The PERColator Podcast
Episode 36: Managing Conflict Mindfully Book Club
Your co-hosts of The PERColator Podcast sit down for a book club discussion of Leonard Riskin's recent book, Managing Conflict Mindfully.
References:
Your co-hosts of The PERColator Podcast sit down for a book club discussion of Leonard Riskin's recent book, Managing Conflict Mindfully.
References:
In this episode of the PERColator Podcast, your co hosts engage in a book club discussion of Leonard Riskin's latest book, Managing Conflict Mindfully. Riskin is a visiting professor at Northwestern University's Pritzker School of Law, and a professor emeritus at the University of Florida, the author of numerous books and articles on alternative dispute resolution systems and practices and the importance of mindfulness in legal education. Riskin has been one of the most important voices in dispute resolution over the last several decades. As the title suggests, the book itself is an effort to bring together a wide body of scholarship into a more cohesive framework to think about how all of us can, as he states manage conflict more mindfully. The books premise starts from the supposition that when we find ourselves in conflict with other people, whether that is actual or perceived conflict, we make significant errors. Those errors can result in bad outcomes, and often needless suffering. These errors, Riskin argues, come from a variety of sources, but the book attempts to organize them into three specific domains, including first the external nature of conflict in terms of its existence between people. Second, our own awareness and attention or lack thereof. And finally, the internal component of conflict as it exists within our own minds, in fostering understanding of these different domains, and providing tools to better manage conflict within each realm, Riskin's hope is that we can all limit or minimize unnecessary suffering that situations of conflict without these tools and awareness will necessarily produce. Well, welcome to the PERColator Podcast. Good to be with you. I am joined by my fellow PERColators, Emily, Matt and Lloyd, hello to the three of you,
Matt Greer:Hey Chris,
Loyd Willaford:Hi Chris.
Emily Martin:Hi, Chris.
Chris Casillas:Good to be with all of you. Today, we are going to do kind of an extension of our recent book club episode and do a little bit of a deep dive into Leonard Riskin's book Managing Conflict Mindfully, which we talked about a little bit last time, or on a previous episode, I should say, but wanted to kind of jump into it a little bit more, kind of get all of your reactions and thoughts to the book on some level. So first off, we do have to kind of identify who is actually read the book, because we have had issues in the past with book club participation.
Matt Greer:Ooh, ooh, can I go first with my report? Chris, Chris, this is Matt, I read the book! I know everyone was wondering, everyone was wondering, but I did read it.
Chris Casillas:Ah, well there is a first time for everything. Well, what did you think, Matt? Tell us, give us your give us your, give us your assessment?
Matt Greer:Oh well, you know, I thought it was an interesting read. I thought that it was really good, how that kind of synthesized a bunch of different concepts from other books that we read and kind of report back on some of our book club episodes, including the core concerns and any other pieces. So I thought it was really interesting how he's synthesized a lot of those concepts together into kind of one system of a kind of a way of thinking about things and being a better negotiator. There was one question I'm curious your perspectives on this. But he identifies early on in the book, the negotiators dilemma, which to be honest, I'm not sure if I've ever heard the negotiators dilemma kind of described the way he described it. But it's basically kind of boils down to, at least how I interpreted it, was that when you're interested in engaging in a different negotiation, process or style, or kind of using some of these different tools, that came up in the chapter on interest based bargaining kind of the top the concepts there. That one of the challenges you have is like, what if you're interested in doing that type of approach, but you don't know for sure if your partner, who you are negotiating against is going to be engaged in that, it kind of creates a dilemma because you, to engage in those processes, you have to be a little kind of vulnerable, right? And you have to kind of trust the other side that if you share information with them, if you share some of the interests, some of the whys behind why you're proposing what you're proposing, or why you're asking for what you're asking for, that opens you up to a certain kind of vulnerability on the other side kind of attacking you if you're not on the same page. And that's one of the challenges that I've always kind of had in terms of when I do trainings with folks and IBB or collaborative bargaining. It's like, I wonder if we're all on the same page with that, and I do sometimes wonder if the if there's a there's an easier way or a way to kind of get to whether or not everyone's on the same page with that dilemma earlier on the process. I'm not sure if he answered it very well about how to how to overcome that dilemma. He identified