Conflict Matters
Posted: 12.08.2015
Conflict in the workplace is natural, productive and healthy, but resolving it can be complex. Therefore, it is imperative that on-the-job-trained mediators are equipped with a broad understanding of effective conflict resolution practices through education beyond on-the-job training. Conflict resolution is only effective when it satisfies all the parties involved. It is therefore necessary for on-the-job trained mediators to understand conflict theories to help them discern the root cause of each particular workplace conflict, separate various and complex conflict interactions, and recognize the difference between Integrative and Distributive negotiation in order to really help mediate resolutions.
Negotiation is a process by which parties try to reach an agreement that specifies how they will act toward one another. Integrative negotiation promotes win-win results, while Distributive negotiation promotes a win-lose resolution. Integrative negotiation begins with identifying and communicating the impact the party has felt because of the conflict, such as, emotional pain and suffering, or loss of self esteem. It aims at making the party whole again, at rebuilding the relationship with the other party so that the hurt is absolved and the healing can begin. By contrast, Distributive negotiation begins with identifying and communicating the desired outcome, such as, job reinstatement or monetary compensation.
A Distributive negotiation approach allows for one party to win at the expense of the other.
Each approach has its place in resolving conflicts. However, Integrative negotiation is more beneficial in resolving workplace conflicts because the impact of a workplace conflict extends beyond the parties in the conflict.
The conflict could impact either directly or indirectly on the non-parties and could result in a poisoned work environment for some employees who are sensitive to the issues. This impact could continue to manifest itself on the non-parties even after a confidential settlement has been reached with the parties directly involved.
The rigid approach of Distributive negotiation, including threats, vocal overtones, such as “we will fight it with all our resources,” is slowly giving way to Integrative negotiation’s flexible approach to work out a common ground. This occurs where the mediator has received formal training beyond settlement mediation and understands conflict theory.
In the workplace, negotiation is a way of life. Therefore, it merits the attention of conflict resolution scholars to conduct more research to assist on-the-job-trained mediators with a better understanding of conflict theory. Negotiation centers on perceived incompatibilities and uses strategies aimed at reaching a mutually acceptable agreement. In the workplace, negotiation and communication are intertwined inherently because negotiation cannot occur without some form of communication. Although many negotiation theorists have recognized this fact, there is little research on the role of communication in the workplace for on-the-job-trained mediators. Communication is central to the conflict resolution process. Some scholars argue that in today’s diverse workplace, communication is the heart of conflict resolution.
In negotiation, the parties must cooperate to reach their respective goals. Each party has the power to prevent the other from attaining its objective. Integrative Negotiation uses conflict resolution strategies and language that encourages the type of social interaction and dialogue that creates mutually acceptable agreements.
Conflict resolution is successful in diverse work environments when the mediator takes each parties use of language and meaning into consideration. If the mediator recognizes the role of language and meaning in how the parties present their positions (framing and reframing of arguments, expressions of threats and promises), then the mediator becomes sensitive to both parties positions and assists them to better understand each other. A mediators understanding of conflict theory and language helps shape the process and steer the resolution outcome. In a case where a party stresses the impact the conflict had on her and how she feels as a result of the conflict, she is signaling that she is using an Integrative negotiation strategy. She wants to be heard, acknowledged and understood as an aggrieved party who has truly suffered. Her resolution focuses on feeling whole again so that she can leave the hurt behind and move on with her life. The monetary settlement she seeks hinges on the degree of emotional impact that she felt.
On the other hand, if the other party simply wants to settle the conflict with a monetary payment based on relevant case law, then he is signaling that he prefers a Distributive negotiation stance. The mediator has a role to play to help each party understand and communicate with the other in order to affect the best possible resolution. If the mediator recognizes these two disparate approaches, then he can help the parties to understand it, too, and guide them to a resolution that satisfies both of them. However, in many instances, Distributive negotiation is used to ascertain “the bottom line” settlement position. This approach discounts the value of the suffering and usually means that the aggrieved party gets less money than they expected, and little to no resolution in their heart.
Based on my experience, the majority of on-the-job-trained mediators are performing these important functions with limited or no understanding of conflict theory. The appreciation of a mediator’s role is still at an early stage of development when it comes to workplace conflict resolution.
Hopefully, in the near future, scholars will focus their research on this important area, and assist on-the-job-mediators with an accelerated knowledge of conflict theory.
In future articles, I will discuss many aspects of workplace conflict and present ideas on how to effectively identify which tools to apply to workplace conflict. Workplace conflict resolution strategies include: transformative mediation, collaborative mediation, facilitative mediation, settlement mediation, problem solving mediation, Integrative Negotiation, Distributive Negotiation, Cross-cultural mediation, cross-cultural and diversity awareness communication and other forms of communication.
