURE FOUR

THE SEARCH FOR PEACE IN A VIOLENT WORLD

Introduction

The lecture endeavors to discuss on barriers of innovative peace initiatives as an attempt to

Search for peace and hence suggest ways in bringing lasting peace in a seemingly violent

world.

4.3 Barriers to Innovative Peace Initiatives

a) Lack of Empathy

Warring groups or gangs have no sense of their enemy/opponents as humans who are

entitled to rights and happiness, as they consider themselves.

This lack of basic compassion and a feeling of superiority complex and a holier-than-thou

attitude, whether committed by or directed to an individual or a group is basically the root

cause of prejudice and discrimination. Prejudice and discrimination are key building

blocks of many forms of conflict.

This inability to see oneself in another hardens the heart and blocks the ability to hearing

another side of the story, a perspective outside one's own. Your story becomes the only

story. This dehumanization of the other, this stripping the other of his/her human rights

(even to think and hold ideas) also allows groups to "justify" violence and killing. (For

example, slavery was justified by designating the blacks as not quite human. After all, they

dressed differently if at all; spoke no comprehensible language; and did not even know

God)

b) Culture of Violence

Consider

Societies torn by civil war; or

Cities and communities wracked by gangsters (whether fighting among themselves or

harassing the members of society at night or at will); or

Families terrorized by their own members.

They all create "bunker" mentalities among themselves characterized by

personal trauma,

perpetual fear, and

22


23/87


24/87

New systems in which people have confidence and with which they are comfortable are

needed. It might be necessary to do these reforms simultaneously. These may include

New court and justice structures including community based tribunals,

New governance structures, including decentralization of control of power and

resources,

New system to document government abuses to counterbalance the failures of what

went on previously,

Alternative education programs that empower the marginalized to comprehend and

hence help in operationalizing the above.

iii) Explore original wounds

Digging into individual traumas, historic ill-treatment of groups, dynamics of prejudice,

and exposing injustice can all lead to a kind of healing that releases bitterness and long-

held beliefs.

iv) Create communities of peace/resistance

Communities trained with specific conflict-resolution tools, acquainted with the mutual

benefit of cooperation and armed with tactics to defuse heated situations, are more likely to

find ways to avoid violent conflict.

v)Build non-violent pathways to rights, equality and assets.Options must exist for bettering one's circumstances outside of violent means. It is also

important to show by legally-accepted collective state/community action that violence

(discrimination, prejudice, etc), corruption and embezzlement, etc does not pay

.

24


25/87

Outcomes Identification Exercise

Facilitator's Opening Statement:

"One of the key challenges facing people who need to work through conflicts together is a

lack of clarity about what they need. What they expect regarding how those needs are metat the workplace, and the relative priority of these expectations, is at the heart of this

exercise. By clarifying desired outcomes from their work together, participants can begin to

build an agenda that seeks to affirm those desires in practice."

Step 1: Individually, each participant should 'brainstorm' a list of responses to the

following question:

"What outcomes do I desire from my workplace?"

An alternative question may be: "What expectations do I seek to fulfill from

my work with my co-workers?"

Take 3 minutes of quiet time to write down as many answers as possible to

the focus question.

Step 2: Going around the circle, each group* member should identify one desired outcometo share with the others. The facilitator should record these responses on flip chart paper.

Go around the circle a couple of times if a 'desired outcome' has been previously stated,

participants are encouraged to identify other items from their personal lists. People may

"pass," if preferred. After completing 2-3 turns around the group, the facilitator should ask

members to review the flip chart list and identify any other items from their personal lists

that they now feel are important to add to the group list.

*At the end of this step, the group's list should contain 12-15 items. This

assumes 5-7 members per group; if working with a larger group, it is

advisable to break into subgroups.

Step 3: Elicit feedback from group members regarding the characteristics of the desired

outcomes they now observe. Ask them [if not otherwise noted] to notice the relatively

significant role ofprocedural needsandpsychological needs identified in these lists. [If you

have a few sub-groups, it may be helpful to have people 'wander around' and view the otherlists before making these comments.]

