by Ashok Panikkar .How families and businesses typically resolve conflict in India- Twelve easy steps towards completely destroying relationships and bankrupting oneself. .When families and companies quarrel amongst each other who do they normally go to for succour? How do they tend to resolve them? At the risk of generalizing, but to make a larger point, in my experience most disputes in India go through certain fairly predictable phases:.1. When differences surface, the first reaction is to pretend to oneself that there is no problem. Bilkul no problem!.2. When the parties cannot hide the fact from themselves anymore, they then (often unconsciously) collude to hide the conflict from others. No Issues..3. When the strained relationship and circumstances start getting unbearable, the parties then start talking to their perceived allies about it- which is where the back- biting and the bitching begins. Toxic seepage.4. When the parties start to lose money or sleep over the conflict, then ‘well wishers’ get into the picture and start ‘advising’ the parties- this usually results in pressure to “adjust” and “accommodate”. Advice aur Adjust .5. The next stage is to bring in the big guns, the respected elders (aging Mothers, Swamijis, successful business folk and leaders in the community. These people usually have credibility with the feuding parties and try and cobble together a “compromise”. Fifty-Fifty.6. At this point there is usually some kind of “resolution”, in that a truce is declared amongst the parties to relieved smiles all around; the sharing of sweets; and the avowal of friendship and goodwill towards all and sundry. Problem khattam!.7. When the “resolution” breaks down it starts with the parties withdrawing from each other and sulking in their corners; this turns into back biting and bitching and finally into open confrontation (personal, public or legal). Chal dikhata hoon!.8. At this point the big guns come back to the picture, but with their powers considerably reduced. Sometimes even bigger guns are asked to step in, usually with little result. Ego problems!.9. Finally it ends up in court where it can stay festering for years until the case is heard. Vakil sahib?.10. If the case is finally heard and a judgement is pronounced, there emerges a winner and a loser. Often both parties emerge losers, with financial, emotional and relational losses that are astronomical. Satyanash!.11. Whether the dispute is resolved or not, the conflict has now moved from the original issue of money or land or a single act of disrespect, and stories start getting crystallized with heroes and villains clearly defined. Izzat ke savaal hai!.12. The conflict has now become institutionalized, it is now an integral part of the identity of the parties and of future generations. It is here to stay. We are like that only..While most conflicts generally follow this trajectory, there are variations on the theme that include the neutralizing of one of the parties or sometimes even the absolute vanquishing or destruction of the other. What is important to recognize is that most conflicts tend to be resolved through the brute application of force or the adjudication by a higher authority. Rarely if ever are both parties given a chance to understand each other by rebuilding their communication or relationship. In the process valuable relationships get destroyed; people do not develop new conflict resolution skills; and learning for the individual and society itself comes to a halt as people entrench themselves in old rigid positions that reinforce old beliefs and notions of victim and oppressor..It is fashionable and reassuring for many well-meaning patriots and nationalists to talk about how a three thousand year old culture has many indigenous ways of dealing with conflict. The truth is that the world has changed. India is itself changing at an unprecedented pace. What worked three thousand, three hundred or even thirty years ago will not work today, and to persist to think so will mean will blinding ourselves to the immeasurable pain and cost that conflicts cause..In a heterogeneous world we need new ways of dealing with disputes. Autocratic and top down approaches (even if formulated by ‘expert committees’) will be resisted by many of those affected by these disputes- as the Government of India learns over and over again when they announce policies, whether it be with regard to Pharma pricing, genetically modified foods, land acquisition or re-settlement. Now if only the GOI and the powers that be both amongst the political parties and the bureaucracy could discover the importance of having effective collaborative processes! Would that be asking for too much? Perhaps not, people affected by a conflict are the best equipped to resolve them- provided they have the tools and are empowered to do so..Lawyers can, if they choose to, play a very critical role here. They can help their clients explore ways to think creatively about less adversarial ways of settling disputes that can optimize values for everybody. Collaboration does not have to be collusion and does not necessarily end up in compromise..Ashok Panikkar is the Executive Director at Meta-Culture, a consulting and training company dedicated to Conflict Resoltuion. Ashok can be reached at ashokpanikkar@meta-culture.
