Settling Differences, 27 09 2025
Conflicts are a pivotal movement for they offer both a challenge and an opportunity. It can rewrite an individual’s life narrative or define a turning point in the history of an institution. The ideal way is to seize the opportunity and resolve it, be it the US tariff challenge or a person laid off. Despite its importance, conflict resolution is not adequately discussed or taught despite history providing a lot of lessons.
Nelson Mandela and Archbishop Desmond Tutu approached the post-apartheid era in South Africa to resolve the emotive and explosive conflict in a unique way providing us both inspirational and insightful lessons. They changed from seeking retributive justice of an “eye for an eye”, to restorative justice, of working together to shape a combined future. It had the traditional four steps used in conflict resolution, but with an interesting twist:
Stage I: Conflicting Idea: The root of most conflicts is in contrasting narratives. Opposing parties hold divergent visions of what is right, valuable, or feasible. Each believe that they alone are right. During apartheid, the white ruling regime saw control as stability, while the oppressed black saw liberation as justice. They met at Mont Fleur and began with an agreement to identify their differences.
The first step to resolution is not to forge an agreement, but to recognize and acknowledge the differences. They identified four scenarios−Ostrich: of ignoring the main difference and hoping it will fade away, of Lame Duck: to accept their inability to solve the problem and work around it, Icarus: of overconfidence in solving the issue, named after the Greek myth of a bird with wax wings that melted when it flew too close to Sun, and the Flight of the Flamingos: to describe collective action seen in unity and celebration.
Like the iconic African heroes showed, all conflicts have all the four options. But the first step in resolving the conflict is to identify the source of the difference.
Stage II: Conflicting Actions: Ideas become actions. Hence, the focus is on the nature of ideas that are encouraged. If differences are the focus, protests, boycotts, and violence emerge. But if agreements are encouraged, it fosters dialogue, discussion and understanding which form the base for conflict resolution. The need for action is high, hence channelize it to collaborate, not contest.
Stage III: Exploratory Interactions: Here the search for shared purpose begins. This is the pivot. The focus here is to listen and learn, not preach and convert. The focus is on exploring each other’s motives, fears, and hopes. Diverse insights help, hence involve a wider group of stakeholders. Blending desires of both the groups and addressing their fears is the way out. It means looking for win-win solutions. This is what the Flight of Flamingos communicate, of shared vision and plan for collaborative action.
Stage IV: Collaborative Actions: Finally, conflict evolves into co-creation. New initiatives, collaborations, and actions emerge, cementing fractured relationships. Autonomy is respected, while purpose and resources are shared equitably. Restorative justice is in play as the truth is told, and wounds are acknowledged to heal not avenge, and restore dignity. These four stages are not linear progression but often involve back and forth movement. When the conflict is resolved, we do not see negative peace in the absence of conflict, but a positive peace in active. If deep wounds of multi-decade problems like apartheid can be healed, can we not resolve all our differences amicably?
Social Profiles