[ICYMI] How to Autopsy a Conflict

How you get started with clients who need a situation resolved?

What are the steps you take to assess the dynamics?

These are great questions that, in order to answer fully, would require several blog posts covering psychology, sociology, theology, legal and other areas. However we are going to forego all of that.
Instead, we are going to focus on the post-mortem analysis of a conflict.
In the medical field, post-mortems occur when a pathologist must determine the cause of death of a human body.
Autopsies are performed either to answer legal or medical questions and tend to be either external, or the more common one that lay people think of, where a body is broken up and sewn back together.When a conflict communication consultant arrives on the scene, it feels like we are performing a post-mortem. And, in essence, we are performing a relational one.
Three steps are required to perform a conflict post-mortem:

  • Determine the players and their positions,
  • Answer questions about their motivations and goals,
  • Propose solutions that will benefit everybody.
Sometimes the solution involves changing an organizational or personal culture and that approach is what we’re all about here at HSCT.Here at HSCT, we deeply believe that changing your personal culture first can lead to changing your organizational culture.
A conflict consultant (or mediator) is called into a situation where the conflict is alive and well.
As a neutral third party, that person (typically us) has no idea what is going on.
Or, they may have only a tangential idea based off of something they were told by either a third party to the conflict, or a person involved in the conflict directly who may be trying to sway the third party participant in their favor.
Messy stuff.
So, us (or an organization like ours) enters the conflict. Our principal conflict consultant talks to all the parties involved and attempts to determine with at least 50% accuracy the answers to three questions. And yes, this is incredibly difficult.
Here are the three questions:
  •  Who’s lying to us about the situation and their role in it?
  • Who’s telling us the truth about the situation and their role in it?
  • Who doesn’t care and wants the situation to “go away” so that they “can get back to their real lives!”?
And yes, in case you are wondering, we have actually had clients say that last one to us.
The answer to the first question—who’s lying— helps us determine what direction we go in to propose resolution to the issue at hand. We may propose a mediation, one-on-one coaching with the conflict participants, or outside resources (i.e. therapy) in addition to whatever else the parties may need.
The answer to the second question—who’s telling the truth—helps us determine who needs the most direct intervention first.
In the case of a conflict involving violence against children, elderly or other individuals who are at-risk, the answer to that question is always, the victim is telling the truth. Period. Once the person being victimized is removed then we can successfully manage other areas of the conflict. Or, disengage from it completely.
The answer to the third question—who doesn’t care—helps us determine who to ignore and whom to persuade as a potential ally to advocate for solutions that may benefit everybody in the conflict.
This is a tough position to take, because sometimes conflict participants say that they don’t care, when in reality they do. Or, they may be saying that they don’t care as another way of saying “I’m emotionally exhausted by this issue.” Conflict avoidance is a way to resolve conflicts, just not a preferable way.
Emotional exhaustion, apathy, victimization, disengagement, deceit, power games, these are all the energies that animate a conflict and keep it going and reproducing, like a cancer in the body.
Asking these three questions allows the principal conflict consultant at Human Services Consulting and Training to make a determination regarding the best path to take to resolution.
Originally published on July 3, 2013.

Download the FREE E-Book, The Savvy Peace Builder by heading to http://www.hsconsultingandtraining.com/e-book-the-savvy-peace-builder/ today.

[Strategy] Leading Through Obligation

If you are a manager in an organization of any size, with any mission or scope of responsibility, it is your obligation to lead.

#FakingIt

Now, obligation is a loaded word, filled with the stresses of accountability, responsibility, and eating last in a world where everyone wants to eat first.

Obligation comes along with the word “honor,” which, as a verb, means to “fulfill (an obligation) or keep (an agreement).

There is a tacit agreement between leaders and followers: Leaders set a tone, provide a secure space for initiatives to be implemented and then codify action through words and deeds. Followers implement the initiatives as they are proposed, rally behind the leader in times of stress or conflict and promote the tone of the actions.

At least, in a perfect world.

Unfortunately, we live in a world of imperfection, mixed motives, lies and deception and selfish pursuits.

In this world, leadership is even more critical and, at the core, requires human leaders to sacrifice resources (material, emotional and even spiritual) in order to accomplish a greater good for their followers—even when they believe that the greater good is wrong.

  • This ability to sacrifice marks the difference between politicians and statesmen.
  • This ability to sacrifice marks the difference between role models and celebrities.
  • This ability to sacrifice marks the difference between leaders and followers.

A leader’s responsibility is not to chart a course for the followers and then blindly lead them there, in spite of everything.

A leader’s responsibility is to chart a course for their followers (after actively listening to their followers) and then convince, persuade, cajole and move the followers toward accomplishing those goals.

This process requires an understanding, and an acceptance of, the definitions of obligation, honor, responsibility, accountability, character and honor.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/

The Percieved Urgency of the Actual Urgency of Mindfulness

There’s actual urgency and perceived urgency.

watna-batna

Actual urgency is a chemical spill on the shop floor. Or a heart attack that a midlevel manager has on a Friday afternoon.

Perceived urgency is everything else.

One of the main struggles that people have with time management is balancing perceived urgency versus actual urgency and a big part of the issue focuses around being here. Now.

Thinks about that.

Being here now is the essence of mindfulness.

Deeply integrated and linked to meditation, mindfulness requires individuals in an organization to really balance the priorities of someone else’s actual perceived urgency, with the demands of the moment.

And the next moment.

And the next.

Mindfulness seems like a new wave thing, in all of the business journels and on LinkedIn, but it has long been the purview of people of a spiritual bent.

But, to be realistic, we must admit that if an individual works forty to eighty hours a week with other people, there better be a way to decompress and unbundle actual urgency versus perceived urgency.

-Peace Be With You All-

Jesan Sorrells, MA
Principal Conflict Engagement Consultant
Human Services Consulting and Training (HSCT)
Email HSCT: jsorrells@hsconsultingandtraining.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HSConsultingandTraining
Twitter: www.twitter.com/Sorrells79
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jesansorrells/