it in a way that I thought was really succinct and interesting. But I'm not sure to give a good answer for it. And I'm not sure you know, kind of, especially this trainer kind of leading people down these paths of going through these these tools. What if either side isn't on board? And does that open up people to a certain kind of vulnerability or even kind of risk in terms of engaging in that process? So that was one of the questions I had? I don't know if it was answered very well, I'm curious if any of you all got an answer to that question. But that was one of the questions I had. And I think overall was kind of interesting. And even if you don't feel comfortable, the other party is on the same page as you using those tools. And that those are some really good concepts in there that kind of, you could use on your own kind of internally to kind of go through and be a better negotiator as well. So, So I think there's still some value there. But I was just kind of that was one of the takeaways I had was, I wonder, how do we, how do we get that dilemma resolved, to be able to use these tools? So anyway, so my
Loyd Willaford:So Matt, I think you hit kind of one of my initial thoughts? biggest observations of the book, right on the head, which was, how do you actually put this into practice? Like the issue of vulnerability versus, you know, exploitation, and later, like, a lot of this is like, you know, intrapersonal work, work on oneself before coming to the, to the bargaining table. And if you're, I think, even with the title, managing conflict mindfully, I mean, you know, some of the listeners to this podcast will be in management, like they're managing bargaining teams, whether they're, whether it's leadership of a union bargaining team, or an employer side bargaining team. And, you know, how do you take these principles and put them into a interpersonal context, as opposed to intrapersonal? Like within oneself? And I do think I mean, this is these concepts, I think, are probably best suited for as I think as you just did just exactly described, to work on oneself, like tools to develop, how do you look at this stuff? But if you're in a, in a team environment, it's not just you, right? There are other people on the team? And how do you open up these topics in a way that's respectful because not everybody's gonna want to talk about this stuff, they're, they're gonna be some really deep seated, personal issues that are, you know, are not the normal things you would talk about in the workplace. And those things are still there. And I think that's one of the nice insights of the book, the book is that just because you don't talk about him doesn't mean they're not there. And just because, you know, you think something doesn't mean it's true. I mean, I still love the subtitle, don't believe everything you think, that's probably my favorite part of the book, actually. So, but I think you hit the nail on the head in terms of how do you practically
Emily Martin:Well, it seems like the book sort of lays out. use this? Here's one model. Here's another model. Here's the third model. And it starts with talking about negotiations and interest based, and then it kind of goes into having a mindful practice and meditation. And then it goes into this, what was it again, the family systems,
Chris Casillas:Internal family systems.
Emily Martin:Internal family systems, and and the author seems to sort of see this as different tiers that you kind of master one versus another and a third. And I'm not sure if it's really that linear. You know, I feel like he kind of was laying out some very linear sort of charts and steps and first do this, then you think about this, and you think about that, and I don't think that's how my brain works. But I think he kept on saying, at least at one point he mentioned, like, everything's a model. And all models are somewhat useful or somewhat not true. So I thought that was a helpful thing to keep in mind, if even if the way he was laying things out didn't quite work for me. I think there was some good stuff to think about. But I think, Matt, to go to your question about, what do you do about the dilemma? I guess, isn't it true that it's not just a one moment test on are we on the same page? Because things shift? And you have to kind of have that question present throughout a negotiation because maybe on one topic, it is very open. And another topic, things get kind of dicey pretty quick. And I think we've all seen like a collaborative bargaining gone wrong, if sort of the tide turns and not everybody's sort of paying attention to it getting into a little dicier area, and then feeling hurt, because weren't we on one page, and now you're you're talking, you're talking with a different script. So I guess I don't have an answer to your question, but I think it's a continuous question.
Matt Greer:Yeah, I think that's a really good I think it's a really good point. It can change especially in the complex negotiations of collective bargaining where you are dealing with a variety of issues in the same negotiation. Things can change on a pin sometimes.
Emily Martin:It is being mindful and it is being aware of what's going on inside your head useful in paying attention to what's what's going on and how things are shifting. Chris, where were you going?
