After having experienced plenty of conflicts throughout my life, including street fights to more sophisticated legal cases, I’ve become an avid researcher in the field of Conflict Resolution. My shelves are stuffed with books on the subject, and the library in my town is considering charging me for excessive use.
If I’m feeling challenged by having a disagreement with someone I love, I can find some comfort by thinking of a good phrase that I came across several years ago. It’s something like, “If two individuals were in complete accord on everything, then one would be insignificant.”
Accepting this, I grant myself the right to participate in the fight fully in the knowledge that there’s an important lesson to be learned.
No matter how many the pages are within a volume and a lot of them are nicely padded, They generally advocate a process that includes one:
1. Nullify emotion
2. Find out the motives behind the conflict.
3. Take a look at other options
4. We agree on which is the most suitable
5. Use the one you have chosen
6. Examine the proposed solution.
I will go over each step in detail; however, before I do so, I am of the opinion that there are some prerequisites or ground rules that have to be approved by both parties prior to the process even beginning. The idea”All’s fair in Love and War “All’s Fair with Love and War” seems to me to be an open invitation to misuse.
Rule 1: Be respectful:
Both sides may be resentful of the sight of one another; however, if they decide to resolve the issue in a mutually acceptable manner, they should admit that.
(i) NEITHER of them are perfect and
(ii) Each will have its own set of specific idiosyncracies
To whom each is entitled.
Rule 2. Commitment
If the dispute is so serious that it warrants resolution, it is crucial to give full commitment to reaching a mutually satisfactory conclusion.
Rule #3: The mission
In the case of a company where there is an official Mission Statement, this can be extremely useful in determining the relevancy or significance of the respective assertions. In the case of informal relationships, i.e. outside of the business world, then creating a mission statement could be very beneficial. It doesn’t have to be a legally binding document signed in blood. However, the more understanding each side has of the other’s wishes and requirements and desires, the more likely your relationship to be successful.
Rule 4. Listening ability:
The old tale of hearing two of your ears at once is real – how of you have heard about someone being criticized because they “listen too often”. To be successful in resolving conflicts, both sides need to feel that they have been validated by the fact that they’ve achieved their goals.
There are many obstacles to listening. Perhaps one of the most frequent is the tendency to “switch off” prior to the time that the other person is finished. Most of the time, it’s as a result of the assumption that it is because we “know what they’re likely be saying” and then devote our time to coming up with a response. This results in it are that “listener” is only able to hear part of the story while the “speaker” feels dissatisfied and unfulfilled. In the effort to be heard, the volume of voice is increased, and the entire interaction is ruined to the lowest degree of disdain.
There are many other barriers to listening, and to explore them in-depth would complete this entire article. To focus on this piece, I will suggest that “Poor listening Skills” is a plight that affects the majority of us. I believe that consciously trying to enhance our abilities to listen will lessen the requirement for formal resolution considerably.
After establishing the rules for our personal Marquis of Queensbury rules and regulations, we are now able to go back to the new system. The first step is to eliminate emotion is far more simple to say than completed. This is a highly controversial topic, which we’ll investigate in greater depth.
Step 1 Nullify emotion.
The first part of the procedure is much easier stated than accomplished. What can you do when on the level of our intellect, we realize that we must present your case in a calm, logical way, but all we really want to accomplish is grab and smother the life from our adversaries? Perhaps, we get so emotional that we want to burst into tears over the unfairness of the whole thing.
However, in our current society, we’ve learned that neither one of these actions is acceptable. If we allow ourselves to our urges, then we’re considered to be unstable or even bizarre. We then put it in a bottle and count to ten, take a deep breath and then tell ourselves that we’re being emotionally overwhelmed.
It’s the way that “civilised” people are doing. But which of these kinds of behaviour is more truthful? If we are angry or upset, then isn’t that our true feelings? If we deny these feelings, isn’t that a lie? I would suggest that this is the exact situation. We’ve become so accustomed to hiding our feelings that a lot of us don’t even know who we really are. “DENIAL” DENIAL has an intriguing acronym that stands for Don’t even notice I’m lying.
What do I mean by suggesting that when circumstances don’t go our way that we let out whatever we feel in that moment? What about the people who get involved? Absolutely no! What I’m proposing is that we are able to OWN our emotions without harming any other person.
