Using this post as a starting point, we can then look at how to avoid or minimize this problem in our lives. In this post, I will quickly show a model of what often happens during conflict escalation.
By understanding the model, we can plan positive steps to back conflicts down after they start. I'm drawing some of this post content from a video course I am developing on resolving personal workplace conflicts. I'll share more on that later. The escalation cycle generally starts with one person I'll call them Person A doing or saying something that the other person Person B perceives as a threat.
Notice the key word: perceives. It doesn't really matter if Person A meant their words or actions as a threat. It only matters if Person B sees the words or actions as a threat. This perception of threat can take many forms, and it is likely linked to the anger process I wrote about previously. Once Person B perceives a threat, they will probably move to anger and then behave in a self-protective way out of that anger. Person A follows the same perception-anger-behavior pattern and further contributes to the conflict escalation as shown in the video above and the image below.
Click on the image for a larger view. In an interpersonal workplace situation, someone gets moved to another department, quits, or gets fired. On a larger level, a department gets split in two, companies divide, religious organizations split, and where there was one nation, now there are two or several.
While I believe that some relationships and structures need to be changed or ended, I do not believe it always has to be through this negative process of conflict escalation.
In many cases, conflict can be resolved through proactive conflict transformation that leads us to changes which feel right, just, and ultimately healthy. We know that training in conflict resolution skills is one of the most effective ways to prevent the negative spiral through the five stages of conflict escalation.
Training will teach strategies for direct discussion and conflict resolution, and will alert people to the potential for thinking errors. Staff will more frequently resolve conflict at Level One and when they feel tempted by Level Two thinking errors, training will assist them in intentionally triggering different thinking processes to help them engage differently.
Two: Utilize Conflict Resolution Coaching. Conflict resolution coaching skills can be taught widely to leadership and staff. Three: Engage Conflict Resolution Specialists. If staff are still not able to resolve their conflict on their own, invest in engaging conflict resolution specialists to assist when the conversation is difficult Level Four.
Through direct, facilitated discussion, people can make decisions together about how to resolve their conflict, and whether they need to change their relationships while leaving their dignity intact. Investing this way will yield positive outcomes for your organization and the people you exist to serve. The book is available on our website. To receive notification of a new blog posting, subscribe to our mailing list or follow us on Facebook , Twitter, and LinkedIn.
Learn more here. Receive a Conflict Resolution Skills e-manual when you subscribe to our weekly newsletter. How conflict escalates The origin of most conflict is usually not so bad, but as conflict escalates it becomes more difficult to resolve productively. Have a Question? Contact Us. Online Training. Training Topics. Public Trainings. Private Training. National Events. Such efforts may now dominate the conflict process. Loss of face, and ensuing retaliatory acts often isolate the conflict parties from bystanders.
This may further exacerbate the escalation mechanisms, because the opportunities for getting tempering feedback about the conflict are reduced.
The threshold to stage 6 is felt to be less dramatic than to stage 5. When the parties start to issue ultimatums and strategic threats, the conflict enters stage 6. Both sides will often issues threats to show they will not budge or lose credibility. Often these threats are issued as ultimatums- either you do this or else.. Once these threats are made, both sides are rapidly losing any control they may have had on the situation.
Both sides essentially force the other to respond more radically and increase the likelihood of violence- as we know a threat to violence only is credible if people are willing to carry it out see Power section. Threats ultimately lead to one party feeling that in order to avoid these threats being carried out, they need to weaken the other side, which leads to stage 7.
It is no longer possible for either side to see a solution that includes their opposite party. Both sides now seek to eliminate the opposition by targeted attacks aiming to maim the other. The counterpart is now a pure enemy, and has no longer human qualities. No human dignity stands in the way of the attacks, the enemy is just an object standing in the way.
Targets may be property, including cars, trailers and horses. The attacks lead to retaliations, often even more destructive. In the frustrated situation, attacks may generate feelings of being powerful and in control, thus giving secondary benefits that reinforce further escalation.
The parties may be prepared to suffer losses, if only there are prospects that the enemy will suffer even larger losses. Malice may become a powerful motive. Superiority is sought in order to ensure ability to block the counterpart in a longer-term perspective. There is no longer any real communication.
At stage 6 the threat strategies build upon at least a minimum of communication: one must know if the counterpart rejects or accept an ultimatum. Threats followed by immediate interruption of communication is a sign of stage 7 dynamics. At this stage ethical norms are subsumed under more pressing concerns. At earlier stages the parties exploited gaps in the norms, now they are cast aside if they are bothersome. This is war, and normal rules do not apply.
The parties see that it is no longer possible to win. It is a lose-lose struggle. Survival and less damage than the counterpart suffers are the main goals. The threshold to stage 8 is attacks that are directly aimed at the core of the counterpart, attacks that are intended to shatter the enemy or destroy his vital systems. At this stage the attacks intensify and aim at destroying the basis of power of the adversary.
Negotiators, representatives and leaders may be targeted, in order to destroy their legitimacy and power in their own camp. The system that keeps the counterpart coherent is attacked, hoping that the very identity of the other side will crumble so that it falls apart. When a party is attacked in a way that threatens to shatter it, it is forced to make strong efforts to suppress internal conflicts.
This increases the stress and the internal pressure within the parties, and leads to an even stronger pressure to undertake further attacks on the other side.
The parties fall apart into factions that fight each other, making the situation completely uncontrollable. The attacks on the counterpart targets all signs of vitality.
0コメント