Posted by Robert Benjamin on October 18, 2000 at 02:54:32:

In Reply to: The Potential for Knowledge Management in Conflict Management posted by Martyn R Jones on October 14, 2000 at 17:14:24:

Martyn

An interesting question. Anwers would probably depend on an individual's definition of KM.

I think the word conflict implies threat and/or counter threat. Furthermore, the sense of threat invokes defense mechanisms and experience rule bases to provide options (avenues) for decision making. Contrary to theory, I believe conflicts always end in a situation where one party loses in one way and probably gains in another. The "opposing" party may also gain in a different area and lose in another.

To resolve any conflict, without lingering resentment, one needs to establish a "fair" compromise. That is a judgement call, as one party's "fair" is another's "unjust".

In order to establish a compromise, both parties need to be absolutely sure of their respective compromise parameters, and be willing to lay them on the table for negotiation. An arbitration mechanism is usually helpful to guide the conflicted parties in this regard.

I see tons of knowledge playing a role in the relatively simple process outlined above. What if the rules of compromise of both parties are in conflict themselves? What if one party is more in tune with his/her/its personal rule base than another?

In my opinion, the only way to resolve serious conflict is to council the negotiation, document agreements, iterate this process until both parties are totally satisfied, cast the agreement in concrete (for now), and enforce the agreement.

There are examples of another way of conflict resolution namely, cut out all the talk and bully the opposition into submission. I win - you lose - that's that. Try again and I'll do the same all over again. The losing party learns that he/she/it does not have enough of a power base to engage in direct conflict. Other ways are sought to erode the opposition's position of power before direct conflict is re-initiated, and often the conflict is engaged via 3rd and nth parties. Intelligence communities refer to this as covert operations.

Bottom Line - Too complex for me. Sure I blew a few mental circuits even writing this junk. ;-)

Regards

Robert

---

Follow Ups:

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: