understanding conflict causation and escalation · understanding conflict causation and escalation...

25
Bob Hosea 2014 Presenter: Bob Hosea, Ph.D. Associate Ombudsman American Red Cross IOA Conference Concurrent Session: Understanding Conflict Causation and Escalation

Upload: vudang

Post on 28-Jun-2018

251 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Bob Hosea 2014

Presenter:

Bob Hosea, Ph.D. Associate Ombudsman American Red Cross

IOA Conference Concurrent Session:

Understanding Conflict Causation

and Escalation

Bob Hosea 2014

• Please take a moment to read the case study (Conflict between peers) provided in your handout.

• The case study will be incorporated into the presentation discussion to provide examples of the presented materials.

Case Study: Alfonso & Denise (Conflict between peers)

Bob Hosea 2014

Bob Hosea…

• Associate Ombudsman, American Red Cross

• Ph.D., Conflict Analysis and Resolution

• Internship, Office of the Ombudsman, NIH (2012)

• Developed and administered (2004-2010) Nova Southeastern

University’s Student Mediation Services providing conflict

coaching, mediation, and training services to students,

employees, organizations, and athletics.

• Has served as a dispute resolution adjunct professor, published

articles, presented at conferences, and provided consulting and

training to higher education institutions.

Presenter Bio Conflict

Analysis

Bob Hosea 2014

• Some of the significant interdisciplinary theoretical perspectives

that offer insight for explaining conflict causation and escalation,

supporting ombuds’ proactive and intervention work.

• Decision-making process as it relates to and impacts conflict

causation and resolution.

• Using theoretical perspectives as a tool in the analysis of conflict

when coaching others and developing options for resolution of

disputes.

Note: This presentation provides ombuds with awareness of possible

theoretical explanations for conflict causation and escalation but does

not advocate for any particular theoretical explanation for conflict.

What we’ll cover today:

Bob Hosea 2014

• When coaching a visitor to your office do you

consider how the conflict was triggered?

• Does this awareness provide guidance

for developing a visitor’s conflict management

competencies and resolution options?

• What is your knowledge base for analyzing

conflict causation and escalation?

• Understanding and awareness for conflict causation analysis is a

significant competency for assisting visitors. Further, the ability to

develop a visitor’s conflict analysis competency broadens their

skills for resolving current and future conflicts.

Explaining conflict causation

Bob Hosea 2014

• Assists in educating party(s) regarding the possible

reasons their conflict occurred and escalated.

• Assists in developing options for the conflict’s

management and resolution.

• Informs our own practice awareness, both proactively

and for resolution strategizing.

Benefits from awareness of

causation theory:

Bob Hosea 2014

• As we listen to a party’s story we consider possible

explanations for the triggering and escalation of the conflict.

• The story telling analysis can be imagined as the peeling

away of the layers of an onion.

• As you listen and ask questions you peel away the outer

layers, hearing and recognizing behaviors contributing to

the escalation of the conflict.

• Continued probing and analysis helps you to identify

suggestions for the root cause(s) or underlying reasons for

the conflict’s occurrence (core of the onion).

The “onion” as a metaphor for

conflict analysis

Bob Hosea 2014

An example explanation for a

conflict’s causation and escalation:

Threat to sense of security:

Human needs theory

Equity theory

Psychodynamic theory

Attribution theory

Bob Hosea 2014

Our understanding of conflict and its resolution is informed through a

variety of scholarly disciplines. A selection of theories from these

disciplines useful for our discussion of conflict causation and

escalation include:

• Social Construction

• Reasoned Action Decision-making

• Human Need and Need for Security

• Trust Development

• Identity and Face Saving

• Equity

• Psychodynamic

• Attribution

• Systems

Selected theories for this

discussion:

Bob Hosea 2014

As a child, how did you learn about conflict?

• Social Construction suggests knowledge creation occurs through our

social interactions via language. Understandings of reality, self, and

the world (knowledge) are products of social interactions not the inner

workings of the human mind. Further, these understandings are

specific to one’s history and culture, resulting in different interpretations

of the same idea or event by different individuals, groups, and

societies. (Gergen, 2007)

• Our knowledge creating interactions are routine-ized and

institutionalized. (Burger and Luckman, 1967)

• Question: How many words in your vocabulary did you actually look up

in a dictionary? So, how did you learn these words?

Social Construction Theory (Developing conflict understandings and strategies)

Bob Hosea 2014

“A real or apparent incompatibility of party’s needs or interests”. (Bush and Folger, 1994) “A perceived divergence of interests, or a belief that the parties’ current aspirations cannot be achieved simultaneously”. (Rubin, Pruitt, and Kim, 2003) “An expressed struggle between at least two interdependent parties who perceive incompatible goals, scarce resources, and interference from the other party in achieving their goals”. (Hocker and Wilmot, 2007)

What is conflict?

Bob Hosea 2014

Mapping a Conflict

Precipitating

Interaction

Trigger Point (Value, Need, Identity)

Impact

(internal reaction)

Consequences

External

Reaction

Assumptions

(motive/intent) Boundary

External

Conflict

Internal

Conflict

(Source: “The (Not So) Merry-Go-Round of Conflict” in: C. Noble.

(2012). Conflict management coaching: The CINERGY Model)

Bob Hosea 2014

Mapping the “Internal Conflict”

External to self

Awareness of behavior (physical or verbal)

Incompatibility of party’s interest, goals, etc. creates a struggle between the parties.

Internal reaction (emotions, feelings)

Resulting perception of threat to beliefs

Recognition of incompatibility with own beliefs (values, interests, goals, etc.)

Assumption generation

Determination of response External reaction

Precipitating interaction

Internal to self

Decision making process

Bob Hosea 2014

Theory of Reasoned Action (Decision-making process for explaining behavior)

Bob Hosea 2014

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs postulates that “needs” are the primary influencers on an individual’s behavior. Behavior results from tensions experienced when a need is present or unmet. (Maslow)

As each level of needs is attained we become less preoccupied in that level and seek achievement of the next level of needs. Unsatisfied needs are prime motivators for actions (conflict) necessary to attain the unsatisfied needs. (Burton)

Human Needs Theory (Explains conflict causation)

Physiological needs basic life needs: food, shelter, warmth, etc.

Safety needs (Threat control) protection, security, law, stability, etc.

Love and Belongingness needs family, affection, relationships, etc.

Esteem needs achievement, status, reputation, etc.

Cognitive needs knowledge, meaning, self-awareness, etc.

Self-actualization morality, creativity, problem solving, etc.

Bob Hosea 2014

Trust…”an individual’s belief in, and willingness

to act on the basis of the words, actions, and

decisions of another.” (Lewicki, 1998)

Trust development model (Lewicki, 1996):

Stage 1: Calculus-Based Trust – Risk-reward calculation that initiation of

trust will produce consistent behavior and positive benefits, or result in

punishment for inconsistency.

Stage 2: Knowledge-Based Trust – Trust is strengthened through knowledge

development about the other over time, allowing for predictability of

behavior.

Stage 3:Identification-Based Trust – Trust is solidified through development

of identification with other’s wants and needs, creating understanding,

appreciation, and sharing of similar preferences.

Conflict resolution efforts can focus on rapport and relationship rebuilding

strategies if the parties are open to regaining trust.

Trust Development Theory

Bob Hosea 2014

Identity – Jones and Brinkert (2008) suggest

identify can be summed up with two questions:

Who are you? Who do you want to be?

Face - Perceived or actual threats to one’s “face”

(i.e., social identity, reputation) can cause conflict and escalate

existing tensions between parties. Actions such as casting doubt on

someone's perspective , competence, or honesty, or placing blame can

be perceived as devaluing or “face threatening”. In turn, defensive and

image-protecting behaviors are attempted to “save face”.

Conflict resolution requires the promotion of collaborative actions

supporting and protecting parties “face”. These actions can include

apology and reframing negative comments in a favorable manner.

(Isenhart and Spangle, 2000)

Identity and “Face” Theory

Bob Hosea 2014

Suggests that we become conflictual in situations where justice is distributed unfairly, in situations where we become aware that there is an unfair or an inequitable distribution of something of value. It is interesting to note how our definition of equity or the fairness of something can change depending upon our role, position or point in time.

Resolution results from examining the harm and injustice caused and restoring balance by apology and reconciliation, compensation, and revision of the rules and norms causing the harm and injustice. (Isenhart and Spangle, 2000)

Equity Theory

Bob Hosea 2014

Individuals approach problems from the particular psychological/emotional state (anxiety, fear, aggressiveness, guilt) they are experiencing at the moment the problem occurs. These psychological states influence our assumptions and perception of choices available to us for how we react to the problem. Examples include:

Aggression as an internal drive may cause people to act out even though they know better because they feel it is their only option, Displacement of anger where you know you can’t yell at your boss so you take it out on someone else.

Conflict management strategies include efforts to redirect and focus this negative energy into constructive outlets.

Psychodynamic Theory

Bob Hosea 2014

Attribution theory suggests that upon experiencing an event, individuals

evaluate the event to determine or attribute causation for the resulting

positive or negative outcome and then create a cognitive or behavior

strategy for controlling future outcomes. Attribution attempts to explain

the occurrence of a conflict by attributing it to something about the

person or situation.

Some ways we do this:

• Blameworthiness – assign responsibility for failure.

• Globality – cause of problem is seen as narrow and

specific to a situation or wide and explains many situations.

• Intent- belief that conscious decisions or planning was involved.

• Locus – assumptions about where the problem lies.

De-escalation comes about by exposing “misperceptions created by

inaccurate attributions”. (Isenhart and Spangle, 2000)

Attribution Theory

Bob Hosea 2014

Views interactions (individual, family, group, and

organizational) as part of a much larger system

wherein all influence each other, causing harmony

and disharmony to the larger system.

Conflict occurs when:

- People engage in continual redundancy of the same conflicts,

- One part of the subsystem becomes ineffective,

- Expectations or power is exceeded by one person or part of the

system causing an imbalance to occur throughout the system.

Resolution comes from examining the whole system to identify ineffective

parts or processes that contribute to the system’s disharmony.

Systems Theory

Bob Hosea 2014

• Alfonso has just experienced a difficult conversation with Denise.

• Alfonso makes assumptions about what he experienced. The assumptions inform his attitude, intention and behavior for addressing his experience. (Reasoned Action decision making process)

• His assumptions cause him to experience a threat to his job security. (Human Need for Security)

• His security threat may be experienced as a threat to his reputation and he may seek to blame someone to save his image. (Face, Attribution)

• Earlier that morning, someone rear-end Alfonso’s car. He has remained in a frustrated and angry mood all morning. (Psychodynamic)

• Part of Alfonso’s assumptions about his experience with Denise is that he knows it is unfair to him and his other co-workers yet it is being tolerated by management. (Social Construction, Equity, Systems)

Case Study: Alfonso & Denise

Bob Hosea 2014

Bob Hosea

Associate Ombudsman American Red Cross

202-303-7884 work

[email protected]

CONTACT

INFORMATION:

Bob Hosea 2014

Take a few minutes to read thru this scenario.

• What theories would you suggest help to explain this conflict’s occurrence?

• What theories would you suggest help to explain the continued escalation of the conflict?

• How would you use this information for developing the visitor’s understanding and how would you explain this information to them?

Case Study: Janis & Colleen

Bob Hosea 2014

Questions ~ Comments