“Intractability” is a controversial concept, which means different things to different people. Some people on the initial BI project team intensely dislike the term, as they saw it as too negative: intractable conflicts are impossible to resolve, they say, so people think they are not worth dealing with.
Drawing from the larger body of general research on conflict framing, the concept of identity frames illustrates the various ways in which people view themselves in the context of specific conflicts. It also allows us to think about how individuals who are part of a larger group are influenced by their affiliation with and participation in that group.
Frames are psychological lenses or assumptions that affect how people see and interpret the world around them. Process or conflict-management frames are the assumptions people make about the right — or best — way to approach a dispute
When individuals or parties enter into a negotiation process to resolve conflict, they will bring a certain orientation to the table in their effort to settle the conflict. The two most basic orientations people adhere to when entering into negotiations are cooperative or competitive.
Today CEDR launches an exciting new initiative, the CEDR New Dialogues programme. This is offered to young and emerging leaders in business and the community, and we are inviting applications through self-nomination or recommendations.
Creating and claiming value are two of the most fundamental aspects of negotiation strategy that exist in tension with one another. In any negotiation, the parties must decide whether to be competitive, cooperative, or some of both. (David Lax and James Sebenius call this the “negotiator’s dilemma.
For my first five years of teaching middle school, many of my units involved debates. Students loved them. They were actively engaged and enthusiastic about their roles. After studying conflict resolution, I realized that debates reinforce unproductive communication habits. Negotiations and simulations, designed to teach cooperation, demand that students demonstrate flexibility, critical thinking, empathic listening, clear speaking, and creativity.
Why should we even listen to them? They have nothing to say to us. They’ll just make us angry. They lied to us, and we can’t trust anything they say. Anyway, they can’t possibly win, if there is any justice. What they did was wrong, and blatantly illegal.
The definition of the word identity varies according to who is using it and why they are using it. In many fields, identity differences are seen to be a root cause of conflict. Psychological, especially social psychological explanations of conflict draw upon social identity theory as one of the primary explanations for conflict.
Breaking a conflict into facts and values helps students make sense of the types of perspectives that drive conflicts. This is useful not only as an entry point to conflict analysis, but also as an essential research skill. Learning the distinctions between facts, values, and opinions will help students evaluate their sources more objectively.