Dealing With Differences

In my experience, most conflicts can be resolved within 20 minutes of both parties accurately stating the needs of the other.

MARSHALL ROSENBERG

What happens when there is actual conflict in the room? When there is a potentially difficult conversation coming up for a team, it can be helpful to pre-empt the conversation by reminding team members of the states of arousal, and what strategies we can use if we have to reset even during the meeting.

Discussing these strategies can normalise this process and keep it light.

In their book Getting to Yes, William Ury and Roger Fisher set out to answer the question of what is the best way for people to deal with their differences. This is my summary of what they describe as principled negotiation developed through the Harvard Negotiation Project.

The first step is to recognise that humans are not robots but have strong emotions which invariably show up when discussing problems. They acknowledge the human emotion in the issue and sensitively separate it from the issue.

Careful facilitation and sensitive placement of sitting people alongside each other, as well as careful use of language in framing the issue can all help getting the issue onto the table with a minimum of conflict.

Identifying the human needs behind the positions of parties allows the issue itself to be clearer. Instead of having to dig in to make our position prominent or right, we can rather allow a more compassionate and connected understanding of the different people. 

By focusing on the human needs of the people holding different positions we can then ask a different question: How can both groups get their needs met? This new question opens up a wide range of possible solutions which can then be discussed on their merits.

Finally, involving an independent criteria or expert opinion allows both parties not to have to agree about the criteria, but to be educated by it.