Definition of Conflict
“Conflict is an expressed struggle between
at least two interdependent parties who
perceive incompatible goals, scare
resources, and interference from others in
achieving their goals.”
Burton – Human Needs
 Burton
says that conflict stems from
unsatisfied human needs
 In conflict, people represent their interests,
but not their underlying needs; however,
they will use power and coercion to meet
those needs
Galtung – Structural Violence
 Inequalities
embedded in the social
structure lead to violence and conflict.
 Unless those underlying inequalities are
solved, then violence will continue
 Prime example is lower-class people dying
because health care resources are
granted to the upper-class
Coser – social function of conflict

Conflict is not always dysfunctional for the
relationship within which it occurs; often, conflict
is necessary to maintain such a relationship
 Conflict not only generates new norms, new
institutions…it may be said to be stimulating
directly in the economic and technological realm.
 If Coser is correct, and conflict serves a socially
useful function, then should conflicts be
resolved?
Game Theory
 Zero-sum

game
fixed pie
 People
assume that they can either win or
lose.


If I win a quarter, they lose a quarter – the
sum is always zero
you give up nothing, because it means the
other side wins what you give up
HISTORY
 Social




movements:
Gandhi and nonviolence – movement to free
India of British Rule
Women’s suffrage movement, 1848-1920
Lech Walesa and Solidarity in Poland
Nelson Mandela/Desmond Tutu and the
movement against Apartheid in South Africa
 Based
off each other, and off Thoreau’s
essay “Civil Disobedience.”
HISTORY
 Thoreau
said:
 Two times when open rebellion is justified:


when the injustice is no longer occasional but
a major characteristic
when the machine (government) demands
that people cooperate with injustice.
 Thoreau
declared that, “If the government
requires you to be the agent of injustice to
another, then, I say, break the law.”
Escalation of conflict
 Conflicts
escalate in both scope and
severity
 Conflicts can escalate constructively or
destructively
Destructive Conflict

Characteristics of destructive escalation





parties become less flexible
goals are narrowly defined and rigid
primary goal is to defeat the other party – assumes
the other side must lose
becomes protracted and intractable
Characteristics of destructive agreements






damages relationships
promotes inequality & power imbalance
outcomes are imposed unilaterally
often requires redress or revenge
outcomes are often oppressive to one side
DOES NOT SOLVE UNDERLYING CAUSES
Constructive Conflicts

Constructive conflicts are not the absence of
destructive elements
 Characteristics of constructive escalation




interaction changes often
flexible goals/objectives
guided by belief that all parties can win
Characteristics of constructive agreements






strengthens relationships
restores equality
recognizing the other parties as legitimate
using benefits/promises rather than threats/coercion
find mutually acceptable solutions
Conflict is actually solved
Conflict Continuum

Negotiation is at the bottom because negotiation
theory is the base for all forms of conflict
resolution (mediation, arbitration, even
diplomacy)
Negotiation Theory
 Positional

Negotiation
Positions are the stance you take and your
proposed solution
• “I want $3,000 for this car”
• “Stop taking my stuff – you have to ask me first.”

Positions are your statements of what you’re
willing to give
 Positional
negotiation starts with two
positions and attempts to find a middle
ground between them, or barter until one
party gives in to the other position.
Positional Bargaining
 Hard


vs. Soft positional bargaining
Hard bargaining – make threats, damage
relationships, demand concessions from other
party, goal is victory, search for one answer
you will accept, apply pressure
Soft bargaining – you get taken, sacrifice your
needs for relationship, trust other party,
disclose your bottom line, try to win friends,
search for an answer they will accept
Principled Negotiation
 1.
Separate People from Problems
 2. Focus on Interests not Positions




 3.
Topic interests/goals
Relational interests/goals
Identity or Face interests/goals
Process interests/goals
Invent solutions for mutual gain
 4. Insist the result be based on some
objective criteria
Separate people from problems

Negotiators are people first

every party in a negotiation has emotions and ego,
and can have misunderstandings

The relationship needs to be taken into account
in all negotiations
 Perceptions – does truth matter?

understand their perceptions to come up with better
solutions
Emotions – the higher the stakes, the higher
emotions run
 Communication – all negotiations have
misunderstandings

Negotiation Interests not Positions
are something you decided on –
what you’re demanding as a solution
 Interests are what got you there
 For every interest, there are several
positions you could take, and vice-versa
 To negotiate interests, identify them
 Positions



ask why? what are they getting from position
ask why not? what are they not getting
most common interests are needs-based
Types of Interests
 T.R.I.P.

Topic, relational, identity/face, process
 Topic

and Process interests
external, negotiable, substantive, tangible,
expressed
 Relational


and Identity interests
internal, non-negotiable, usually not
expressed aloud, intangible (values)
DRIVE all conflicts
Topic and Process Goals
 Topic


interests:
what do we want? what are we fighting for?
either both parties have the same goal, or
both parties have opposing goals
 Process


interests:
what communication process will we use?
process goals appear when low-power party
cries unjust process or unfair fight
Relational Goals
 Who



 At
are we to each other?
How will we be treated?
How much influence do we have over the
other?
How interdependent are we?
the heart of all conflicts, but rarely
articulated
 Relational goals must be met in order to
solve underlying issues
Face or Identity Goals
 Who
am I in this conflict?
 You can save or damage your own face or
the other’s face
 If face is destroyed, it must be restored
(saved) before any other conflict goal can
be addressed
 When face is damaged:


people dig into their positions
creates losers who “get back at you” next time
Ways to restore face
 How




rationalize actions
claim unjust intimidation
dig into our position
damage other’s face
 How



we save our own face:
we save other’s face:
help increase their self-esteem
avoid giving orders or directives
listen carefully and legitimize their concerns
 No
one wants to look like the loser
More about types of interests
 Interests




all conflicts have multiple goals
relational and identity goals are always
present
different goals have primacy
parties in conflict rarely have same goals with
same primacy
 Interests

overlap
are disguised
relational and face goals are presented as
topic and process goals
More about interests
 Goals/Interests

goals change as they’re met or as they’re
frustrated
 Prospective

goals
what you want as you’re preparing
 Transactive

change
goals
goals that emerge during the conflict
• shift as negotiation occurs
• can become destructive (esp. face)
• can be sacrificed (esp. topic)
 Retrospective
goals – set up for next time
Invent Solutions for Mutual Gain
 Easiest
solution in a negotiation is to split
the difference between the positions
 In order to have more options to choose
from, you need more solutions


Brainstorm
Broaden your options
• shuttle between the specific and the general
• invent options of differing strength
• change scope

Make a bigger pie (game theory)
• look for shared interests and goals
• split differing interests

Turn it into reaching a common goal
Insist on Objective Criteria

Use a “Fair Standard”





Use a “Fair Procedure”


market value, such as “blue-book value”
professional standards
precedent
scientific judgment
Flip a coin, lottery, use a 3rd party, “I divide, you
choose”
Agree to the principles first
 Not a way to strengthen your position – a fair
standard must be fair for both parties