Topic 2
DEFINITIONS OF CONFLICT
Definition of Conflict – Version 1
Conflict is an expressed struggle between at least two interdependent
parties, who perceive incompatible goals, scarce resources, and
interference from others in achieving their goals. This definition is taken
from the reading, “The Nature of Conflict”, by Wilmot and Hocker. It is probably
the most widely used definition in conflict studies.
A few things to note:
I.
II.
III.
IV.
The conflict is expressed. If I am just thinking about how much I disagree with you, how
wrong I think you are, and how I would like to give you a piece of my mind, we do not
yet have a conflict. The conflict requires that I act in some way, whether with words or
with something else.
At least two parties – this is about social conflict, not intra-psychic conflict.
The parties are interdependent. Our behaviours affect each other, and each can act in a
way that impacts the other and they will notice.
Incompatible goals, scarce resources, and interference. In acting I cost you something –
if I get my goal, you don’t get yours. If I get the resources I want, you don’t.
Definition of Conflict – Version 2
Conflict is a struggle over values and claims to scarce status, power,
and resources, in which the aims of the opponents are to neutralize,
injure, or eliminate their rivals. This definition is also taken from the reading,
“The Nature of Conflict”, by Wilmot and Hocker.
Note a couple of differences:
I.
II.
III.
This definition includes the possibility that the struggle includes intangibles. It is open to
discussion whether the first definition only deals with tangibles. Arguably incompatible
goals have to do with what the future holds for the parties in tangible ways. Values are
intangible, as are status, and power, even if they have real world effects.
Furthermore, conflict is more than interference in achieving goals. The parties’ intent is
to neutralize, injure, or eliminate each other. Under this definition conflict must have
serious consequences.
It may not surprise you to learn that this definition was written during the cold war. It
was written in the context of the struggle between NATO, the U.S. in particular, and the
Soviet Union. Rivals who arguably were seeking to neutralize, injure, or eliminate the
other.
Definition of Conflict – Version 3
Conflict situations are those unique episodes when we explicity
recognize the existence of multiple realities and negotiate toward the
creation of a common meaning. This definition comes from John Paul
Lederach, currently director of the Kroc Institute at the University of Notre
Dame.
This definition is very different:
I.
II.
Its focus is not on externals, either of what is in conflict or how the conflict plays out,
but on meaning. It recognizes that when we are in conflict we are living in multiple
realities. The worlds the parties live in are not the same. When I did divorce mediation
this was immediately obvious. The separating spouses each lived in worlds where they
were the best parent possible for their children and their soon to be ex-partner was at
best, unimportant to the children, and at worst, a complete hindrance to the health of
the children.
Secondly, the definition recognizes that each conflict is in some ways unique. While
there are patterns, this conflict involves these two people, with specific ways of being in
the world. No other conflict will be identical to this one. Note also though, that the
reference is to unique episodes. In other words, especially when people have longer
term relationships, conflict comes and goes. It is part of the architecture of our lives.
Conflict gets expressed in specific episodes. A conflict arises now for its own unique
III.
IV.
reasons, is dealt with, and subsides. Next week, next month, next year another will arise
in its unique ways, and be dealt with and subside.
This definition also has a goal unlike the other two definitions. Note the goal – not the
resolution, not the management, not reconciliation. The goal is common meaning. In
other words, the goal is to have the parties inhabit the same reality. This assumes that
this goal does not eliminate future conflicts, and that addressing this conflict does not
lead to the perfect relationship. Rather, it recognizes the episodic nature of conflict and
that it will come back.
It is however, the re-inhabiting of a single reality that allows for the decisions in this
conflict, and allows for the parties to make decisions in a helpful way in future episodes.