The document discusses several perspectives on the nature and causes of conflict. It defines conflict as an expressed struggle between parties with incompatible goals and scarce resources. Conflict arises from unsatisfied human needs according to Burton, and from inequalities in social structures according to Galtung. Coser argues that conflict sometimes serves useful social functions by stimulating change. The document then covers negotiation theory and strategies, including separating people from problems, focusing on interests not positions, inventing mutual gains, and insisting on objective criteria.

1. Definition of Conflict
“Conflict is an expressed struggle between
at least two interdependent parties who
perceive incompatible goals, scare
resources, and interference from others in
achieving their goals.”

2. Burton – Human Needs
 Burton says that conflict stems from
unsatisfied human needs
 In conflict, people represent their interests,
but not their underlying needs; however,
they will use power and coercion to meet
those needs

3. Galtung – Structural Violence
 Inequalities embedded in the social
structure lead to violence and conflict.
 Unless those underlying inequalities are
solved, then violence will continue
 Prime example is lower-class people dying
because health care resources are
granted to the upper-class

4. Coser – social function of conflict
 Conflict is not always dysfunctional for the
relationship within which it occurs; often, conflict
is necessary to maintain such a relationship
 Conflict not only generates new norms, new
institutions…it may be said to be stimulating
directly in the economic and technological realm.
 If Coser is correct, and conflict serves a socially
useful function, then should conflicts be
resolved?

5. Game Theory
 Zero-sum game
 fixed pie
 People assume that they can either win or
lose.
 If I win a quarter, they lose a quarter – the
sum is always zero
 you give up nothing, because it means the
other side wins what you give up

6. HISTORY
 Social movements:
 Gandhi and nonviolence – movement to free
India of British Rule
 Women’s suffrage movement, 1848-1920
 Lech Walesa and Solidarity in Poland
 Nelson Mandela/Desmond Tutu and the
movement against Apartheid in South Africa
 Based off each other, and off Thoreau’s
essay “Civil Disobedience.”

7. HISTORY
 Thoreau said:
 Two times when open rebellion is justified:
 when the injustice is no longer occasional but
a major characteristic
 when the machine (government) demands
that people cooperate with injustice.
 Thoreau declared that, “If the government
requires you to be the agent of injustice to
another, then, I say, break the law.”

8. Escalation of conflict
 Conflicts escalate in both scope and
severity
 Conflicts can escalate constructively or
destructively

9. Destructive Conflict
 Characteristics of destructive escalation
 parties become less flexible
 goals are narrowly defined and rigid
 primary goal is to defeat the other party – assumes
the other side must lose
 becomes protracted and intractable
 Characteristics of destructive agreements
 damages relationships
 promotes inequality & power imbalance
 outcomes are imposed unilaterally
 often requires redress or revenge
 outcomes are often oppressive to one side
 DOES NOT SOLVE UNDERLYING CAUSES

10. Constructive Conflicts
 Constructive conflicts are not the absence of
destructive elements
 Characteristics of constructive escalation
 interaction changes often
 flexible goals/objectives
 guided by belief that all parties can win
 Characteristics of constructive agreements
 strengthens relationships
 restores equality
 recognizing the other parties as legitimate
 using benefits/promises rather than threats/coercion
 find mutually acceptable solutions
 Conflict is actually solved

11. Conflict Continuum
 Negotiation is at the bottom because negotiation
theory is the base for all forms of conflict
resolution (mediation, arbitration, even
diplomacy)

13. Negotiation Theory
 Positional Negotiation
 Positions are the stance you take and your
proposed solution
• “I want $3,000 for this car”
• “Stop taking my stuff – you have to ask me first.”
 Positions are your statements of what you’re
willing to give
 Positional negotiation starts with two
positions and attempts to find a middle
ground between them, or barter until one
party gives in to the other position.