Cecil Norman holds a Masters Degree in Conflict Resolution. His column on Conflict Matters appears monthly. You may reach him directly at his practice, Human Rights Advisory Services Inc. Email: cnorman@hras.ca
Negotiation is a process by which parties try to reach an agreement that specifies how they will act toward one another. Integrative negotiation promotes win-win results, while Distributive negotiation promotes a win-lose resolution. Integrative negotiation begins with identifying and communicating the impact the party has felt because of the conflict, such as, emotional pain and suffering, or loss of self esteem. It aims at making the party whole again, at rebuilding the relationship with the other party so that the hurt is absolved and the healing can begin. By contrast, Distributive negotiation begins with identifying and communicating the desired outcome, such as, job reinstatement or monetary compensation.
A Distributive negotiation approach allows for one party to win at the expense of the other.
Each approach has its place in resolving conflicts. However, Integrative negotiation is more beneficial in resolving workplace conflicts because the impact of a workplace conflict extends beyond the parties in the conflict.
The conflict could impact either directly or indirectly on the non-parties and could result in a poisoned work environment for some employees who are sensitive to the issues. This impact could continue to manifest itself on the non-parties even after a confidential settlement has been reached with the parties directly involved.
The rigid approach of Distributive negotiation, including threats, vocal overtones, such as “we will fight it with all our resources,” is slowly giving way to Integrative negotiation’s flexible approach to work out a common ground. This occurs where the mediator has received formal training beyond settlement mediation and understands conflict theory.
In the workplace, negotiation is a way of life. Therefore, it merits the attention of conflict resolution scholars to conduct more research to assist on-the-job-trained mediators with a better understanding of conflict theory. Negotiation centers on perceived incompatibilities and uses strategies aimed at reaching a mutually acceptable agreement. In the workplace, negotiation and communication are intertwined inherently because negotiation cannot occur without some form of communication. Although many negotiation theorists have recognized this fact, there is little research on the role of communication in the workplace for on-the-job-trained mediators. Communication is central to the conflict resolution process. Some scholars argue that in today’s diverse workplace, communication is the heart of conflict resolution.
In negotiation, the parties must cooperate to reach their respective goals. Each party has the power to prevent the other from attaining its objective. Integrative Negotiation uses conflict resolution strategies and language that encourages the type of social interaction and dialogue that creates mutually acceptable agreements.
Conflict resolution is successful in diverse work environments when the mediator takes each parties use of language and meaning into consideration. If the mediator recognizes the role of language and meaning in how the parties present their positions (framing and reframing of arguments, expressions of threats and promises), then the mediator becomes sensitive to both parties positions and assists them to better understand each other. A mediators understanding of conflict theory and language helps shape the process and steer the resolution outcome. In a case where a party stresses the impact the conflict had on her and how she feels as a result of the conflict, she is signaling that she is using an Integrative negotiation strategy. She wants to be heard, acknowledged and understood as an aggrieved party who has truly suffered. Her resolution focuses on feeling whole again so that she can leave the hurt behind and move on with her life. The monetary settlement she seeks hinges on the degree of emotional impact that she felt.
On the other hand, if the other party simply wants to settle the conflict with a monetary payment based on relevant case law, then he is signaling that he prefers a Distributive negotiation stance. The mediator has a role to play to help each party understand and communicate with the other in order to affect the best possible resolution. If the mediator recognizes these two disparate approaches, then he can help the parties to understand it, too, and guide them to a resolution that satisfies both of them. However, in many instances, Distributive negotiation is used to ascertain “the bottom line” settlement position. This approach discounts the value of the suffering and usually means that the aggrieved party gets less money than they expected, and little to no resolution in their heart.
Based on my experience, the majority of on-the-job-trained mediators are performing these important functions with limited or no understanding of conflict theory. The appreciation of a mediator’s role is still at an early stage of development when it comes to workplace conflict resolution.
Hopefully, in the near future, scholars will focus their research on this important area, and assist on-the-job-mediators with an accelerated knowledge of conflict theory.
In future articles, I will discuss many aspects of workplace conflict and present ideas on how to effectively identify which tools to apply to workplace conflict. Workplace conflict resolution strategies include: transformative mediation, collaborative mediation, facilitative mediation, settlement mediation, problem solving mediation, Integrative Negotiation, Distributive Negotiation, Cross-cultural mediation, cross-cultural and diversity awareness communication and other forms of communication.
Cecil Norman holds a Masters Degree in Conflict Resolution. His column on Conflict Matters appears monthly. You may reach him directly at his practice, Human Rights Advisory Services Inc. Email: cnorman@hras.ca
