OBJECTIFICATION AND DEHUMANIZATION - AT THE CORE OF BIAS, BLAME US/THEM THINKING, AND MANY CONFLICTS

WHILE WE ARE KEEPING SOCIAL DISTANCE AND HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON OUR HANDS, LET’S DO SOME CONFLICT RESOLUTION…

OBJECTIFICATION AND DEHUMANIZATION - AT THE CORE OF BIAS, BLAME US/THEM THINKING, AND MANY CONFLICTS

What is Objectification and what does it have to do with Conflict?

In social philosophy, objectification is the act of treating a person as an object or a thing. It is part of dehumanization, the act of disavowing the humanity of others. Bias, the us & them thought process, othering and the blame & shame culture is connected to the concept of objectification. One person sees themselves as in one group and identifies others as in an another group. No problem. One person sees those who are in another group and that group is seen as things, not humans. That's objectification. Meaning that the group of people have been transformed, mentally, into objects. Once transformed into objects, its easy to allow bias and blame and shame and stereotype to go unchallenged. After all:

• an object can't have feelings,

• I can't empathize with an object

• the object is a lessor thing than I am

• all those things are alike.

Do I objectify any groups?

Usually objectification occurs with a lack of knowledge and/or with limited personal experience. Years ago I might have objectified people who live in a particular place. I had limited experience with people from that place and I accepted the stereotypes. My limited, almost non-existent knowledge became rigid and I acted as if the 'objects' (people from this place) were of lesser value in comparison to those who I considered to be fully formed individuals. I negatively objectified--dehumanized-- people from this place. How about you, as you search your experience, are there people or groups of people you might have dehumanized or objectified?

Here's what disintegrates objectification--knowledge and personal connection. In order to work against objectifying the people from that particular place, I spent some time in that place having real experiences. Here's a few other ways to undo objectifying groups of people:

• Pick a role model from that group. My role model is....

• Read about, see a documentary about, study the group...

• Say to yourself 'I am a ...(fill in the blank of the objectified group) and the one thing I never want someone to say about me is....

• Consider whether you yourself have ever been objectified by another person

• Listen to people use the 'we' and 'they' terms (right about now the off-Island/on-Island 'we' and 'they' might be ripe for this)

Objectification and conflict

Sometimes in a conflict the core issue is not actually the topics on the table, but the underlying objectification between both people. This can happen in community cases between neighbors or in business relationships. Over time the conflict has developed because one or both of the disputants objectifies the other. They ascribe the difficulties they are having with the other person, as happening because they are part of the dehumanized group. People cannot resolve conflicts with an object--and so until the objectification is undone, its pretty difficult to make significant progress.

Mediators can sometimes detect objectification during mediation sessions, though we can't easily undo these hardened attitudes. When we say, "I'd like you to put yourself into the position of the other person, and describe the situation from that point of view." it can help to open someone's eyes to their objectification.

There's a lot more to this topic

We've just scratched the surface here. Take a look at some more writing on this topic.

• Othering "belonging must begin by expanding the circle of human concern." article

• Dehumanization "dehumanization is creating an enemy image..." article

• Stereotyping, Bias, and Prejudice in Conflict Resolution powerpoint by Kenneth Cloke--international mediation expert

• People are hard to hate close up. Get closer. Article by Brene Brown.

NEW ATTITUDE - DON’T ASSUME

WHILE WE ARE KEEPING SOCIAL DISTANCE AND HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON OUR HANDS, LET’S DO SOME CONFLICT RESOLUTION…

NEW ATTITUDE - DON’T ASSUME

Assumptions get in the way of conflict resolution

The life cycle of an assumption

"I know exactly what he is thinking." says the neighbor in the mediation session "Look at him, you can see it, just look at him." Or the client in a private session during a corporate facilitation session, "Can't you hear that in her voice, I know she is being dishonest. I can tell just by listening to her." Or, "They are out to get us, they are lining us up like pins and then, wham, here comes the bowling ball." says the employee in a contract negotiation.