Step 4: Ask each person to reflect upon the group list that has been generated, as well as25
https://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/glossary.htm#proceduralconcernshttps://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/glossary.htm#proceduralconcernshttps://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/glossary.htm#proceduralconcernshttps://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/glossary.htm#psychologicalconcernshttps://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/glossary.htm#proceduralconcernshttps://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/glossary.htm#psychologicalconcerns


26/87

26


27/87

IMPASSE PROCEDURES

Because strikes are generally prohibited for public-sector employees, the following

outcomes can occur when an impasse is reached: management may continue the past

contract, mediation may occur, the employees may go out on a legal or illegal strike or

have a"sickout," fact-finding may take place, interest arbitration to resolve remaining

differences may occur, or a legislative body may mandate an agreement. Fact-finding,

arbitration, and strikes will be examined, with an emphasis on the first two because they

don't normally occur in the private sector.

What leads to impasses in public-sector negotiations? A study of New York state police

and fire fighter negotiations proposed the model shown in Figure 15-2. Environmental

characteristics most strongly related to reaching an impasse included previous impasse

experience, percentage of the local electorate voting Democratic in 1972 (for police), and

previous starting salary (for police). Structural characteristics associated with impasses

were union pressure tactics, adherence to pattern settlements (police), lack of authority for

the management negotiator, internal management conflict, and pressure on union leaders

(police). Interpersonal/personal factors associated with impasses included hostility, lack of

management negotiator skills (fire), lack of union or management in-house negotiators, and

management negotiator experience.

Negotiations involving formal impasse resolution at or beyond the fact-finding level were

more likely to have had higher previous starting salaries, previous impasse experience, and

be in large cities (police). Union pressure tactics were positively related, while management

negotiator authority was negatively related. Finally, hostility and negotiator experience

were positively related, while negotiator skill (for fire) was negatively related.

Impasse-resolution

All negotiations do not result in an agreement. If a person is looking for a car and the dealer

is unwilling to sell at the highest offer, a sale is not made. The same thing happens in labor-

management negotiations when management and the union cannot agree on the terms of a

new contract. This inability to agree is called an impasse. Unlike the car purchase situation,

the union is not free to seek a new employer to deal with, and the company must still be

willing to negotiate with the union representing its employees.

27


28/87

Most negotiations do not result in an impasse. The parties usually find a common ground

for settlement, and strikes or interventions by third parties are not required. Recent data

show that for the early 1980s about 24 million workdays per year were lost to strikes-only

about .11 percent of total time available.

This chapter examines the causes of impasses, the tactics available to either side after an

impasse is reached, and the interventions of third parties. This chapter focuses on the

private sector. Public-sector impasse resolution procedures, which are generally more

complex and often applicable only to certain occupational classifications, are covered in

Chapter 15.

In reading this chapter, attention should be focused on these issues:

1 . What differences exist in the way impasses are handled in organizations covered

by the Railway Labor Act?

2. What actions can labor and management legally take when an impasse is

reached?

3. What is involved in the mediation process?

1. What steps do private enterprise and labor take to reduce the incidence of impasses

Behavioral theories of labor negotiations

Four behavioral components are involved in bargaining. Distributive bargaining takes place

when the parties are in conflict on a particular issue and when the outcome will be a loss

for one party and a gain for the other. Suppose the union wants a 60-cent hourly increase,

and the parties ultimately settle for 30 cents. The 30-cent increase is a gain to the union and

a loss to the company, which is not to say the loss is greater than the company expected,

However, the company may have felt a settlement for anything less than 35 cents would be

better than it expected to win. Distributive bargaining simply means some resource is in

fixed supply, and one's gain is the other's loss as to that resource.

Since distributive bargaining involves the division of outcomes on a bargaining issue, much

of the activity is related to providing the opponent with information as to the importance of

a particular position, the likelihood of future movement on that position, and the trade-offspossible for a concession on the position. Through the bargaining itself, both sides may

28


29/87

pick up cues as to where the other is willing to settle. An important part of this process is

identifying the finality of commitment a bargainer attaches to a position. Figure 10-5

portrays various management and union commitment statements and analyzes their finality,

specificity, and consequences for ignoring them.

Four Ways To Work Out Business Disputes

Business owners have four options to resolve disputes with partners, vendors or customers.

