The Chair and Dispute Resolution

Article in Conscious Chairman - Dispute Resolution
by: Steven Bowman
Copyright 2007 by Conscious Governance. All rights reserved.
You may forward this in its entirety to anyone you wish.

The best way to bring more awareness to the issue is by asking questions:

* How did you arrive at that conclusion?

* What are the perceptions, experiences, reasoning on which your belief are based?

* What are your grounds for holding the views you hold?

The chair must choose to remain conscious and to continually look for evidence that confirms or disconfirms the disagreement - by not having a fixed point of view and seeing everything as just 'an interesting point of view'. If you don't do interesting point of view, you do alignment and agreement or resistance and reaction with the point of view which will lock everything up in polarity. When the process is locked up in polarity, unresolved tension will remain in the organisation.

Maintaining 'no fixed point of view' is the basic tool for sustaining a high level of consciousness. The more consciousness the chair can sustain during disparity, the more possibilities they will be able to perceive and receive; therefore, the more options they will have; therefore, the more effectual they are. The less conscious the chair is during this dispute situation, the fewer the possibilities are visible; therefore, the more rigid and mechanical the process will be; therefore the less effective the decision will be.

The way to assure a conscious resolution is to seek the solution which will make all sides contented and still be practical. Conscious solutions must be based on the attitude that resolution occurs not by attacking the negative, but by fostering the positive.

Step 1:
Identify and verbalise the real issue being discussed. Do not take a fixed point of view

Step 2:
Determine whether any existing policy covers that issue.

Step 3:
If a policy applies to the issue, determination should be made in accordance with the policy.

Step 4:
If there is no policy, or only a partially relevant policy, try to establish where there is common ground on the issue. Do not take a fixed point of view

Step 5:
(a) Elicit any common obj ectives;
(b) verbalise them and pass them as a resolution; and
(c) do the same with any other points of agreement.

Step 6:
(a) Try to identify the precise areas of disagreement (which may be about side issues or about means rather than ends);
(b) consider whether all or any objections can and/or should be met;
(c) consider whether compromises are possible; and
(d) decide whether unresolved matters need to be dealt with by the Board.

Step 7:
If a decision is required, decide whether it needs to be:
(i) a specific policy decision; or
(ii)a decision to set specific constraints on administrative action.