All assumptions, and not helpful. I call it snapshot thinking, because in my view, what happens is that one person takes a snapshot and fills in all kinds of information that may or may not be true based on their biases, imagination, fear and limited experience. Boom. You've got a full-blown assumption. It started as a snapshot, a moment in time, and became a full blown epic story. And much of it is inaccurate and becomes a barrier to a peaceful resolution of the conflict.

Its hard for mediators, conflict coaches, facilitators and others in the conflict resolution field to deal with a client's hardened assumptions. Here's how the assumption is created. The individual takes in data. They pick through data selectively. They ascribe a meaning to the data. They believe the meaning they have settled on as true. They then pay attention only to what confirms their assumption.

Dissecting this assumption is sometimes the most important contribution a conflict resolution specialist can provide. In order to resolve a conflict, assumptions need to be put aside. Here's what it sounds like in a mediation--during a private session:

Mediator "So you have said that Robin only wants to hurt you."

• Client "Yeah you can see it in their eyes. You see it too, I know you do."

"Well I'm wondering what it means to you that Robin is willing to be here in mediation."

• "They are just trying to make me miserable, and they are enjoying how hard this is."

"Help me understand where you are coming from. Is there something Robin has done today that shows this?"

• "No you are not going to see it, Robin is on their best behavior with you.

"Is there anything you could possibly see or hear from Robin that would help you to undo your assumption that Robin is out to hurt you?"

• "No there is nothing that would show me that, nothing Robin can do would change my thinking."

The ladder of inference

Start at the bottom of the ladder. The information is real and easily documented. Its the meaning behind that information that becomes someone's assumption. Unless the person does research to determine whether their hypothesis is correct or in error - asks questions, keeps an open mind, considers multiple possibilities, knows that their first reaction is often inaccurate. Once you've climbed up the ladder, its hard to back down. Better to avoid making assumptions right from the beginning.

How you stop the ladder of inference from taking over your thought process? If you tend to jump to conclusions, it may be difficult to re-orient your habitual thinking. Some step-by-step challenges to try:

• Take off your blinders and gather lots of information, some of it might seem contradictory at first. In the above scenario, the observable data was that Rashmi took sick leave. Push yourself to make a list, maybe of 10 different possibilities of what might be happening. All kinds of ideas, some can be unusual.

• Imagine the other person, think about them sympathetically. Try to not jump to conclusions. What would they want you to be thinking?

• When you have the opportunity (in this case that would take time until Rashmi returned to work) check things out with an open mind.

• If you find yourself climbing the ladder, consider what part fear and/or lack of power might play in your reflexive loop. Is this assumption more about you and not the other person?

• If you find yourself creating some epic story, start writing it as a fictional piece--change names to help yourself to clearly distance fiction from reality.

• Do this:

  • The ladder of inference shows how your assumptions lead you through a reflexive loop where your assumptions are reinforced by your selective attention. Article

  • Cinnie Noble is my teacher in Conflict Coaching and her writing is written in a simple and profound way. Article

  • Felix from the Odd Couple teaches you (and the judge and Oscar) about what the word assume means. Video

  If you missed Day 1 through 32 here they are:

  Day 1 Thoughts about conflict https://conta.cc/3d565pG

  Day 2 Conflict Styles https://conta.cc/38URE4h

  Day 3 Listening https://conta.cc/38Z4rTj

  Day 4 Feelings https://conta.cc/33uxop7

  Day 5 Change yourself https://conta.cc/2wrCd6h

  Day 8 Conflict stages https://conta.cc/2wA8rMG

  Day 9 Learned conflict styles https://conta.cc/2y4ySup

  Day 10 Accusations into questions https://conta.cc/2JgUy8U

  Day 11 Underlying needs https://conta.cc/39j5AFd

  Day 12 Slow your roll https://conta.cc/2WSFC95

  Day 15 Bullying https://conta.cc/2QUXn3Z

  Day 16 Accommodation Conflict Style https://conta.cc/3bE2L3g

  Day 17 Using Neutral Language https://conta.cc/3dLDfuF

  Day 18 Identity and Conflict https://conta.cc/3467oR2

  Day 19 Conflict Bubble https://conta.cc/39Ig9BU

  Day 22 Digital Conflict https://conta.cc/39Uop29

  Day 23 Competing Conflict Style https://conta.cc/39UAcgF

  Day 24 Analyzing Conflict https://conta.cc/2XkJ7W5

  Day 25 Values and Conflict https://conta.cc/3c0wHXs

  Day 26 No More Good/Bad https://conta.cc/2UXaFzd

  Day 29 Conflict Services https://conta.cc/2XzUpGi

  Day 30 Compromising Conflict Style https://conta.cc/3cjXoGI

  Day 31 Tone of Voice https://conta.cc/3aeDgV7

  Day 32 Power https://conta.cc/2wK0zbB

  Day 33 Assumptions

  Have a great weekend. Back on Monday. Thank all the deliverers--Postal service, UPS, Cape Cod Express, Meals on Wheels. Wash your hands folks!

  Next Friday will be the last day of the Daily Working From Home message. By then there will have been thirty daily emails over forty days of shutdown. Beginning on April 28th we will be sending out new messages on Tuesday and Fridays--twice a week. Tell your friends to sign up.

  Shameless plug for MVMP--pass it along if you know someone who needs our services.

  Sara

CONFLICT COMPONENTS - POWER

WHILE WE ARE KEEPING SOCIAL DISTANCE AND HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON OUR HANDS, LET’S DO SOME CONFLICT RESOLUTION…

CONFLICT COMPONENTS - POWER

Power in conflict resolution

Much below is excerpted/derived from Dissecting Power and How it Influences Conflict by Ellen Kandell

Power is the ability to influence an outcome or get a task completed. To understand power, it is vital to know the context in which it is being exerted and the other forces and influences in play. In the context of conflict, power is defined as the ability to get one’s needs met. For a conflict to exist each of those involved must have some degree of power and the ability to influence the outcome of the conflict.

Understanding Structural and Personal Power

Power is an elusive concept because it has so many manifestations. Everyone has many potential sources of power, most of which he or she is often unaware. Some are independent of the conflict while others can be enhanced or diminished by the process of conflict. Structural power is derived from the situation. One form of structural power is formal authority. Changes in structural power usually require systemic fixes. Personal power is inherent in the individual, their personal characteristics and traits. Personal power may come from communication skills, training or experience.

Key Types of Power

Formal: The authority given by an institution, by a set of laws or policies or by virtue of one’s position, such as school principal, board president or city council member.

Legal: Rights and choices defined by law or policy. Related are the resources a person has to pursue legal action.

Information: Data and knowledge. If one party to a conflict has information that the other doesn’t then they may have power in a conflict.

Association: This kind of power comes from the connection with other people or groups, such as political entities, trade associations or any other organization.

Resources: The ability to control resources whether tangible in the form of money, labor or time, or intangible, such as reputation and stamina, is a significant source of power

Rewards and sanctions: The ability to confer benefits or rewards and impose sanctions or penalties.

Morals: Power can flow from an appeal to the values, beliefs and ethics or from an attack on the values of those with whom you are in conflict.

Personal characteristics: This kind of power derives from an individual’s inherent make up, such as their perseverance, endurance, intelligence, communication skills, determination, and emotional and physical strength.

Some of these types of power are compatible with each other while others are not. For example:

• A person with tangible resources may be effectively able to use the threat of a lawsuit to negotiate a settlement.

• The use of an appeal to morals may not be effective if one doesn’t have personal characteristics to evoke this use of power.

• In the workplace context, a manager may have formal authority based on her position which was obtained by virtue of her intellect but her power may be diminished if she doesn’t have the skills to manage people on her team.

The amount of power an individual has is less important than how effectively it is marshaled. According to Bernard Mayer in his book, The Dynamics of Conflict Resolution, “Sometimes it is important to use power to change a situation, and sometimes it is necessary to show a willingness to use power.” And sometimes is important to put clear power differences aside and create a more even playing field.