Each option is based on different assumptions, and entails a different cost. Therefore, it

pays to understand them better.

Option 1. Direct negotiation

Direct negotiation is certainly the cheapest - but not necessarily the easiest way to resolvea conflict. A good place to start is to get clear about what one wants, why, and how much

one cares for the future relationship with the other person. The next step, is finding out how

the situation looks from the other person's perspective. This task requires effective

questioning, listening, and observing. The final negotiation step, is crafting an agreement

that both parties believe to be better than all other alternatives.

To negotiate successfully one needs some planning, communication and negotiation skills.

Without them, it is easy to end up with no deal, or a bad deal, or even a personal war.

Option 2. Mediation

The goal of mediation is not to find out who is right or wrong, but how the problem at hand

can best be resolved. Mediation is a process in which parties who disagree meet with a

neutral third-party, who facilitates their negotiations. The mediator doesn't have any

decision-making authority. The parties decide how to resolve their problem, in a way that is

mutually acceptable.

Since mediation is confidential, mediation discussions and materials are not admissible in

court. In a sense, when people mediate they have everything to gain and nothing to lose. If

they are able to reach a mutually acceptable agreement with the mediator's assistance, that's

great. Otherwise, they can still use the remaining two options. And in that case, whatever

they have said or heard, offered or counter-offered during mediation, doesn't matter.

29


30/87

Option 3. Arbitration

The business dispute is submitted to a neutral arbitrator, who examines the evidence, listens

to the parties and renders a binding decision. The conflicting parties must accept the

arbitrator's decision, no matter whether they like it or not. Arbitration is past-oriented, and

requires a certain amount of fact-finding. Therefore, generally it takes more time (and

money) than mediation, but less than litigation.

Option 4. Litigation

The fourth option is to let the judge decide which party is right or wrong, based on the facts

and the law. In actuality, though, the vast majority of civil cases never get that far (some

statistics say up to 90%). They settle out of court. A few days ? or even hours ? before the

trial, the two conflicting parties, assisted by their respective attorneys, prefer to negotiate

their own agreement, rather than running the risk of losing in court.

For business owners ? as well as for anyone else - litigation has two major drawbacks.

First, it inevitably has a detrimental effect on the future relationship between the parties.

Second, it can be quite expensive in terms of time, money and stress. Nonetheless, when a

business dispute cannot be resolved any other way, litigation is a valid option.

Giuseppe Leone

Promotion of cross-cultural understanding

When individuals have had only very limited or no contact at all with a particular culture,

they commonly hold stereotypical, or broad behavioural generalisations, about that culture

and its members. In the absence of direct experience stereotypes provide a set of usually

negative and inaccurate guidelines that indicate what can be expected when encountering

members of that culture. Commonly held stereotypes include the beliefs that the English

are arrogant and aloof, that the Scottish are dour and cheap and that Americans are loud,

aggressive and wealthy. In times of impending or actual warfare, governments frequently

evoke exceptionally crude stereotypes that demonise and depersonalise the enemy, or

'other', thereby making it easier for the public, or 'us', to hate and kill 'them' (D'Amore

1988). Such attitudes, for example, were deliberately cultivated by the Australian

government towards the Japanese people during World War II, while the 'White Australia'

immigration policy, which prevailed until the 1970s, was based in large part on imaginary

fears of being overwhelmed by the 'faceless hordes' of Asia.

30


31/87

Advocates of tourism contend that direct contacts between tourists and residents can serve

to dispel such stereotypes and allow the members of each group to perceive one another as

individuals and, potentially, as friends. People who travel extensively are often

characterised as more broad-minded, tolerant and cosmopolitan than people who maintain

limited contact with the world at large (Mcintosh, Goeldner & Ritchie 1995). Hence,

tourism is seen as a potent force for cross-cultural understanding because huge numbers of

people come into contact with members of other cultures both at home and abroad. In

Australia direct contacts with Japanese and other Asian tourists have undoubtedly

contributed to the erosion of stereotypes held by some Australians, while the same effect

has also occurred through the exposure of outbound Australians to Asia and other overseas

destinations. In addition, the government now actively encourages such positive attitudes

because of the economic benefits that are associated with the inbound Asian tourist market.

