From Positions to Interests

EXPLORING MEMBERS' PRACTICE ISSUES

"Transformative." That's by what means a colleague of mine describes the courses at the Justice Institute of British Columbia (JIBC) midst for Conflict Resolution. I have to agree. Without a doubt the knowledge and skills I have evolveed through JIBC course work have profoundly influenced in what way I interact with the world around me

JIBC presents education and training m collaborative conflict resolution. Typically the training I have taken includes one as well as the other a theory and practice piece, the latter known as the "coached skills practice component" This primarily involves character playing, in which one partner plays the skilled individual (the individual with some understanding of collaborative conflict resolution), while another plays the unskilled individual. Instructors, coaches and other class participants then proffer the skilled individual positive feedback as well as that for improvement.

An underlying premise of the conflict resolution protoplast taught at JIBC is that generally in conflict we clinch "positions." Positions are reflected in "I will, I won't either/or" statements. In a conflict situation, think of the individuals' positions as tips of icebergs that above the water may gaze far apart. The thing about icebergs is that you can't diocese what is below the surface of the water. There may or may not be an overlap or public space under the water. Just as the main material part of the iceberg lies below the surface of the water, below the tips, motivations, feelings and extremitys lie positions.

An interest-based approach to conflict resolution relies upon uncovering the motivations, feelings, and urgencys behind positions and then generating solutions to appropriate those interests, versus positions, which are usually satisfied by means of "either/or," "mine or yours." It approaches conflict as a riddle to be solved, and in the words of single of the instructors, Arthur Ridgeway, it is an invitation to stand together and approach a question side by side, instead of opposing individual another and becoming further entrenched in our positions.

The course "Shifting from Positions to Interests" is interested with how to get from the tips of the icebergs to what is underneath the water. You may not flat be aware there is something below there to find. In that faculty of perception this approach does rely upon a degree of self awareness, in that it's important for you to understand your possess interests, in addition to having a certain quantity of skill in helping others identify their interests.

Take the following example. You and a companion are planning your annual vacation. You want to make progress to Hawaii (your position) and your companion wants to pass to the Yukon (her position). Getting entrenched in those positions may mean you take separate vacations, or individual person "gives in" and dispose ofs the whole vacation sulking because she didn't achieve to go to her chosen destination. a certain quantity of keys to solving this dilemma collaboratively are to:

* Frame this as a "problem" to be solv together. "What do we want without of our annual vacation?" or "How do we want to disburse our time?" versus an "either/or" question: "Do we move to Hawaii or the Yukon?"

* Talk about what is important and for what cause [i]or[/i] reason it is important. Don't give or ask for justification for a position, for example, "I want to pass to the Yukon because it will be les expensive than Hawaii." That is a justification for going to the Yukon on further exploration, you may find that staying within a predetermined bundle or having an inexpensive vacation are interests of your companion.

* bring yourself in your companion's shoe Each time she takes a position find without why. "I want to make progress to the Yukon because I have always wanted to experience the North." What is it about the North that attracts you? "There's all that vast, unpopulated space. I really want to achieve away from the city." in like manner wherever we go, you would like to lay out some time in the wilderness and away from populated areas? "Yes"

You begin to diocese how your companion has an interest in travelling upon a budget and spending time in the wilderness. You may share those interests, as well as have different interests, of the like kind as not spend too plenteous time getting to your destination. You may have conflicting interests. You want to be delighted with fine dining. Your companion wants to live not upon the land.

What I trust is being illustrated is that by dint of "uncovering and discovering" the interests, you and your companion will be able to generate a number of solutions to your "problem" (oh that all our riddles should be so big!) that will suitable both your interests. Now you have many destinations to make choice of from. Or you might find that each of you could realize your interests met in Hawaii or the Yukon In that case you can flip a com You might also find that you have not many shared interests when it approachs to vacation time, and that probably it would be best to take separate holidays. At least you'll one as well as the other have a better chance of getting your straits met!

Clearly, many of the point to be solved [i]or[/i] settleds we face in our lives are far more compounded than where to spend our vacation. I have ground however, the theories and skills learned are applicable at the individual, workplace and community horizontal In the words of single of my early instructors "Be curious!" You at no time know what interests you'll lay bare that will allow you to work with others to evolve more and better solutions to the vexed questions we all face.