by Ashok Panikkar .How families and businesses typically resolve conflict in India- Twelve easy steps towards completely destroying relationships and bankrupting oneself. .When families and companies quarrel amongst each other who do they normally go to for succour? How do they tend to resolve them? At the risk of generalizing, but to make a larger point, in my experience most disputes in India go through certain fairly predictable phases:.1. When differences surface, the first reaction is to pretend to oneself that there is no problem. Bilkul no problem!.2. When the parties cannot hide the fact from themselves anymore, they then (often unconsciously) collude to hide the conflict from others. No Issues..3. When the strained relationship and circumstances start getting unbearable, the parties then start talking to their perceived allies about it- which is where the back- biting and the bitching begins. Toxic seepage.4. When the parties start to lose money or sleep over the conflict, then ‘well wishers’ get into the picture and start ‘advising’ the parties- this usually results in pressure to “adjust” and “accommodate”. Advice aur Adjust .5. The next stage is to bring in the big guns, the respected elders (aging Mothers, Swamijis, successful business folk and leaders in the community. These people usually have credibility with the feuding parties and try and cobble together a “compromise”. Fifty-Fifty.6. At this point there is usually some kind of “resolution”, in that a truce is declared amongst the parties to relieved smiles all around; the sharing of sweets; and the avowal of friendship and goodwill towards all and sundry. Problem khattam!.7. When the “resolution” breaks down it starts with the parties withdrawing from each other and sulking in their corners; this turns into back biting and bitching and finally into open confrontation (personal, public or legal). Chal dikhata hoon!.8. At this point the big guns come back to the picture, but with their powers considerably reduced. Sometimes even bigger guns are asked to step in, usually with little result. Ego problems!.9. Finally it ends up in court where it can stay festering for years until the case is heard. Vakil sahib?.10. If the case is finally heard and a judgement is pronounced, there emerges a winner and a loser. Often both parties emerge losers, with financial, emotional and relational losses that are astronomical. Satyanash!.11. Whether the dispute is resolved or not, the conflict has now moved from the original issue of money or land or a single act of disrespect, and stories start getting crystallized with heroes and villains clearly defined. Izzat ke savaal hai!.12. The conflict has now become institutionalized, it is now an integral part of the identity of the parties and of future generations. It is here to stay. We are like that only..While most conflicts generally follow this trajectory, there are variations on the theme that include the neutralizing of one of the parties or sometimes even the absolute vanquishing or destruction of the other. What is important to recognize is that most conflicts tend to be resolved through the brute application of force or the adjudication by a higher authority. Rarely if ever are both parties given a chance to understand each other by rebuilding their communication or relationship. In the process valuable relationships get destroyed; people do not develop new conflict resolution skills; and learning for the individual and society itself comes to a halt as people entrench themselves in old rigid positions that reinforce old beliefs and notions of victim and oppressor..It is fashionable and reassuring for many well-meaning patriots and nationalists to talk about how a three thousand year old culture has many indigenous ways of dealing with conflict. The truth is that the world has changed. India is itself changing at an unprecedented pace. What worked three thousand, three hundred or even thirty years ago will not work today, and to persist to think so will mean will blinding ourselves to the immeasurable pain and cost that conflicts cause..In a heterogeneous world we need new ways of dealing with disputes. Autocratic and top down approaches (even if formulated by ‘expert committees’) will be resisted by many of those affected by these disputes- as the Government of India learns over and over again when they announce policies, whether it be with regard to Pharma pricing, genetically modified foods, land acquisition or re-settlement. Now if only the GOI and the powers that be both amongst the political parties and the bureaucracy could discover the importance of having effective collaborative processes! Would that be asking for too much? Perhaps not, people affected by a conflict are the best equipped to resolve them- provided they have the tools and are empowered to do so..Lawyers can, if they choose to, play a very critical role here. They can help their clients explore ways to think creatively about less adversarial ways of settling disputes that can optimize values for everybody. Collaboration does not have to be collusion and does not necessarily end up in compromise..Ashok Panikkar is the Executive Director at Meta-Culture, a consulting and training company dedicated to Conflict Resoltuion. Ashok can be reached at ashokpanikkar@meta-culture.