One manifestation of this view is D'Amore's contention that tourism is a vital force for

world peace. Aside from the spontaneous day-to-day contacts, he cites the role of tourism

in facilitating deliberate 'track-two diplomacy', or unofficial face-to-face contact that

augments official or 'track-one' avenues of communication (D'Amore 1988; D'Amore 8c

Jafari 1988). A classic example was the 'ping pong' diplomacy of the early 1970s between

the United States and China. For strategic reasons, both countries desired normal

relationships, but could not realize these immediately in the atmosphere of mutual

animosity shaped by 30 years of Cold War hostility. The solution was to open the door

slowly through a series of discrete sporting meets, cultural exchanges and city-twinning

agreements between the two countries, which often included unofficial contact between

low-level diplomats. Gradually, track-one initiatives became feasible after the unofficial

contacts served to thaw relationships and place a human face on the former enemy.

Kirn and Crompton (1990) discuss a similar process that was initiated between the two

Koreas in the late 1980s. Another- recent example has involved the exchange of scientists,

culture troupes and academics between Iran and the United States during the late 1990s. In

all likelihood, the 'Great Satan' will eventually be replaced by the 'Steadfast Ally of the

Iranian People" and such low-key tourism exchanges will have been instrumental in

bringing about such a radical shift in perception.

31


32/87

Conflict Resolution

Definition: The process of defusing antagonism and reaching agreement between

conflicting parties, especially through some form of negotiation.

Also, the study and practice of solving interpersonal and intergroup conflict.

"Conflict" from the Latin root "to strike together" can be defined as any situation where

incompatible activities, feelings, or intentions occur together. Conflict may take place

within one person, between two or more people who know each other, or between large

groups of people who do not know each other. It may involve actual confrontation between

persons, or merely symbolic confrontation through words and deeds. The conflict may be

expressed through verbal denigration, accusations, threats, or through physical violence to

persons or property. Or the conflict may remain unexpressed, as in avoidance and denial.

A given conflict may be defined in terms of the issues that caused it, thestrategies used to

address it, or the outcomes or consequences that follow from it. Preschool and early

elementary school-aged children tend to have conflict over property issues, and they tend to

use physical strategies to resolve them, like taking a toy they want from another child. As

children grow older the causes of conflict are more frequently about social order, and they

are more likely to use verbal strategies as solutions.

Strategies for resolving or preventing the development of conflict can be classified as

avoidance, diffusion, or confrontation. Turning on the TV rather than discussing an

argument is a form of avoidance. Two teen athletes talking to their peers or counselors after

a dispute on the football field is an example of diffusion. Insulting another student's

girlfriend or arranging to meet after school to fight is examples of confrontation.

Courtroom litigation, like the trial and indictment of a juvenile who has violated the law,

also represents a form of confrontation.

The phrase conflict resolution refers specifically to strategies of diffusion developed during

the second half of the 20th century as alternatives to traditional litigation models of settling

disputes. Based on the idea that it is better to expose and resolve conflict before it damages

people's relationships or escalates into violence, methods of conflict resolution were

developed in business management and gradually adopted in the fields of international

relations, legal settings, and, during the 1980s, educational settings. According to the

32
http://www.healthline.com/adamcontent/transvaginal-ultrasoundhttp://www.healthline.com/adamcontent/transvaginal-ultrasound


33/87

principles of conflict resolution, the only true solution to a conflict is one that attempts to

satisfy the inherent needs of all the parties involved.

Most conflict resolution programs employ some form of negotiation as the primary method

of communication between parties. In the negotiation process, parties with opposing

interests hold conversations to settle a dispute.Negotiation can be distributive, where each

party attempts to win as many concessions to his or her own self-interest as possible (win-

lose), or integrative, where parties attempt to discover solutions that embody mutual self-

interest (win-win). Research on games theory and the decision-making process suggest that

the face-to-face conversation involved in direct negotiation may actually influence people

to act in the interest of the group (including the opposing party), or some other interest

beyond immediate self-interest. Certainly the simple act of talking with the opposition

sends a message that the parties are committed to positive resolution, and face-to-facenegotiation inherently tends to be integrative in its consequences.

