How can we manage and resolve conflicts between stakeholders in our CO?
Why is it relevant?
Learning how to effectively manage and resolve conflicts between stakeholders in COs is crucial for ensuring the success and sustainability of these initiatives. Conflict is a natural occurrence when diverse individuals and groups come together, each with their own interests, perspectives, and expectations. By understanding conflict management strategies, CO practitioners can address disagreements in a constructive manner, fostering a collaborative and inclusive environment. This not only helps to prevent conflicts from escalating and hindering progress but also promotes transparency, trust, and mutual respect among stakeholders. Furthermore, effective conflict resolution enhances the overall credibility and legitimacy of the CO, as it demonstrates a commitment to fair and inclusive decision-making processes. Ultimately, by actively learning and implementing conflict management techniques, organisers can navigate and leverage conflicts to generate innovative solutions, build stronger relationships, and ensure the long-term success of their CO.
How can this be done?
Negotiation
Negotiation is a widely used and cost-effective method of resolving disputes in the construction industry, allowing the involved parties to maintain control over the resolution process. To achieve a successful negotiated settlement in a conflict, four key characteristics should be met: fairness, efficiency, wisdom, and stability (Moura & Teixera, 2009). Fairness ensures that all parties have an equal opportunity to present their perspectives and interests. Efficiency focuses on reaching a resolution in a timely and cost-effective manner. Wisdom involves making informed decisions based on sound judgment and expertise. Stability aims to establish a durable and long-lasting resolution that minimises the likelihood of further conflicts arising. By incorporating these characteristics into the negotiation process, a positive outcome can be achieved for all parties involved.
Negations are often divided into two types: cooperative and competitive. Cooperative negotiation, also known as win/win negotiation, involves a different approach compared to competitive negotiation. According to Fisher and Ury (1991), there are five fundamental elements to this approach:
Separate people from the problem: Rather than viewing the opponent as someone you dislike or who intends to harm you personally, consider them as someone with whom you can solve a problem through a mutually beneficial solution. It is essential to focus on the problem at hand instead of personalising the negotiation.
Focus on interests, not positions: In organisational settings, the underlying interests are what truly matter for effective problem-solving, rather than merely asserting your own position. Negotiators should concentrate on understanding the reasons behind their demands and seek solutions that address their interests.
Generate options for mutual gains: Instead of focusing on how to divide a fixed pie, it is advantageous to explore ways of expanding the benefits for all parties involved. Competitive negotiators often strive to maximise their own gains, while win/win negotiators seek creative solutions that enhance mutual benefits.
Insist on using objective criteria: When negotiation involves criteria that are agreed upon and recognised by all parties, the likelihood of reaching a satisfactory agreement increases. Win/win negotiators rely on mutually accepted and objective criteria to evaluate the outcomes of their negotiations, promoting fairness and legitimacy.
Consider the best alternative to a negotiated agreement: Negotiators should carefully assess the potential consequences of not reaching an agreement through the ongoing negotiation process. By considering their alternatives, negotiators can better understand the value of finding a mutually acceptable agreement and avoid potential drawbacks.
On the other hand, competitive negotiations may require an alternative approach. Various principles have been identified for competitive negotiation with conflicting stakeholders. Perhaps the most prominent approach was outlined by Fisher and Ury (1991), who suggested a five-step method to negotiating:
Refrain from launching personal attacks and instead adopt an impartial perspective.
Actively listen to and acknowledge the opposing viewpoint, striving to find areas of agreement.
Focus the discussion on finding solutions that meet the interests of both sides.
Utilise the other party's ideas as a foundation to facilitate their agreement.
Present proposals in a way that makes it challenging for the other party to refuse.
These five-steps are supported by a list of thirteen accompanying principles for a negotiator:
Establish commonly accepted facts.
Separate people from problems.
Base your position on principles, even if your opponent tries to make it personal.
Emphasise equality principles.
Ask questions instead of making statements.
Explore the principles of the other side.
Listen, rephrase, and clarify your points.