Chris Casillas:Yeah, I just wanted to build off of that. And maybe I'll return to another thing you said here in a moment. But just to kind of circle back to Matt's question, because I think it's a good one. And I don't think Riskin really answers that question for us in the book. But as you were, as everybody was talking, I should say, you know, it made me think of a couple things. One, I mean, it it is a dilemma in terms of thinking about how you approach the party on the other side, and kind of maybe wanting to have that conversation about how we can shift our approach to the negotiation process in a way that maybe better manages the conflict or the tension between the two sides or the history they've had. And and I don't think there's really an easy an easy answer there to kind of escape the vulnerability that that kind of question would invite. But a couple things come to mind there. One is I mean, I think that's where particularly in labor relations, kind of the, the relational component of what we do is so important there, right? Because I think that will give you some insight into how a question like that will sit with the other side? You know, we're not we're not asking these questions, at least in labor relations, generally, we're not asking these questions in a total vacuum, right? Like, I think in some more transactional negotiations, where the parties have never worked together before, and it's a one off kind of thing. That's a tougher, tougher question to ask. But for us, a lot of times we have these relationships, and there's long standing relationships in some cases. And so I think that can kind of inform you in terms of how to how to, you know, think about asking that question and what kind of response you might get. And I think another thing with us is, like, our trainings are great opportunities to kind of like soft test those ideas, and, you know, in a way that's kind of non committal, but you know, brings everybody together to kind of start thinking about some of these different concepts, without necessarily taking that full jump into doing it. So I think there's some things, some tools that we have in our world that allow us to kind of better manage that question. But the other thing it made me think of, too, is, you know, and I say this a lot in trainings to like the concepts we talked about, in IBB, or collaborative bargaining or talking, when we talk about interests, you know, I always remind people like, regardless of what the other side is doing, and how they're behaving, you know, you can always control your your reactions to those and how you approach those situations. And so, for me, some of this is like, it's not even always necessary to get kind of agreement or buy in from the other side to deploy some of the strategies that he's talking about. I think, Lloyd pointed out the fact like a lot of this is just about us as persons as negotiators and how what we bring to the table and how we manage ourselves in these situations. And we have control of that, regardless of what the other side is doing. And so I think for some of this, you know, when he's talking about, you know, these different concepts from books that we've read, and materials that we've covered in this podcast, and during our lunch zoom, like getting to yes, and, you know, the core concerns approach and mindfulness and all this, like, these are all things that we can do, even if we don't have full buy in or acceptance from the other side. Right? It's, it's, in some respects, it's almost more about us than it is the other side.
Emily Martin:And I think a lot of the concepts and all the models he's talked about are things that we're familiar with. It's the internal family systems one that felt the newest to me. And in some ways, it's the end of the book, and it's still least develop. And I think of the what do we do with this kind of idea? Because it's sort of introducing a concept that, I don't know, if it's been, maybe Chris, you know, more how frequently this is sort of thought about in a conflict resolution space. But I think there's something interesting to learn about that model and figure out if that's useful to understand ourselves. And it's sort of talking about what is ourself? And what are some parts of ourselves that protect other parts of ourselves? And what kind of modes or I guess they use the word parts, but those personas come out. And I thought that was really interesting. I could, I didn't get as far to kind of think about it in terms of mediation. But I did recognize some of that in myself, in reading the book kind of thinking about, there have been modes I've gotten into. And then when I think more deeply about, why do I do those behaviors, I kind of could recall maybe some moments of when those behaviors started and it helped me kind of understand myself a little bit better. So I do think there's some value in thinking about that, I am not sure I got enough from this book to fully understand it, but I did order more books. So I think that was, I think that was the whole point was introducing a new idea, thinking about where this could go and see if this is useful to think about oneself and how you react and how you how you respond to things.
Matt Greer:I found it very helpful, I was glad that he introduced that session with the reference to the movie Inside Out. And I think we talked about that in the last podcast with that, that way, I had that framework in mind at that movie, I had to go back and refresh my memory about that movie, but that may immediate help help make it a lot more sensible to me, like the warring factions between the emotions in your brain that are going on all the time. And at various points in your life, I thought that was really an interesting way to kind of frame it up.