The success of a given instance of conflict resolution depends on the attitudes and skills of

the disputants and of the mediator or arbitrator. The elementary skills that have been

identified as promoting conflict resolution overlap to a high degree with those that reflect

social competence in children and adolescents. They include:

Awareness of others

Awareness of the (not necessarily obvious) distinctions between self and others

Listening skills

Awareness of one's own feelings and thoughts, and the ability to express them

Ability to respond to the feelings and thoughts of others

A child or adolescent will employ the basic skills of conflict resolution to varying degrees

in responding to a conflict. Responses can be graded according to the level of

cooperativeness they reflect, i.e., the level of integration the child experiences between his

own self-interest and the interest of the opposing party. Thus, threatening the other party

reflects a slightly more integrated, constructive response to conflict than an immediately

aggressive response such as hitting. Examples of progressively more cooperative responses

to conflict are: withdrawing from a conflict; demanding or requesting the opposing party to

concede; providing reasons the opposing party should concede (appealing to norms);

proposing alternatives to the opposing party; and proposing "if statements, suggesting

willingness to negotiate. Perspective taking, or articulating and validating the feelings and

33


34/87

thoughts of the other party ("I see that you want...."), reflects the higher orders of conflict

resolution skills. Integration of interests ("We both want...") reflects the highest level,

leading to a consensual settlement of negotiations.

Conflict resolution or conflictology

is theprocessof attempting to resolve a dispute or aconflict. Successful conflict resolution

occurs by listening to and providing opportunities to meet each side's needs, and adequately

address their interests so that they are each satisfied with the outcome. Conflict resolution

aims to end conflicts before they start or lead to verbal, physical, or legal fighting.

More common but not popular with practitioners in conflict resolution is conflict

management, where Conflict is a deliberate personal, social and organizational tool,

especially used by capable politicians and other social engineers.

Among groups

Conflict resolution usually involves two or more groups with opposing views regarding

specific issues, and another group or individual who is considered to be neutral in their

opinion on the subject. This last bit though is quite often not entirely demanded if the

"outside" group is well respected by all opposing parties. Resolution methods can include

conciliation, mediation, arbitration orlitigation.

These methods all require third party intervention. A resolution method which is direct

between the parties with opposing views is negotiation. Negotiation can be the 'traditional'

model of hard bargaining where the interests of a group far outweigh the working

relationships concerned. The 'principled' negotiation model is where both the interests and

the working relationships concerned are viewed as important.

It may be possible to avoid conflict without actually resolving the underlying dispute, by

getting the parties to recognize that they disagree but that no further action needs to be

taken at that time. In a few cases, such as in a democracy, it may even be desirable that

they disagree, thus exposing the issues to others who need to consider it for themselves: in

this case the parties mightagree to disagree.

It is also possible to manage a conflict without resolution, in forms other than avoidance.

For more, see conflict management.

34
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_(general)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_(general)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflicthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflicthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflicthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fightinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fightinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conciliationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litigationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negotiationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negotiationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agree_to_disagreehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agree_to_disagreehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_(general)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflicthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fightinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conciliationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litigationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negotiationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agree_to_disagreehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_management


35/87

Among Non-Human Primates and Other Animals

Conflict resolution has also been studied in non-humanprimates (see Frans de Waal, 2000).

Aggression is more common among relatives and within a group, than between groups.

Instead of creating a distance between the individuals, however, the primates were more

intimate in the period after the aggressive incident. These intimacies consisted ofgrooming

and various forms of body contact. Stress responses, like an increased heart rate, usually

decrease after these reconciliatory signals. Different types of primates, as well as many

other species who are living in groups, show different types of conciliatory behaviour.

Resolving conflicts that threaten the interaction between individuals in a group is necessary

for survival, hence has a strong evolutionary value. These findings contradicted previous

existing theories about the general function of aggression, i.e. creating space between

individuals (first proposed by Konrad Lorenz), which seems to be more the case in betweengroups conflicts.

In addition to research in primates, biologists are beginning to explore reconciliation in

other animals. Up until recently, the literature dealing with reconciliation in non-primates

have consisted of anecdotal observations and very little quantitative data. Although

peaceful post-conflict behavior had been documented going back to the 1960s, it wasnt

until 1993 that Rowell made the first explicit mention of reconciliation in feral sheep.