WEDNESDAY SKILLS - TONE OF VOICE

WHILE WE ARE KEEPING SOCIAL DISTANCE AND HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON OUR HANDS, LET’S DO SOME CONFLICT RESOLUTION…

WEDNESDAY SKILLS - TONE OF VOICE

Add this tool to your toolbox

Your tone of voice can cause or calm a conflict

Tone of Voice

Try this. Say 'That's really interesting' in a normal and even-handed tone of voice. Now say it again in a bored tone. Now again in the way you would when you are surprised. Now try 'That's really interesting' with a sarcastic tone. What's the point? The same words can communicate a very different message dependent upon your tone of voice.

These days while we are doing so much communication remotely, we are missing out on much of the in-person body language we usually rely upon. Your tone is highly important to communicate effectively. Many conflicts are resolved or perpetuated by a tone of voice.

Your voice as a tool

You can improve your vocal tone and use your voice more effectively. Do you dislike hearing yourself on recordings? Most people do. Get over it, and start listening to yourself on recordings. Do you notice that you are using a sing-song cadence, and you would like to sound more even-handed? Give it a try. Have you been told you are too bossy and demanding? Listen to see if you can hear it in your recorded voice and try a new tone that is more inviting and collaborative. Would you like to speak more authoritatively? Work on having a more even tone and speaking more slowly. Would you like to use your voice to communicate kindness? Listen to see if you can hear yourself using tone that connotes kindness and caring.

Just like any tool, you can learn to use your voice better and more effectively. It starts with having a goal and intention, and setting forward on a journey toward improvement. And every journey begins with a single step or in this case a single word.

Conflict and vocal tone

This is a pretty surprising statistic. Some research indicates that between 80 and 90% of conflict is related to tone of voice. And under 10% is derived from the actual words. With so much riding on this one tool, it seems pretty important to pay attention to it and work to develop the tone of voice that you want to have.

If you have a conflict, this is an area to which you should pay close attention. Do you tend to have a higher or louder or more clipped and brusque tone of voice when you are in a conflict? There are things you can do to improve. Practice the tone of voice you would like to adopt. Record it and rehearse until you like what you hear. When you are stressed, work to speak more slowly and deliberately. Breathe. Then breathe again. When the adrenaline is flowing, it affects your vocal chords and this stress-filled voice will come across to the other person. You will want to consciously calm yourself so your voice can be a partner in conflict resolution and not a hindrance to the process.

Your voice reflects your thought process, more than you know. If you are angry, your voice will convey this emotion. That is fine if you choose to put this emotion across to the other person. But it should be a choice. You can train your voice to come across more even-handed and calm--it requires some self reflection and practice.

Individual vocal tone challenges

Everyone has a different set of vocal tone challenges. Have you heard from others that they notice something about your voice? Take this helpful feedback seriously. No one can change the actual mechanics of their vocal structure, but like any musical instrument, practice makes perfect and you can learn to use your vocal instrument more expertly. If you would like to be able to use your voice in the service of resolving conflicts, it can be done with some concerted effort.

Do this:

• Record your voice. Do you like what you hear? Pick one specific goal that will help you come across in the way you intend. Keep recording. Or ask a partner to listen to you more carefully and give you feedback.

• Ted talk about vocal tone and leadership,

• Article about vocal tone and conflict in the workplace.

Using the Compromising Conflict Resolution style

WHILE WE ARE KEEPING SOCIAL DISTANCE AND HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON OUR HANDS, LET’S DO SOME CONFLICT RESOLUTION…

I TEND TO USE THE COMPROMISING CONFLICT STYLE

Using the Compromising Conflict Resolution style

In mediation, facilitation and conflict coaching, we work to open up creativity in the conflict resolution process. That's in the upper right corner of the chart above. We help to develop a collaborative process where the result is a new creative problem solving outcome. These are win-win agreements. Conflict is diminished and communication and understanding is increased.

Compromising conflict style is...