14. Positional Bargaining
 Hard vs. Soft positional bargaining
 Hard bargaining – make threats, damage
relationships, demand concessions from other
party, goal is victory, search for one answer
you will accept, apply pressure
 Soft bargaining – you get taken, sacrifice your
needs for relationship, trust other party,
disclose your bottom line, try to win friends,
search for an answer they will accept

15. Principled Negotiation
 1. Separate People from Problems
 2. Focus on Interests not Positions
 Topic interests/goals
 Relational interests/goals
 Identity or Face interests/goals
 Process interests/goals
 3. Invent solutions for mutual gain
 4. Insist the result be based on some
objective criteria

16. Separate people from problems
 Negotiators are people first
 every party in a negotiation has emotions and ego,
and can have misunderstandings
 The relationship needs to be taken into account
in all negotiations
 Perceptions – does truth matter?
 understand their perceptions to come up with better
solutions
 Emotions – the higher the stakes, the higher
emotions run
 Communication – all negotiations have
misunderstandings

17. Negotiation Interests not Positions
 Positions are something you decided on –
what you’re demanding as a solution
 Interests are what got you there
 For every interest, there are several
positions you could take, and vice-versa
 To negotiate interests, identify them
 ask why? what are they getting from position
 ask why not? what are they not getting
 most common interests are needs-based

18. Types of Interests
 T.R.I.P.
 Topic, relational, identity/face, process
 Topic and Process interests
 external, negotiable, substantive, tangible,
expressed
 Relational and Identity interests
 internal, non-negotiable, usually not
expressed aloud, intangible (values)
 DRIVE all conflicts

19. Topic and Process Goals
 Topic interests:
 what do we want? what are we fighting for?
 either both parties have the same goal, or
both parties have opposing goals
 Process interests:
 what communication process will we use?
 process goals appear when low-power party
cries unjust process or unfair fight

20. Relational Goals
 Who are we to each other?
 How will we be treated?
 How much influence do we have over the
other?
 How interdependent are we?
 At the heart of all conflicts, but rarely
articulated
 Relational goals must be met in order to
solve underlying issues

21. Face or Identity Goals
 Who am I in this conflict?
 You can save or damage your own face or
the other’s face
 If face is destroyed, it must be restored
(saved) before any other conflict goal can
be addressed
 When face is damaged:
 people dig into their positions
 creates losers who “get back at you” next time

22. Ways to restore face
 How we save our own face:
 rationalize actions
 claim unjust intimidation
 dig into our position
 damage other’s face
 How we save other’s face:
 help increase their self-esteem
 avoid giving orders or directives
 listen carefully and legitimize their concerns
 No one wants to look like the loser

23. More about types of interests
 Interests overlap
 all conflicts have multiple goals
 relational and identity goals are always
present
 different goals have primacy
 parties in conflict rarely have same goals with
same primacy
 Interests are disguised
 relational and face goals are presented as
topic and process goals

24. More about interests
 Goals/Interests change
 goals change as they’re met or as they’re
frustrated
 Prospective goals
 what you want as you’re preparing
 Transactive goals
 goals that emerge during the conflict
• shift as negotiation occurs
• can become destructive (esp. face)
• can be sacrificed (esp. topic)
 Retrospective goals – set up for next time

25. Invent Solutions for Mutual Gain
 Easiest solution in a negotiation is to split
the difference between the positions
 In order to have more options to choose
from, you need more solutions
 Brainstorm
 Broaden your options
• shuttle between the specific and the general
• invent options of differing strength
• change scope
 Make a bigger pie (game theory)
• look for shared interests and goals
• split differing interests
 Turn it into reaching a common goal

26. Insist on Objective Criteria
 Use a “Fair Standard”
 market value, such as “blue-book value”
 professional standards
 precedent
 scientific judgment
 Use a “Fair Procedure”
 Flip a coin, lottery, use a 3rd party, “I divide, you
choose”
 Agree to the principles first
 Not a way to strengthen your position – a fair
standard must be fair for both parties