Saturday, October 31, 2020

Building Towards Equitable Consensus While Handling Conflict

        The important question that groups should ask before entering into any kind of decision-making process is ‘how do we determine what constitutes agreement?’ The definition of agreement can vary widely so this is an important starting point.  Consensus building is a decision-making process that typically involves several stages whereby a group initially diverges in thinking then collectively converges to create a decision or solution that is satisfactory to all. The challenge with consensus building is that it takes time!

During a typical consensus-building process there are two distinct stages that the whole group will need to collaboratively work through.  This includes the diverging and converging stages. When diverging, there will be several steps seen as group activities.   These steps include sharing ideas, hearing out and paraphrasing back what each other states, asking succinct questions for further collaboration or elaboration, and of course brainstorming: An approach that needs to be non-judgmental.  The diverging stage should intentionally invite participation, so open-mindedness exhibits the better starting point.  

The steps in the converging stage of ideas often include merging similar ideas, sorting or ranking ideas based on level importance, challenging assumptions to create or elevate innovative solutions, testing for agreement and calmly dealing with disagreement, and ensuring everyone has a mutual understanding of the potential final idea under consideration.  Consensus-building therefore speaks to a process of collaboration and effective communication.   

As a process, consensus-building is different from what people refer to as “achieving consensus.” Achieving consensus refers to the quality of a decision or the degree of agreement.  A group reporting, “We have a consensus” should mean ‘I can live with the idea’ and ‘I am willing to defend it and commit to any necessary follow through.’ Anything less than that level of agreement and commitment means there REALLY isn't consensus.

Let's now focus on two specific skill areas that are crucial during the consensus-building process: Providing effective feedback and identifying your “natural” conflict handling mode. Positive feedback is more readily and accurately perceived than negative feedback.  However, when frustrated, anxious, or simply confused, it is easy for negativity to creep in and rule the discussion.  Mindfulness guided by intentionality, care, optimism, respect and trust helps keep a positive tone, elevates your leadership, and promotes your standing as a credible, effective self-advocate.  

•Positive feedback fits what most people wish to hear and already believe about themselves.

•Negative feedback is most likely to be accepted ONLY when it comes from a credible source and objective in form.

•Subjective impressions carry weight ONLY when they come from a person with high status and credibility.

        We each have our own conflict resolution style that shapes how we interact with people.  It is valuable for each of us to understand where our “natural” conflict handling mode lies, and to be aware of how others’ styles shape or influence our behavior.  We may have different styles for personal vs. professional situations, family relationships vs. professional relationships.  Conflict resolution is situational.  Rather than believing there is a right or wrong way to handle conflict, think of the options as a hand full of cards so you can select out what fits best for that situation.

Through the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, the researchers describe a person’s behavior along two basic dimensions:

·         Assertiveness, or the extent to which the individual attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns,

·         Cooperativeness, or the extent to which the individual attempts to satisfy the other person’s concerns

By contrast, as noted by the Thomas-Kilmann chart above, consideration of relationship goals compared to personal goals determines the best mode for handling conflict as exhibited through specific behaviors: 

Avoiding: Behavior is based on low concern for personal and relationship goals.  Preference for avoiding conflict is often because one feels he or she doesn’t have the tools to deal with the issue or with others

Accommodating: Behavior sacrifices personal goals to accommodate relationship goals.  When do we typically engage in accommodating behavior?  With significant others.  It’s the relationship we care about.

Controlling:  Behavior is exhibited when there is very high concern for personal goals and low concern for relationship goals.  This is the “power” approach to addressing disputes.  You see this often in the for-profit world, whereby everything is seemingly driven by the bottom line.  Controlling behavior is also highly evident in the parent-child relationship – Most of the viewers here might agree controlling behavior to handle conflict doesn’t work very well with adolescents!

Collaborating:  Behavior exhibits high concern for both personal and relationship goals.  Collaborating takes a lot of time, commitment, facilitation and negotiation skills.  This set of skills are learned or mastered by most of us later in life.  When an agreement is worked out through collaborating behaviors the agreement usually lasts a long time or is seen as durable.

Compromising: Behavior accepts that if you would just give up something, the problem could get it resolved.  Be careful about using this word as typically our culture embraces negotiation or bargaining but compromise is often a trigger word.  It is also a less optimal approach to addressing disputes because if you go into a conflict ready to compromise, you are going to compromise.  In the continuum, compromise is an end-result that usually creates consensus.

Understanding the consensus-building process and the skills needed to reach agreement will empower you as an active leadership partner.  From an educational perspective, this knowledge helps to effectively participate in the pursuit of the learning for all mission.  Knowing how to build consensus through effective feedback and handling conflict optimizes your human potential. 

 

 

To Cite:

Anderson, C.J. (September 30, 2020). Building towards equitable consensus while 

        handling conflict. [Web log post] Retrieved from http://www.ucan-cja.blogspot.com/

 

References

Anderson, C. J. (2017). Examining demonstrated emotional intelligence and

perceptions of inviting schools. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice,

23, 35-61. 

 Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (2016). Fundamentals of invitational education.

(2nd Ed). International Alliance for Invitational Education. Retrieved from:  

http://invitationaleducation.net/product/category/books ​

Shapley, K.L. & Case, B.J. (2004) Building partnerships with parents. Retrieved

from: ​ http://www.pearsonassessments.com/NR/rdonlyres/73E53CF9-64D8-4459-8B11-6BCE9E2668CB/0/Building_Partnerships_with_Parents.pdf ​

 Thomas, K.W. & Kilmann, R. H. (2010) Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument

(TKI). Retrieved from https://www.skillsone.com/Pdfs/smp248248.pdf

 


No comments:

Post a Comment