We don't always have the time required to do creative conflict resolution. As conflicts arise, our prevalent conflict approach is usually what we use. If you tend toward the compromising style, located smack in the middle of the the chart, then that's likely your go-to approach.

Compromising can be a great method to come to a more fair outcome in comparison with the Avoid, Compete and Accommodate styles. Its a big improvement over these approaches which end up with Lose/Win, Win/Lose or Lose/Lose outcomes. In this context we can say that Compromise is Win/Lose -Win/Lose--a little bit of both for both people.

Imposed Compromise

Many are familiar with the orange story. Here's a quick review. Two sisters want the last orange. They fight. Frustrated mom comes, hears the argument and takes her knife and slices the orange into two halves, handing half each to her two daughters.

Compromise? Well sort of. In this case, its an imposed compromise. The girls didn't resolve it themselves, it was decided by another person--a powerful third party acting as the decider. Fair outcome? Whether its fair or not is up to the disputants, not the decider, so we don't really know. They each got half of what they wanted, it was resolved quickly, bingo bango. We don't really know, because the two disputants didn't get to figure it out with each other. This is important in any conflict resolution process. Someone else deciding is not optimal---though sometimes necessary in the interest of time.

Self determined compromise

If possible, though, allowing those in the dispute to decide what's fair would be better. Preserving their self-determination. Instead of imposing a solution, a neutral mediator would work to help the the two sisters to talk and listen to each other and to begin understand the other's perspective. Through mediation they might come up with an entirely different outcome--and decide it is a fair one that they like. Or they themselves might decide to cut the orange in half and even thought they only would end up with half of what they wanted, it would have been their own compromise, made together through discussion. A compromise determined in this way can help to preserve or build a relationship.

When is compromising style a wise choice?

There are many situations in which compromise might be the best method. For example:

• When differences have been discussed and its time to move on.

• When it is unrealistic to totally satisfy everyone.

• When the goals of both parties have equal importance and merit.

• When the situation requires a quick resolution, even if temporary.

• When there's no time/energy available for collaboration.

• When "splitting the difference" is the fair and best solution.

• When the value of maintaining relationships is more important.

• When the parties can agree to disagree and live with the decision.

Thoughtful Compromisers

Why do people tend to compromise? As per Dale Eilerman, in his article below: "These people are more likely to be objective in their assessment of differences and use factual information when weighing their options. Individuals with a thinking preference typically make pragmatic decisions based on deductive reasoning." Individuals who tend to compromise are aware of other's desires and are willing to engage in discussions to consider each other's ideas and interests. The idea of 'splitting the difference' appeals to their logical reasoning.

When is compromising not good?

Compromising is generally better than the other three styles mentioned previously. Talking it out and ending up with both individuals losing a little as well as winning a little sure seems like a pretty fair way to go. Right? Yet sometimes the material thing at the center of the dispute is not the real conflict--but a stand in for emotional or relational conflict. In this case the compromise may just delay the needed deeper discussion to get to the core of the conflict.

In the case of the sisters and the orange, a compromise was a quick but incomplete outcome. As those who know this classic story remember, the sisters wanted the orange for different purposes. One sister wanted to zest the peel for a baking project. With her half she had half the zest she needed and had to manage the baking with less. A win/lose. She threw the inner fruit away. Sister two had wanted to eat the orange fruit herself, and ended up eating half of what she wanted. A win/lose as well. Had the two sisters had the time and energy to talk the issue out, they would have learned this from each other. Both would have been able to collaborate and come up with a new outcome where both of them each got what they wanted. Having started each with the position, 'I want the whole orange!" they could have ended up with 'Both of us got exactly what we want." A Collaborative outcome--the conflict style that our organization tries to work toward when we mediate.

Do this:

• Read this article about the compromising conflict style

• If you tend to be an compromiser, look to see if you can push past the 'split the difference' quick fix. Can you collaborate on a new and creative way to resolve the conflict?

• The compromise style in business, when it works and when it doesn't.

• William Ury is looking for the 18th camel, looking for the win/win. Video here.