Innovative Conflict Resolution

It seems that everywhere I go these days I’m hearing people talk about “the conversation.”  Even if you haven’t heard the term, you’re knee-deep in it.  Postmodern thought, empowered by the rise of blogs and social media networks like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter, have changed the way we think about nearly everything, from religion to politics to business.  Those who are clued in now understand that the flow of information is no longer one-way; it is, in a very real sense, a conversation.

Marketers can hope to influence the conversation, but they can no longer control it.  A lone blogger can exert nearly as much influence, without having spent millions to develop a marketing strategy.  The same is true for politicians.  Those who have been traditionally controllers of information are beginning to understand this, and it’s driving them crazy.  Why?  Because conversation is, in essence, conflict.  While the old guard of Information Imperialists were used to being in conflict with the competition, very few have really adjusted to being in conflict with the general public.

There is a lot of talk these days about how to use Social Media in promoting whatever it is you are wanting to promote, and businesses are popping up all over to help you catch the latest wave.  However, how many really understand the conflict-based nature of the conversation?

The essence of conflict is our differences.  Using our political system as an example, we all understand that emphasizing the differences between parties has been the foundation of most political campaigns.  However, in both the current and the prior Administration, we can see the difficulties when the conversation shifts: The conflict is no longer primarily between parties (although they keep trying to frame it in this way, which isn’t working) but between the Administration and the Public.

To succeed, a politician – and any one else who hopes to influence society – must understand and be able to embrace – not defeat – that essential conflict, for to end the conflict would be to end the conversation.

We need to change the way we look at conflict. Traditionally, the goal has always been to resolve conflict (it’s even in the title of my blog).  Certainly, there will always be those negative conflicts which need resolution. However, there is such a thing as positive conflict; this is the “conversation.”  In a culture in which the goal has changes from homogenity to diversity, conversational conflicts will be pushed to the forefront instead of being ignored or squelched.

To succeed in our current environment, we need to become comfortable with the concept of conflict.  We should understand what drives conflict and how it works. We need to see conflict not as a barrier, but as a tool.  And as I said in a prior post, we need to be able to see conflict as being potentially positive, and even fun.  Even more than that, I think those who will succeed will be those who learn how to invite people into the conversation, into the conflict.