 |
 |
|
Introduction:
According to Frank Blechman, one of the most useful things
that can occur during a conflict intervention is for the intervenor to be surprised
by a party's behavior or speech. Surprises offer a chance to re-assess the
assumptions an intervenor has made about a conflict and correct any misconcpetions.
He illustrates this point with a story.
| |
This rough transcript provides a text alternative to audio. We apologize for occasional errors and unintelligible sections (which are marked with ???).
Surprises
Frank Blechman
Private Consultant. Formerly at the Institute of Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University
| |
Q: What lessons have you learned over the years doing this work?
A: I said at the beginning that I think one of the key personal
characteristics is a certain level of humility. Related to that and it's very
clear to me that I have no gift of prophecy. So one of the lessons I've learned
is I can't predict what is going to happen next. I can occasionally in a sort of
gambler's way, sort of estimate the probability of certain things happening. But
I am often not very right about that. It is almost always the surprises that
prove most beneficial. When things happen that are unexpected, I can respond to
that as a threat to my expectations or I can recognize that what's happened is
something that I didn't expect to happen and that means that my whole understanding of what
was going on wasn't very complete and that this is an opportunity for me to
learn more, to understand more, to get a more accurate model rather than to try
to stuff the situation back into my expectation. I do view surprises as gifts.
Now sometimes they are certainly bewildering and threatening, but if we can keep
the perspective that there just might be something useful under that pile, then
almost always there is.
Q: Can you think of an example of where you were surprised and it changed your understanding of the situation?
A: I was involved in a board dispute within a health maintenance
organization. It was a not for profit health maintenance organization. The paid
management wanted to change that into a for profit corporation and people who
had been involved in this for a long time really were feeling betrayed and very
hostile. I interviewed everyone and interpreted this in a very intellectual way
as a dispute about economical models. Maybe some issue of social values and
social models. I didn't realize how deeply personalized it was. We scheduled a
weekend retreat to look at some of these issues. Friday night went very well and
I was feeling quite confident. Saturday morning went really well and just before
we broke for lunch one member of the board turned to a number of the members of
the board and then turned to me and said, "Do you mind if I just say
something that has been on my mind?" I thought it was going to be one of
these positive breakthroughs. Instead what the person said was, "This has
been a very nice conversation, but I don't believe you. I don't believe a word
you've said. I don't trust you." Then went on with about a five-minute
tirade about what a lying skunk this other person was.
Obviously this did not make me happy. This really made me feel like oh, this whole thing was going down the tubes." Instead of which, after I picked my teeth up off the floor, what it made me realize was that there was a whole series of personal issues that go way back into
history that involve past fights that I don't understand and some of which don't
even involve these people. The person in that case, the older member of the
board who was spitting at one of the newer members of the board really was using
the new member as a surrogate for a past fight that I didn't even know about,
but it didn't matter. We had to stop the policy discussion and dig out some of
the personal stuff and acknowledge it before we were ever going to move on. I
should have known. If I had probably interviewed better I might have know.
Eventually we
got through that, but if I had tried to say that's inappropriate, that's out of
order, we are here to talk about policy and everybody agreed to ground rules and
now were not going to talk to each other that way. If I had done that, I think I
could have blown up the whole event and I almost did. Fortunately, there was a
break for lunch and it gave me a chance to recollect my wits and talk to people
over lunch and to get other folks to tell me what they thought was going on. And
they helped me realize what was going on was not entirely what I imagined was
going on and it could be dealt with. It was just one of those nasty surprises. I
had nightmares about that for years afterwards, but I've gotten over that now. I
am feeling much better.
|
 |
 |
 |