Chris Casillas:And in going back to something Emily said, which I think is correct, and I agree with in the sense that it almost gets presented as like, these kind of linear steps, like, first you do this, and then you do this, and then you go to, you know, but I think, you know, maybe to give give Riskin the benefit of the doubt there, you know, when describing these kind of complex systems and models, I think it helps to kind of present them in that fashion. But in reality, of course, like, it's that's not how it works, right. Like, and I don't think I don't think that's necessarily what he was saying. I think the bigger the bigger point there was that when and this kind of goes back to his the thesis of his book, which is essentially, like, when we're, you know, when we're in situations of conflict, it causes us to make kind of poor decisions and poor decisions lead to bad outcomes and bad outcomes, increase frustration and negative feelings. And so how can we, how can we avoid that? Well, it's not just like this simple, kind of like, let's, you know, develop a new bargaining model, or let's be more thoughtful about what we say like, what he's saying is, it's really like, if you break it down, like, it's these conflicts existing on these different planes are these different levels, right? Like there's, there's conflict between people and parties, there's, there's conflict in our own minds. And there's conflict and how we're kind of perceiving the situation. And so, you know, in any given situation, I think, you know, you pull on those different things in different ways and kind of think about them differently. So it's not like, Okay, I'm in conflict with this other side. So the first thing I'm going to think about are the techniques about how to manage conflict between different parties. And here are the principles from getting to yes, that I'm going to now deploy like, it's not like mechanical or linear like that. But I think what the bigger takeaway from me was just recognizing like, you know, conflict does create, it does cause us to kind of think about things irrationally, and it can lead about bad outcomes, and it can make us more frustrated. And so to avoid that, like, we can't just think about it as one thing. It's really these, like, multiple tiers, that that to me was like the probably the most helpful thing in the book, just to kind of think about it that way.
Loyd Willaford:Yeah, Chris I would agree with that. And I think also, one of the other valuable things from the book for me, is to remember that this is, you're a human being, and you've got these things going on all the time. And, you know, it's just like, anything else, it takes practice, if you're going to change anything, right, so you do not want to wait until you're in the middle of a negotiation to pick up a car, you know, this, here's a kit of tools, as you talked about, and then we're just gonna apply those tools, you actually have to do some work in the meantime. And there's all kinds of worksheets and tools and, and developing practices so that you can gradually kind of change the way that you approach conflict, and you don't do it directly. It's kind of an indirect process. It's, it's like, you know, a musician, you know, learning chords, right? Or, or practice that you practice this stuff so that when you get to the actual point of performance, it's second nature, and now you're naturally doing it. And so I appreciated that, I think, I think that's exactly right. And also, that's real change, as opposed to kind of superficially, "Oh, we've got this conflict, so let's bring in an IBB person," and we don't, it's just kind of surface gloss and never gets to what's going on that's creating the conflict to begin with.
Chris Casillas:Well, I know it wasn't all you know, roses and puppies and unicorns while we're reading this, though, so what's the other side of, what's the other side of it? Where did he, where did he miss, what what fell flat for you? What didn't resonate?
Emily Martin:He spent a lot of time talking about mindfulness and meditation, not mediation, but meditation. And I feel like I've read and I've heard him had a lot of like, oh, this is how you can start a meditative practice. And it never really sticks with me, you know, reading that chapter over again, felt familiar, but didn't connect in a way that like, isn't something I think I'm ever going to pick up from reading a book, my new quest is that I do have an Oculus, that does have meditation apps. And somehow that's easier to play around with, I don't know if that's actually sincere or not. But maybe visualizing some pretty spaces with a guided meditation will be useful to me. But I always felt like a failure when I read how to meditate. And I'm like, Yeah, I've read this a million times, and it never really stuck with me, and sort of the same old like, this will change your life. And this is great. I don't know, I don't know if the three of you connect to that. But I've never really found a way, the good way to connect with that before.
Matt Greer:I had a moment I was drawn into that part of it, especially when he was talking about the I was laughing, I say, the the loving kindness meditation part, which of course, makes me laugh a little bit to say that a lot. But when I was my thought about it through my of the prism of my life, like I don't have a prism of the Buddhist kind of meditation traditions that he kind of puts out there. But I do have a tradition of like, the Protestant, Christian prayer model. And some of those, like, once once I realized, oh, what he's talking about really is praying for somebody, praying for yourself, that kind of clicked in a different way, I was like okay, if I kind of think about that, that mind frame, then it helps me kind of resonate with that with that part a little differently. So I'll put that out there is it for the for those of you who come from that tradition, kind of thinking of it through that prism, maybe that helps a little bit to kind of frame it up a little bit differently.
