In some conflicts and disputes, a contending strategy is preferable.  But most conflicts seem resolved best through problem-solving.  Individuals are more likely to honor agreements generated through problem-solving; a process in which they participate actively in decision-making and "own" part of the solution.  But we will likely encounter people who respond to conflict competitively; how can we convert competition into collaboration?  Here are some ideas.

1.    Establish ground rules.  Prior to negotiating substantive issues, you should negotiate procedures, or "negotiate about negotiation."  In a collaborative environment, people can/should be open about negotiation and decision-making process.  Recognize structural features and constraints and explore the possibilities of change.

2.    Propose a "learning" perspective.  Conflicts and disputes are often challenging to work through. A benefit to the challenge is the learning that can occur, about the issues, the parties, and the relationship.  If disputants see the conflict interaction as a mutual or joint learning opportunity, they may be more inclined to collaborate.

3.    Make trust an overt issue.  Some reasonable level of trust is critical to collaboration.  You can build trust by discussing why parties may not trust one another, and what parties can do to earn and display trust.  You can begin by asking others to express concerns about your trustworthiness.

4    Share information.  Focus on interests and concerns.  Model interest-disclosing behavior.  Minimize ambiguity and uncertainty.

5    "Talk about talk."  Communicate about the dispute settlement and interaction process.  Take stock from time to time about the collaborative process you are using and how well it is working.  Discuss how you are communicating and what parties are learning from one another.

6.    Commit to constructive, competent communication.  This involves the following:

• Active listening (including paraphrasing).  This includes withholding judgments until one understands the other's positions and interests.
• Relevant self-disclosure of information and reactions.
• Check your perceptions.
• Describe behavior and indicate how you are reacting to that behavior.
• Use "I" messages.
• Criticize and evaluate constructively.

8.    Value disagreement; argue collaboratively and constructively.  Respect diversity of opinions.  Encourage inquiry and disagreements that stem from interests.  Keep arguments focused on issues rather than on people.  Supporting "raising doubts" and "constructive skepticism."

9.    Try to understand the views of others.  This is enhanced by:

•  Role reversal - examining and attempting to understand the issues from the other party's/parties' perspective.
•  Bilateral focus - a variation of role reversal, parties share with one another perceptions about what the other is feeling, thinking, interpreting, and thinking.
• Imaging - Each party indicates how it see itself, how it sees the other, how it thinks    the other party would describe it, and how it thinks the other party views itself.  The information is shared.
• Mirroring - a third party interviews the conflicting parties about the difficulties of working together, shares this information in a joint session, and facilitates discussion.

• Employing protective contracts.  A prenegotiation agreement stipulating consequences may establish a foundation for collaboration.
• Employ contentious behaviors to prompt the other to take the problem-solving process seriously.
• If necessary, escalate the conflict to generate a perception of interdependence.

12.    Reduce tension.  Unproductive conflicts and disputes often become highly emotional and personal. Parties become angry, frustrated, and upset.  They display strong commitments to positions, argue strenuously for their side, and rigidity increases.  When discussion turns into personal attack, little promise remains for a productive outcome.  Tensions can be addressed via the following:

• Tension release ar "venting"  - allow the other party to vent emotion (a "cathartic release").
• Recognition that feelings are authentic and legitimate; acknowledgement of the other party's feelings and concerns.  The parties may discuss feelings without "counseling" one another, engaging in appropriate self-disclosure.
• Separation of the parties - declare a recess or call a caucus.

14.    Look at the conflict situation "systemically."  Many conflicts and disputes are mutiple issue and or mutliple party -elements connect to other elements (e.g., coming late to meetings may relate to a perception of lack of respect).  A "systems" view can promote collaborative discussion and actions.  Systems learning techniques include:

15.     Manage and address complexity.  See the conflict or dispute "systemically," recongizing that one issue or element is connecyed to others.  Techniques include:

• Create a "rich picture" of the conflict situation.  Draw a picture or a "mind map" of what you see.  Share your illustration or vidualization with others.
• Use a "single negotiating text;" or "draft discussion text" as a starting point for dialogue.

• Reduce the number of parties on each side (this is very risky in some public policy disputes, because those parties excluded may pursue unilateral BATNAs).  A good way to manage party numbers is to promote "self-nomination" or selection, while requiring a strong, demonstrated, literal commitment to the collaboration process.
• Control the number of physical, tangible issues involved.
• State issues in concrete terms rather than as principles.  If a principle or policy seems to loom as a hidden agenda, then . . .
• Discuss concerns over principles; separate concrete issues from them.
• Focus on exceptions to principle that do not negate the principle.
• Restrict the precedents involved - both procedural and substantive. Try to keep single issues from becoming major questions of precedent.
• Divide big issues into smaller issues; by time, by application, etc.
• Depersonalize the issues.  Separate the people from the problems.
• Distinguish short-term and long-term concerns.

• Superordinate goals - parties look for and find common ground among their short term and/or long term goals and reframe their diescription of the situation and these shared interests into superordinate goals.
• Common enemies - the parties in conflict find a common enemy; a third party who will gain if the disputants do not reach agreement.  Perhaps the "enemy" is the problem itself or those who will make the decision if you do not reach a settlement.
• Agreement on the rules, procedures, timetables, agendas, etc.
• Create long-term visions of the future.

19.     Share power.  Transfer power from the individual party to the collaborative partnership and the process.  Three dimensions of power deserve note: strategic power, dependence power, and resource power.  In so far as possible, support parties' as decision-makers; owners of both process and outcome.  Consider the development of on-going collaborative management groups.
 
20.     Make preferred options more desirable to the other party.

• Give the other party a "yesable" proposal.  Create an option (make an offer) one some issue that the other party will find acceptable.
• Ask for a different decision.  Refine the demand or need: rephrase, reformulate, repackage, reorganize.  Invent options for mutual gain.
• Sweeten the offer rather than intensifying the threat.  Use a "positive" frame.  Rewards are often more enticing than threats.
• Establish objective, agreed upon standards for evaluating alternative solutions or improvements.
• Employ appropriate integrative solution strategies.
• Increase decision space or lattitude.

• "Trial balloon" ideas and options to see how the other party deals with you.
• Backchannel contacts.  Hold informal problem-solving discussions behind the scenes.  Take a "walk in the woods," have an informal dinner meeting at a restaurant, etc.
• Communicate through an intermediary (likely a messenger).
• Send conciliatory signals.  Use a symbolic move to indicate a willingness to problem-solve and negotiate in good faith.   Cards and gifts may symbolize a desire to work through the conflict situation.

[Sources include: Lewicki, Litterer, Minton, and Saunders, Negotiation, 2nd ed., 1994; Rubin, Pruitt, and Kim, Social Conflict, 2nd ed., 1991; Wilmot and Hocker, Interpersonal Conflict, 5th ed., 1998; Gray, Collaborating, 1989; Fisher and Ury, Getting to Yes, 1991; Folger, Poole, and Stutman, Working Through Conflict, 3rd ed. 1995; and Ury, Getting Past No, 1993.]