Reconciliation has since been documented in spotted hyenas, lions, dolphins, dwarf

mongooses, and domestic goats.

Conflict Resolution: Information on Health

Conflict Resolution is:

a) The process of defusing antagonism and reaching agreement between conflicting

parties, especially through some form of negotiation.

b) Also, the study and practice of solving interpersonal and inter-group conflict.

"Conflict" from the Latin root "to strike together" can be defined as any situation where

incompatible activities, feelings, or intentions occur together.

Conflict may take place

a) Within one person,

b) Between two or more people who know each other, or

35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frans_de_Waalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggressionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groominghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_(medicine)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Lorenzhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frans_de_Waalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aggressionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groominghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_(medicine)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Lorenzhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primates


36/87

c) Between large groups of people who do not know each other.

It may involve actual confrontation between persons, or merely symbolic confrontation

through words and deeds. The conflict may be expressed through verbal denigration,

accusations, threats, or through physical violence to persons or property. Or the conflict

may remain unexpressed, as in avoidance and denial.

A given conflict may be defined in terms of the issues that caused it, thestrategies used to

address it, or the outcomes or consequences that follow from it. Preschool and early

elementary school-aged children tend to have conflict over property issues, and they tend to

use physical strategies to resolve them, like taking a toy they want from another child. As

children grow older the causes of conflict are more frequently about social order, and they

are more likely to use verbal strategies as solutions.

Strategies for resolving or preventing the development of conflict can be classified as

avoidance, diffusion, or confrontation. Turning on the TV rather than discussing an

argument is a form of avoidance. Two teen athletes talking to their peers or counselors after

a dispute on the football field is an example of diffusion. Insulting another student's

girlfriend or arranging to meet after school to fight are examples of confrontation.

Courtroom litigation, like the trial and indictment of a juvenile who has violated the law,

also represents a form of confrontation.

The phrase conflict resolution refers specifically to strategies of diffusion developed during

the second half of the 20th century as alternatives to traditional litigation models of settling

disputes. Based on the idea that it is better to expose and resolve conflict before it damages

people's relationships or escalates into violence, methods of conflict resolution were

developed in business management and gradually adopted in the fields of international

relations, legal settings, and, during the 1980s, educational settings. According to the

principles of conflict resolution, the only true solution to a conflict is one that attempts to

satisfy the inherent needs of all the parties involved.

Most conflict resolution programs employ some form of negotiation as the primary method

of communication between parties. In the negotiation process, parties with opposing

interests hold conversations to settle a dispute. Negotiation can be distributive, where each

party attempts to win as many concessions to his or her own self-interest as possible (win-

lose), or integrative, where parties attempt to discover solutions that embody mutual self-

interest (win-win). Research on games theory and the decision-making process suggest that

36
http://www.healthline.com/adamcontent/transvaginal-ultrasoundhttp://www.healthline.com/adamcontent/transvaginal-ultrasound


37/87

the face-to-face conversation involved in direct negotiation may actually influence people

to act in the interest of the group (including the opposing party), or some other interest

beyond immediate self-interest. Certainly the simple act of talking with the opposition

sends a message that the parties are committed to positive resolution, and face-to-face

negotiation inherently tends to be integrative in its consequences.

The success of a given instance of conflict resolution depends on the attitudes and skills of

the disputants and of the mediator or arbitrator. The elementary skills that have been

identified as promoting conflict resolution overlap to a high degree with those that reflect

social competence in children and adolescents. They include:

Awareness of others

Awareness of the (not necessarily obvious) distinctions between self and others

Listening skills

Awareness of one's own feelings and thoughts, and the ability to express them

Ability to respond to the feelings and thoughts of others

A child or adolescent will employ the basic skills of conflict resolution to varying degrees

in responding to a conflict. Responses can be graded according to the level of

cooperativeness they reflect, i.e., the level of integration the child experiences between his

own self-interest and the interest of the opposing party. Thus, threatening the other party

reflects a slightly more integrated, constructive response to conflict than an immediately

aggressive response such as hitting. Examples of progressively more cooperative responses

to conflict are: withdrawing from a conflict; demanding or requesting the opposing party to

concede; providing reasons the opposing party should concede (appealing to norms);

proposing alternatives to the opposing party; and proposing "if statements, suggesting

willingness to negotiate. Perspective taking, or articulating and validating the feelings and

thoughts of the other party ("I see that you want...."), reflects the higher orders of conflict

resolution skills. Integration of interests ("We both want...") reflects the highest level,

leading to a consensual settlement of negotiations.

