It’s a given that most people choose to avoid direct conflict… I don’t have empirical numbers to cite, but the anecdotal evidence in this case is overwhelming. Many of us perceive conflict as a waste of resources and energy and as being generally disorderly and uncivilized. Our perceptions of conflict often don’t come from the best examples… a bullying neighbor, courtroom drama, or political posturing. The unfortunate outcome is that so many negative examples of conflict seem to exist because there was the absence of an able and willing adversary to make a countering case.

Conflict is the birthplace of ideas. More importantly, conflict is an opportunity to take old ideas and reshape them. I was reminded of this Sunday at a meeting that I facilitated. Coming into the meeting, there was chaos, competing ideas, and yes, some hard feelings. By the end, there was a brand new idea on the table that addressed multiple concerns, embodied respect for existing rules, and recognized the realities of the situation. This solution was a product of the group that had been at odds, created by themselves and for themselves.

Through an organized process, questions could be asked that revealed the most important concerns within the organization, aside from the initially stated “problems.” In fact, I have often found that many people disguise the true nature of their concerns initially because of the intensely emotional and personal nature of many conflicts. They may fear that if their claims or concerns are not countenanced with other logic and reasons that may actually not be relevant, that their concerns will instead be summarily rejected. Through a safe environment that is honest and balanced, the true problems can be revealed and addressed.

While many ideas had been placed upon the table for consideration, in the end none of the original suggestions were adopted by the group. In this, we all can learn, or at least relearn, some key concepts. First, meetings need purpose and direction. An outside facilitator trained in communication dynamics and conflict resolution can be key in achieving this. Also, when debating between options that bring about stalemate and do not serve to resolve the problem, a third way must be found. I’ve yet to encounter an instance of bitter, ongoing debate between options A and B that could not eventually be solved by finding a way to introduce an option C. This third way is always possible with an open mind, and open heart, and sometimes a little guidance from a trained professional!

Jared A. Chambers