New to the site? International Mediation and Intractable Conflict Jacob Bercovitch January Intractable conflicts have been with us for quite some time now.
January As conflict escalatesadversaries begin to make greater threats and impose harsher negative sanctions. There is often a greater degree of direct violence and both sides suffer heavy losses. In some cases, these conflicts spiral completely out of control. Given the highly destructive role that escalation plays, it is important to develop strategies to limit and reverse this process.
De-escalation involves changes within each of the adversaries as well as new forms of interaction between them. In most cases, de-escalation does not occur until the parties have reached a prolonged stalemate in which both sides are being harmed by continuing the confrontation.
Once the parties realize this, they are more likely to Project management conflict resolution essay willing to negotiate.
Once initiated, de-escalation tends to proceed slowly and requires much effort. Many small steps must be taken before more significant de-escalation strategies can be initiated.
These include gradual reduction in tension GRITde-escalation negotiations, media managementand various efforts to strengthen relationships between adversaries. One way to avoid the dangers associated with escalation is to limit the extent to which a conflict becomes more intense and severe.
Relationships that do not escalate easily are said to be high in stability. Various factors contribute to stability and make some conflicts resistant to escalation.
First, conflict-limiting norms and institutions can limit the severity of conflict. Such expectations act as "ceilings on normal behavior as rules of any competition. Outside actors can also aid in preventive diplomacyusing diplomatic efforts to de-escalate conflicts BEFORE they become violent.
Preventive diplomacy measures that aim to prevent conflicts from becoming overly severe include early warning responses and violence prevention options.
Democratization can help parties to develop nonviolent and just mechanisms for resolving any disputes that arise. In addition, the fear of escalation can be important in limiting the extent to which conflict escalates out of control. Indeed, conflict is less likely to spiral when people are aware of the potential for such spirals and concerned about the consequences of escalation.
They can agree to "cut losses" if the struggle escalates too far, or avoid entering struggles in which entrapment seems likely. For example, they may establish rumor control teams or other rapid facts-verification processes to prevent rumors from developing and quickly spreading.
They may also utilize escalation-limiting language to ensure that any statements made about their grievances are not unnecessarily provocative. The establishment of social bonds tends to discourage the use of harsh tactics and reduce the likelihood of escalation.
Such bonds include positive attitudes, respect, friendship, kinships, perceived similarity and common group membership. And many note that an effective way to combat polarization is to forge sentimental bonds between two groups by making them feel they are a part of the same larger group.
Common membership in crosscutting groups produces "bonds of perceived similarity and common group identity between these individuals. This process of humanization makes it much more difficult to justify the use of heavy violence or aggression, and is therefore a powerful tool in limiting escalation.
De-escalation But what can be done when conflict has already reached a significantly high level of intensity? In these cases, parties must turn to de-escalation strategies to counteract the escalation process and move toward a reconciliation. Conflict de-escalation refers to a decrease in the severity of the coercive means used and in the number of parties engaged in the struggle.
De-escalation can be directed away from intense animosity or toward increased cooperation. Fortunately, people in an escalated conflict can only do so much damage to each other, and for only so long.
At this point, neither party can escalate the conflict further. The point of maximum conflict intensity and destructiveness has been reached, and neither side anticipates that the balance of forces will change so that it may triumph.
If they refuse to end the stalemate by yielding or withdrawing, they must work together to find a mutually acceptable way out. Hostility decreases, the tendency to retaliate lessens, and the level of coerciveness declines. Conditions that Encourage De-escalation "Dramatic events, including sharp, sudden increases in tensions and unilateral bids for peace, often motivate the turning point of mutual de-escalation.
The processes of de-escalation occur within each adversary, in the relations between adversaries, and among parties in the social environment. These changed conditions produce a new context in which de-escalation policies are more likely to succeed.
Social-psychological and Organizational Changes The process of de-escalation that takes place within each adversary includes various social-psychological changes and organizational developments. These processes help people to recognize their own responsibility for the conflict and to reframe the conflict so that a mutually beneficial solution seems possible.The Core Class "Every day I use what I have learned.
To be a team player, to listen to the opinions of others, to try to be empathetic to the needs of others, and go that second mile. The fourth journal paper- ‘Understanding the role of politics in project management’ identifies organizational politics as one of the causes of conflict & reveals that successful project management is linked to the ability of a Project Manager to understand its importance to make it work for project success.
Conflict resolution is conceptualized as the methods and processes involved in facilitating the peaceful ending of conflict and urbanagricultureinitiative.comted group members attempt to resolve group conflicts by actively communicating information about their conflicting motives or ideologies to the rest of the group (e.g., intentions; reasons for .
Project managers routinely deal with conflict, both from internal and external sources. This article provides a framework for the organizational conflict process, and discusses such common organizational causes of conflict as reward systems, scarce resources, uncertainty over lines of authority, differentiation (or interdepartmental friction), and poor communication.
Sep 30, · Conflict Management Michael Schmalzer Southern New Hampshire University Seminar in Project Management QSO Term 14TW4 Abstract Project managers utilize different resolution styles and recommendations for specific situations to resolve conflict. Conflict Management in the Pygmy Culture - The way people behave within conflict is a strong indicator of whether peaceful resolution is a possible outcome of conflict management (Eunson, ).