Take time to consider the problem and prepare your response; avoid making immediate decisions.
Present your reasons before proposing.
Present your proposition as a fair solution.
Share your perspectives on the consequences of reaching an agreement or not.
Give the other side an opportunity to influence the outcome of the negotiation process.
Conclude the negotiation in a conciliatory manner, even if you do not fully feel it.
Mediation
Mediation is a conflict resolution process in which a neutral third party, known as a mediator, assists individuals involved in a conflict to negotiate and reach a mutually acceptable agreement (Moore, 2014). There are strong ties between negotiation and mediation, and the two approaches are often used in conjunction (Currie et al., 2017), particularly when those involved in the dispute are not familiar with common patterns of behaviour in conflicts or be aware of the various options for resolving their differences (Bollen & Euwema, 2013).
In order to structure and implement mediation processes, a six-step process is often used:
Introductory Remarks: The mediator facilitates introductions, creates a non-threatening environment, and establishes their neutrality, while outlining the participants' roles and briefly addressing the main issue.
Statement of the Problem by the Parties: Each party is given an opportunity to present their story, allowing them to frame the issues and providing the mediator with emotional information.
Information Gathering: The mediator employs open-ended questions, active listening, and summarising to delve into the emotional undercurrents and build rapport between the parties.
Problem Identification: The mediator strives to find common goals and identify the issues that can be settled or prioritised for resolution.
Bargaining and Generating Options/Reaching an Agreement: Through various methods like caucus sessions or proposals, the mediator facilitates option generation, negotiation, and the exploration of potential solutions leading to a final agreement that resolves the conflict.
Reaching an agreement: Private sessions with each party separately are conducted to accelerate negotiations, allowing for confidential discussions, brainstorming, and the surfacing of underlying fears to find common ground and possible solutions.
The Community Engagement Good Practice Guide (The Policy Project, 2020) also provides a range of guidelines for stakeholder engagement practices, including the management and mediation of conflict situations within communities. In particular, the section of the document focusing on 'Good practice engagement when involving communities' details key approaches that can be used to allow (conflicting) stakeholders to work together, and foster joint problem solving. These include: advisory groups, citizen's panels, co-design processes, and deliberative forums.
Arbitration
Arbitration is a way to solve disagreements in a formal and controlled manner. Instead of going to court, those involved in the dispute agree to have a private person or a group of people called arbitrators decide on the outcome of the conflict. These arbitrators are qualified, impartial and chosen by both parties involved or by a mutual agreement.
Moura and Teixera (2009) identified a four-stage approach to the arbitration process:
The parties agree to settle any current or future disputes through arbitration. This is called the arbitration agreement.
The conflicting parties choose an arbitrator or a group of arbitrators together.
The arbitration procedure begins when one of the parties takes the initiative to address the dispute.
The final stage is the award and enforcement of the arbitrator's decision. This decision is typically considered binding and cannot be changed, except in specific circumstances mentioned previously
Useful resources
GUIDELINES: The Community Engagement Good Practice Guide (The Policy Project, 2020) provides guidelines for adopting effective community engagement practices, including the management of conflict situations amongst stakeholders.
COOKBOOK: The WeObserve Cookbook (WeObserve Consortium, 2021) provides comprehensive support for CO practitioners, including specific pages on stakeholder management
"You may also be interested in..."
References
Bollen, K., & Euwema, M. (2013). Workplace mediation: An underdeveloped research area. Negotiation Journal, 29(3), 329-353.
Currie, D., Gormley, T., Roche, B. and Teague, P. (2017), “The Management of workplace conflict: contrasting pathways in the HRM literature”, International journal of management reviews, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 492-509.
Fisher, R., Ury, W. L., & Patton, B. (2011). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Penguin.
Moore, C. W. (2014). The mediation process: Practical strategies for resolving conflict. John Wiley & Sons.
Moura, H. M., & Teixeira, J. C. (2009). 17 Managing Stakeholders Conflicts. Stakeholder Management, 286.
Last updated