It is now common knowledge that feelings that are suppressed or ignored don’t simply disappear. They remain just beneath our minds, waiting to be seen. The issue is that preventing them from seeing is similar to playing with a ball on the beach in the water. The time we put into keeping it in the play takes us away from energy that could be used to accomplish other tasks. It is possible to keep them under control through our teens; however, when we hit middle age, this can take its burden. What do yesterday’s emotions have to do now? When we are caught in a conflict, and our feelings are rising, perhaps the issue isn’t with the current situation right now, but perhaps it’s because of our “History Buttons” that are being forced.
The word “stress” has finally been given some credence; However, we often blame things that aren’t our own. My boss always is this, and my wife will always be this. If we can pinpoint an explanation for the issue externally, it prevents us from focusing on the actual issues. If we see that the other person is “making us feel angry”,, naturally we’ll respond in a defensive manner. How can we determine whether our anger stems from the current circumstance or something else from the past is being provoked? One of the biggest indicators is to discern the pattern. How many times have you been confronted with the feeling of déjà familiarity? Life is a process of creating difficult situations to allow us to gain knowledge.
This “Blame-The-Other-Guy” culture has prevailed so far because we haven’t had the level of self-awareness necessary to help us learn personal responsibility. However, it’s not only technology and science that are changing. Today, there are a variety of methods and tools to assist us in learning to act more reflectively.
If we find ourselves with conflict instead of taking a deep breath in anticipation of the feelings to ease, we can actually take the time to think about our thoughts. As we count up at the number 10 (or 100 if is needed), We can attempt to recall the past experiences that made us feel exactly the same way. This isn’t the easiest task to do for any person, but if opposing parties are able to accept this approach and agree to it, they will not only create the two sides to win and a better relationship, but that relationship is likely to be benefited.
I believe that the majority of people would be in agreement that “nullify emotions” is a lot easier said than accomplished. However, we are able to recognize how to utilize our emotions when they are activated during conflicts. If we are aware that our emotion (in this moment) isn’t in relation to how the circumstance requires and our buttons for history are being forced.
Step 2 Examine the causes that led to the conflict.
This may not be as simple as it appears. What could start as an argument about the lid’s position placed down or up often be a sign of a bigger issue? In relationships that last for long, when the amount of minor disputes seems to have increased and gotten worse, it’s almost likely that there are larger concerns at play. If both partners have confidence in themselves and have an agreement for them to “Put the Relationship Prior to Self”, Then third mediators may be required.
In more casual interactions, like those that happen at work or at a business, the issue could not be as obvious as it appears.
I love the tale of the two teenage sisters battling for the one orange in the home. Everyone was convinced that their needs were greater than that of her sister. It was only when the good old Mum intervened to find a win-win-win solution identified. Following a discussion, it was found that one girl needed fresh orange juice while another wanted to bake a cake made of orange with only the peel.
In this stage of the investigation, the aim is to collect as much pertinent, even if it seems insignificant, information as is possible. When both sides are united in this process, they could inspire each other to think of the most creative way feasible.
Step 3 Think about alternative plans of action
In all likelihood, there is a chance that some of the animosity and apathy will be gone in the near future, and a bit of cooperation could have made its way into the mix. Instead of having just two totally polarized options, there right now is a wide array of options. Based on this list of possible solutions, each option can be ranked according to the likelihood of solving the issue.
Step 4 Identify the best procedure to take.
If the best option may not be clear, there’s a helpful practice that can be carried out that can almost guarantee an outcome. It’s very easy to attempt, and it is also a fantastic indication of how committed each person is to the common good.
The process involves each participant acting as an attorney for the opposing party. Party 1 uses as much imagination, logic, and imagination as it can to ensure that the other party’s viewpoint is completely taken into account. Party 2 then reciprocates on behalf of Party 1. Although there is no guarantee in this world, it is among the most efficient tools I’ve ever utilized.
Step 5 Implement and monitor
This last step is essentially uncomplicated. After the best option has been determined, it’s only an issue of implementing it. If the resolution calls for changes in behaviour and monitoring is necessary. The more deeply ingrained conflicts, the more time is needed to reinforce the different steps that were agreed upon. If, however, the other person has gained enough understanding to realize that their behaviour is not acceptable and they are able to choose to “do things differently”.
The effort to reduce the subject to less than 2000 words is quite ambitious. If two people believed and behaved exactly the same manner and behaved in the same way, then one would be insignificant. Our diversity makes the world an intriguing place. If we could implement some of the principles that I’ve been promoting in this blog, like being respectful to others, maybe we can contribute to making the world a little more peaceful.