26-08-2016, 09:32 AM
contents.htm (Size: 18.14 KB / Downloads: 4)
{OLD TITLE: Framing: What is this conflict about?} The first part of a conflict assessment is to define what the conflict is about from one's own point of view. What are the key issues? What is your position with respect to those issues? In other words, what are you asking for? Conflict professionals often refer to the process of defining what a conflict is about as "framing." The term "framing" is a metaphor for the process of framing a picture or looking out a window frame. When two people look out a window, their eyes take in the same scene. However, their brains may interpret what they see very differently. One person may focus on the people walking below; another may focus on the traffic in the street; a third on the weather. Each person describes or "frames" the scene differently. Similarly, two people viewing a conflict may frame the conflict differently. One may see the key issue as jobs, while another may define it in terms of environmental quality, or quality of life. Being clear about one's goals, what one is trying to obtain from the conflict, and why that is so important is critical to success. :
Scoping: Who are the other parties involved and what do they think the conflict is about?
After assessing one's own view of the conflict, it is important to consider who else is involved and what their view of the conflict is. We call this part of the conflict assessment "scoping."
Who else is involved?
Conflict professionals often refer to the people involved in a conflict as disputants, or parties. In order to deal with a conflict effectively, all the parties to the conflict must be identified. Often these individuals or groups are divided into categories. "First parties" are the disputants who initiated the conflict--they are the ones who are seeking a change. In legal terms, they are the "plaintiff." "Second parties" are the ones who oppose the first parties. Usually, they oppose the first party's change--they want to maintain the status quo. Lawyers refer to these parties as "defendants."
Other parties may be involved in or are affected by the conflict, even though they have not taken a side. These people are often called "third parties." Sometimes the term "third party" is reserved for people who become actively involved in trying to help the disputants to resolve the conflict. Mediators, arbitrators, conciliators, or judges, for example, are usually referred to as "third parties." In other cases, the term "third party" simply refers to people who are affected by the conflict, but who have not become involved on one side or the other.
How do the other parties define, or frame the conflict?
Often, different parties will describe or "frame" a conflict very differently. Continuing the window metaphor, an adult may look out a window, see a heavy snowstorm and react with dread, while a child may look at the same scene with delight. The adult and the child frame the scene differently because their interests and needs are different. Similarly, people who are in different situations will have different interests and needs, so they too will frame a conflict situation differently from each other.
What factors are complicating the conflict? Complicating Factors
The second step in any conflict assessment is to identify all the other people involved in the conflict, and to identify, as much as possible, how each of them views the conflict. This requires determining the other parties' positions, interests, and needs. This process is even more prone to error, as communication and understanding between conflicting parties is usually poor, and parties may not even agree within themselves what their positions, interests and needs are. In addition to communication problems (which are discussed elsewhere), common scoping problems are:
finding problems, decision making procedural problems, and escalation. These complicating factors tend to intensify or obscure the core conflict, making it harder to deal with effectively. Even when the core conflict is highly resistant to resolution, by limiting (or even eliminating) most of the complicating factors, it is possible to deal with the remaining conflict in a much more constructive way.