Greetings Birgitt, Thank you for your detailed explanation of how conflict resolution and OST weave together in your practice. You captured what has been the deepest learning for me about OS when you said: Most frequently, conflict is resolved in either of these processes by the participants themselves, without anyone else needing to be involved. It is not because the people necessarily wanted to resolve the conflict, but because they want to get on with the business opportunities for which they have passion and recognize for themselves that the conflict needs to be resolved to get on with it. Their passion takes them beyond their attachment to victim behavior, their passion takes them beyond their attachment to conflict . When I think about some of the employment mediations Ive been involved in, I think of the myriad overlapping issues and people who were talked about as contributing in some way to the conflict, but who were not involved directly in the mediation because they were not the primary participants in the conflict. And I think about the people who would sit in my office drawing diagrams of how the organization could work if things were restructured to better suit the people who worked there, and then throwing up their hands because their ideas were too big for the process that was offered to them. Those issues felt too big for mediation because the stated task, the given, was to resolve the conflict between a small group of people, and not to restructure the organization. I can see how in these kinds of situations, opening up the space and invoking the law of two feet could lead to dramatic and positive change within an organization. I can also see how upper management might resist large-scale opening space and change, and might desire and ask for mediation as a way to resolve the most obvious and pressing conflicts within the organization without requiring THEM to significantly engage or change. Someone here recently said something about working at providing people as much space as they can take. I think thats right. For example, mediation is often much better for individuals and organizations than the grievance process. If management is willing to go with mediation, but isnt ready for OS, then mediation might be the best we can do. Ive also seen organizations engage staff in collaborative negotiation trainings, to help people learn to solve problems on their own before they turn into larger problems. That also seems to me to be a health-inducing decision very much in keeping with the values of OS .. in OS lingo, a way of teaching people how to open space in a circle of two. I think mediation also has a place in situations that OS doesnt approach (or hasnt yet approached, to my knowledge). Im thinking of situations where people perceive it is not in their best interest to invoke the law of two feet. Sometimes the conflict really does need to be dealt with openly and directly between the people who are in it. In those situations, mediation can be a very simple, elegant, and powerful process. In many ways, like OS. Also a little different. I think people who are in intense conflict who come to mediation experience considerable stress and anxiety about the conflict and the mediation. >From what I know so far, they need more support than the typical OS participant. As a result, most mediators openly engage at a deeper level with participants than does an OS facilitator (as I understand it). Mediators dont engage in an effort to control or to solve the problem, but to provide enough understanding and emotional safety that each person can tolerate the stress of sustained interaction with the person they are in conflict with. Sometimes I think of mediation as creating circles of two: me and A, and then me and B, and then back again, talking about what has happened, how it felt, and how it feels. As those circles become comfortable and A and B relax within their individual circles with me, learning to trust that they will be listened to and understood, they gradually reach out to each other. For a time, they hang onto their relationship with me as support, and we create a circle of three. As they become more comfortable, they leave me behind, and create their own circle of two. (This is my favorite part. I think of myself as blending into the wallpaper of the room .. present but unnoticed.) Often something difficult will be said, fear will rise, and one or both will reach back to me for support, and were back to a circle of three. I will help summarize or clarify or validate, working toward deeper understanding, the fear will diminish, and they go back to their circle of two. Eventually, if they choose to, they will reach a new understanding, and perhaps a formal or informal agreement. It seems to me that OS and mediation and other processes are tools. My husband, the carpenter, has many tools. Each is ideally suited for different tasks. His skill is to understand the best use of each tool, and to use it accordingly. I think the same is true of the work we do.
Julie