WHAT IS BARGAINING?

Several academic disciplines have undertaken the study of bargaining. The following is a

description of bargaining or negotiating from an economic perspective:

37


38/87

1. Negotiation takes place if both parties will benefit by an agreement. In labor-

management relations, the employer benefits by continued operations and the union

benefits by better conditions for its members.

2. The concessions made by the parties during the negotiations are voluntary. The

concessions, in number and degree, may be influenced by the magnitude of the demands

and the opponent's beliefs about the demander's willingness to concede; but any

movements made are still voluntary.

3. Negotiations are seen as productive. They may disclose areas of agreement or

alternatives not previously considered by either party.

4. Negotiations as used in labor-management relations are characterized by verbal and/or

written demands and concessions. And finally, the bargaining process requires competition

before the benefits available accrue to the parties involved in the bargaining.'

Bargaining, in its simplest format, is the communication by both parties of the terms they

require for consummation of a transaction and the subsequent acceptance or rejection by

both of the bargain.

Negotiation is the set of techniques used to translate bargaining power into the ultimate

settlement.

From a psychological perspective, bargaining may be defined as "the process whereby two

or more parties attempt to settle what each shall give and take, or perform and receive, in a

transaction between them." For bargaining to be required, the parties must have a conflict

of interest in relation to issues jointly affecting them. For most bargaining, the parties are

joined in a voluntary relationship. This may not be true in collective bargaining, and the

joining is relatively permanent. The activities of the parties include the division ofresources and other intangible issues in which the parties have joint interests. The process

of negotiation requires the presentation of positions, their evaluation by the other party,

and, finally, counterproposals. The process requires a sequential rather than simultaneous

mode, because each party must have time to evaluate the other's proposals before

responding.

38


39/87

A more specific definition from a behavioral perspective includes the following:

1. Collective bargaining includes a variety of issues, some generating conflict between the

parties and others requiring collaboration to accommodate the separate interests of both.

2. The attitudes and feelings of the bargainers play a part in the outcome of the negotiationsover and above what occurs as a result of the rationally defined attributes of the parties.

Further, the parties do not come together only for this negotiation but must maintain an

ongoing relationship. Thus, the results of the bargaining situation have an impact on the

long-run characteristics of the bargaining relationship.

3. The bargainers are often acting on behalf of others rather than for their own ends. They

are representing constituents who evaluate their performance and may affect their tenure in

negotiating positions.

Thus, the bargaining process involves parties who have mutual interests in reaching

agreement on a variety of issues. The negotiators represent others who stand to have their

positions altered as a result of the bargaining. Personal characteristics of the bargainers, as

well as the

Agreement

Agreement is mostly on a paper regarding the terms agreed.

This article and my articles "Overcoming Obstacles to Agreement" and "Negotiating

Agreement" are about how to deal with disagreement--from simple difference of opinion to

active upset and anger--and some specific steps that will help you reach an agreement. As

you will see, the things you can do yourself are far more effective than anything a lawyer

can do for you.

More than 90% of all cases are settled before trial. Unfortunately, too many are settled only

after the spouses have spent their emotional energies on conflict and their financial

resources on lawyers. The time and effort spent battling has impaired their ability to get on

with their lives and may have caused serious psychic damage to themselves and their

children. The spouses could have saved themselves all that simply by agreeing to settle

earlier. Why didn't they?

39


40/87

Okay, here you are, heading for a divorce; your spouse is going to be involved and you

want to work out an agreement. What's so hard about that? Why don't you just do it? Easier

to say than do, isn't it? There are good reasons why it's hard for spouses to work out an

agreement--five, to be exact:

1) Emotional upset and conflict

2) Insecurity and fear

3) Ignorance and misinformation

4) The legal system and lawyers

5) Real disagreement

To get an agreement, in or out of the system, with or without an attorney, you have to

overcome the five obstacles. Let's look at them in a little more detail to see what you're

dealing with.

