Creating Conflict - Emergent Leadership

When I ask people to describe a time they were at their personal best in a conflict situation, they tell inspiring stories of having their interests recognised, challenging abuse, standing up for higher standards of practice, refusing to accept exclusion from decision-making processes, establishing rights for individuals and groups, resisting oppressive use of position or authority, helping achieve beneficial structural and cultural changes in organisations.  The connections between conflict and positive emergent leadership are strikingly obvious, though many of these people would not necessarily see themselves as leaders.  To the contrary, many experience themselves as powerless.  But, engaging in the conflict can often be the beginning of self-empowerment and of their emergence as a leader.

It is a personal challenge to become an advocate or take an oppositional stance - particularly if you sense that you may be articulating a minority view or representing a potentially contentious or marginalized position.  It takes a great deal of energy, awareness, self-development and determination to adopt and maintain such a position in the face of opposing views or interests.  Too often the focus for the individual is on the outer task, the goal, the desired change in the relationship, organisation or community.   Insufficient attention or support is given to the inner-work and self-leadership needed to oppose effectively and ultimately, to transform ones identity from opposer to advocate or leader of the values, view or purpose which motivated engagement in the conflict.

When you tackle tough issues in groups, organisations and communities you can be sure there will be conflict whether hidden or overt.  These differences in perspective are the engine of human progress, though the conflict itself is often a significant aspect of what makes such tough issues difficult to deal with.  Framing the tough issues as conflict, gaining acknowledgement and acceptance of the existence of the contention and raising awareness of the positions, interests and forces at play at an early stage helps honour and affirm those involved and their right to be heard and engaged with.  This raises the likelihood of healthy rather than destructive conflict.  Orchestrating such conflict and facilitating constructive handling of it is not easy even when in positions of power or authority.  It is even more difficult for those who are not.

None of us like to create conflict - yet it often seems like we have to in order to be heard, change an unacceptable situation or live our values.  Some react to what they perceive as unwanted or inappropriate pressure.  Some choose to act or live their lives in a way that unintentionally creates conflict with their nearest and dearest.  Many find themselves in conflict because their interests and needs are threatened and they feel the need to defend them.  Others will be motivated by vision, values or fervently held beliefs that they see as worth standing up for, even if resisted by established institutions or dominant groupings. Yet others will occupy positions in organisations or communities where they see the need for changes that may be opposed by some or many of those affected.  What all these have in common is a valid purpose energises and gives meaning to the conflict.

Ordinary people, social activists, whistleblowers and others who oppose discrimination, oppressive regimes or advocate change may often be experienced as troublemakers, disturbers or disrupters in their communities and organisations.  Personalised attack is used to undermine their credibility, to deflect from the interest, view or value that they represent, and to marginalize or isolate their position and influence.  They are sometimes ignored or deliberately not engaged with to starve their issues of attention and in the hope they will get tired or go away.

Despite the obvious value of their stance, other people may be reluctant to support them, particularly in the early stages.  They may live in a state of uncertainty as to whether they should be advocating such a stance, whether it is worth it, or whether they have any chance of success.  They may have their views pulled apart, their interests or their futures threatened, or stand to loose the privileges they currently enjoy by being compliant, maintaining a low profile or keeping their views to themselves.

Particularly in the early stages of outing a particular conflict, self-sustenance, continual clarification and more effective articulation of their views or vision becomes paramount.  (Regrettably, this can sometimes dominate the parallel need to listen to opposing views and interests and to develop a deeper understanding of the forces at play and the context of the conflicting positions and issues.)  Conscious efforts are needed in order to resist escalation tendencies, which seem to have a momentum of their own, and to maintain a stance of inquiry as well as advocacy.

Most of what we popularly term conflict, i.e. that which has become heated, escalated, and public, stems from the failure of "benign" ways of handling opposing interests and standpoints.  In part, this is because emergent leaders do not have the skills of surfacing conflict to match their motivation.  It can be as much to do with the lack of awareness in our culture about how to engage in a healthy conflict as it is due to the self-preservation instincts of dominant people or groups.  Too often we have had to rely on violence, subterfuge or bloody revolution to bring about the desired changes.   Less destructive, more sustainable ways are increasingly available but require us to focus on development of new social skills and transformative inner-work as well as more effective strategies for achieving our purpose.

The challenges of emergent leadership, because of its conflictual nature, can create considerable tension and strain in our personalities, e.g. between our different needs, our values and behaviour, between our personal identity or role and social expectations.  If we do not attend to the developmental challenges and growth opportunities posed by such tensions, emergent leaders will be less effective in achieving their goals and may fail to make the necessary transition from opposer to advocate and leader thus undermining their purpose and vision.  Most leaders who have made that transition are sooner or later able to recount the struggles entailed in the developmental transformations that they have undergone - often in retrospect as autobiographies of Mandela and others testify.  We don't all have to be Mandela's but they show us what can be done.  Building conflict capability can provide support and legitimate the transformational journey from opposer to advocate, from rebel and disturber to leader.

Thankfully, there is much practical help available now for such a transformational journey, and for appreciating the value of conflict in our developmental journeys, whether in resolving intra-personal dissonance, aligning organisational energies or harnessing social contention.  To successfully complete such journey we must attend to the innerwork as well as the outer work.  Awareness, meaning, and capable action can go a long way toward transforming our conflicts and creating a sustainable future.  We are all capable of leading and getting beyond our fear of conflict can free us up to do so.

Organisations and existing leaders of our communities too, face no less difficult a challenge in supporting dissident voices from below or from the margins.  Their greatness and legacy as leaders and the health and development of their organisations and communities will depend on their ability to engage in healthy conflict and to integrate and harness such difference and diversity, though it may not always appear to be in their personal interests to do so.

Tips for Resolving and Transforming Organisational Conflict:

Occasionally we find ourselves having to deal with a crisis either personally or as a mediator of others where we need to unilaterally recognise, limit escalation, contain and relieve the crisis before we can even begin to deal with the substantive issues.  The other(s) may be unable or unwilling to do so.

Recognise a crisis: There is sense of urgency/ time pressure. Emotions are quickly coming to the surface and heated exchange is beginning to dominate interaction.  Parties are trying to threaten or coerce one another to get their way. Parties are listening defensively, e.g. selectively to pick holes or undermine others.  Parties are using face-saving strategies to protect their self-esteem rather than attending to the issues.  There is an absence of problem-solving behaviour.

Contain the crisis:  Calm your own state with self-affirmations and bracket / temporarily set aside own needs.  Receive the other's comments without interruption or non-verbal rejection.  Place other in control by asking for permission to speak. Repeat the person's comments in neutral tone.  Reflect their emotions as objectively as possible.  Paraphrase in your own words the others view of the conflict and check your understanding until other person acknowledges it.  Request the other's proposed way of dealing with the problem.  Agree process or ground-rules for working on conflict if possible.  Ask for help before the situation gets out of hand.

Limit danger of escalation:  Make self-attributions e.g. acknowledge lack of awareness and responsibility as appropriate.  Avoid interpretations or attributions of other, e.g. of their intentions or motivation.  Acknowledge your feelings of hurt, fear, anger etc. to yourself.  Manage own emotions or if unable to do so, commit to meeting at an agreed future time and withdraw quickly.  Initiate information exchange and self-disclosure.  Avoid face-saving or retaliatory attacks.  Acknowledge the importance of the other's feelings.  Reflect others feelings and discover needs underlying their attack.