The Five Obstacles to Agreement

1.Emotional upset and conflict:

This is about high levels of anger, hurt, blame, and guilt--a very normal part of divorce. If

one or both spouses are upset, you can't negotiate, have reasonable discussions or make

sound decisions. Complex and volatile emotions become externalized and get attached to

things or to the children. When emotions are high, reason is at its lowest ebb and will not

be very effective at that time. There are various causes of upset:

a) The divorce itself - stress of major change, broken dreams, fear of change, fear of an

unknown futureb) Different readiness to accept the idea of divorce and willingness to proceed--the hidden

cause of conflict in many cases

c) History of bad communication habits or conflict

d) Particular events or circumstances (a new lover, a new debt)

2. Insecurity, fear, lack of confidence, unequal bargaining power:

40


41/87

You can't negotiate if either spouse feels incompetent, afraid, or that the other spouse has

some big advantage. Divorce is tremendously undermining and tends to multiply any

general lack of self-confidence and self-esteem. Also, there are often very real causes for

insecurity: lack of skill and experience at dealing with business and negotiation, and lack of

complete information and knowledge about the process and the marital affairs. It doesn't

matter if insecurity is real or reasonable; it is real if it feels real.

3. Ignorance and misinformation:

Ignorance about the legal system and how it works can make you feel uncertain, insecure

and incompetent. You feel as if you don't know what you are doing--and you are right.

Misinformation is when the things you think you know are not correct. Misinformation

comes from friends, television, movies, and even from lawyers who are not family law

specialists. It can distort your expectations about your rights and what's fair. It's hard to

negotiate with someone who has mistaken ideas about what the rules are. Fortunately, both

conditions can be easily fixed with reliable information.

4. The legal system and lawyers:

The legal system does not help you overcome obstacles to agreement, but rather it is one of

the major obstacles that you have to overcome. The legal system is designed to workagainst you. You want to avoid the legal system as much as possible--and you can. You can

beat the system.

5. Real disagreement:

These are the real issues that you want to deal with rationally and negotiate with your

spouse. Real disagreement is based on the fact that the spouses now have different needs

and interests. After dealing with the first four obstacles, these real issues may turn out to beminor, but even if they are serious, at least they can be negotiated rationally. The solutions

are in your hands. Apart from the legal system--which you can avoid--all obstacles to your

agreement are personal, between you and your spouse and between you and yourself. Take

care. Pay special attention to emotional upset and especially insecurity and fear. These are

the forces that drive people into a lawyer's office. You want to avoid doing anything that

might increase the upset and fear of either spouse.

The upset person is saying: "I can't stand this, I won't take it anymore! I'm going to get a

lawyer!"

41


42/87

The insecure person is saying: "I can't understand all this, I can't deal with it, and I can't

deal with my spouse. I want to be safe. I need someone to help me. I'm going to get a

lawyer."

And this is how cases get dragged into unnecessary legal conflict. You need to arrange

things so both spouses are comfortable about not retaining an attorney. If you think your

spouse may be upset or insecure, you have to be very careful and patient. If you are feeling

incapable of dealing with your own divorce, the information in my book, Divorce

Solutions: How to Make Any Divorce Better will help a lot and you will see that you can

get all the help and support you need without retaining an attorney.

42


43/87

LECTURE FIVE

CAUSES OF CONFLICT IN AFRICA

INTRODUCTION

Kofi Annan, former UN Secretary General said in 1998 report to the UN General Assembly

that more than 30 wars have been fought in Africa since 1970 majority being political

intra-state in origin.

In 1996 alone, 14 of the 53 African countries were afflicted by armed conflict.

a) accounting for more than half of all war-related deaths the world over; andb) resulting in over 8 million refugees, returnees and displaced persons in our

continent.

We should also note the many intra-state conflicts, e.g. the December/January 2008 in

Kenya, continuous conflict in Somalia, the mess in Zimbabwe over elections, continued

conflict in Sudan, etc.

Viewed from the outside, Africa is the most volatile continent and the western media

makes much of this even exaggerates.

But the trut

notes conflict resolution

Documents