Chris Casillas:Yeah, I have those same struggles, Emily, especially. I mean, it's a little bit easier for me now as mediator for almost six years now to have a little bit more kind of broader perspective. And, you know, it's then when I was in my negotiation days, but you know, it is even even, even as a as a neutral, like, there, you know, I still struggle with like, thinking about how I can be more contemplative and meditative and thoughtful in the midst of an actual conflict. Like, it's really, it's really hard to, to do that. But I mean, I think, you know, with with all of this, though, it's like, and then to Lloyd's point earlier as well, like, I think, if you can find like, you know, 2% of this book that makes sense to you, and you can kind of slowly you know, implement some of that, I think that's a, I think that's a win, like we're none of us are going to get to 100% of what he's talking about, none of us are going to come close to that. Because it's just not realistic. Like, we're just we're too human. And that's okay, that's, that's okay. But I think, you know, like we've talked before, in at least, our lunch zoom, I'm trying to think of we talked about on the podcast before, but like, you know, simple things of just like breathing, you know, that kind of slow breathing to kind of engage that parasympathetic nervous system. And, you know, I do that more than I used to. And it does help, you know, kind of calm me down and center me in moments where I'm really frustrated. And so something as simple as just kind of being mindful of that. And having a little bit of a technique that kind of helps me in some of those moments, some of the time. I think that's worthwhile, even though knowing most of the time I like, I'll just retort with some kind of snide remark and get my blood pressure will raise and I don't execute on this terribly well. But that's okay. I think, you
Matt Greer:Yeah, I think it's a good point. And I do think that know, one of the things I was reading through this book, because I had to, I had to do some work, translating it through, through my work and through my life experiences, like the one example I gave before. But also, I'm wondering if any of you like we're struggling to kind of translate some of the concepts to, especially for negotiators who are representing an entity, like if you're negotiating on behalf of an employer or on behalf of a bargaining unit. And a lot a lot of the book is kind of framed as it's your conflict as your kind of business conflict as your situation dealing with somebody. I was at various points, I was struggling like, well, how does this really apply to somebody who's maybe out there representing an entity, which most of our listeners are? So I don't know if I had a good pick away from that. But I'm curious. I guess that was one of the thoughts I had as I was trying to translate it into our world. Does anybody have any insights about how that might work?
Chris Casillas:Yeah, I think that's, I mean, I think you're
Loyd Willaford:Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, I guess if we right there Matt in questioning whether how, or how well, this, had Riskin here, I think he would probably say, hey, that's what he's saying kind of translates into our environment, one of the voices in the head, right? That's one of the or an environment in which you're working as a internal I'm a representative. And my representative voice is telling me X, Y and Z. And my human being, you know, my other life maybe I'm, you know, I have political views. that might in fact differ from my representative views. And how do you, you know, I think the first thing is just be aware. And I was going to come back and comment on what Chris said, I think the just the act of observation, and being aware that this is going on, and then doing whatever you do with that old practice outside of, before you get into the negotiation, before you get that just instant reaction, helps. I mean, it doesn't, it doesn't totally, and I just want to think I appreciate it. He's, he's not talking about people becoming saints here, right? He's saying, hey, you know, I did this and it, I don't feel good about it, right? It went wrong, it went sideways, you know, but let's look at it. And then, you know, see what we, you know, maybe next time I'll be better at it, or our I won't, or you just or you, you come to accept that this is the way I'm going to be and but it's a conscious, and this is the it's a conscious choice, as opposed to an unconscious reaction. Which is what I think you know, the whole point about your, your your first thought, you don't always, if you just react, you don't have any control over what you're doing, as opposed to Hey, taking a pause, mindfully, meaning I'm making a choice mindfully to do one thing or another. And I'm aware of what I am doing, and maybe thinking about what are the consequences? I do want to say on that topic on the consequences back to Matt's initial topic about, you know, and I had described, kind of how does this actually going to get implemented in collective bargaining? Is that I think it's an it's risky, there is an there is some risk, there's always risk in being vulnerable. We talked about that in IBB right? There's a risk and being vulnerable. Or risk in, you know, in a mediation context, hey, somebody's got to make this first move. Right? And it's risky. And maybe it doesn't get reciprocated. But somebody's got to do it anyway. Right? Emily's always telling a story of the Fred who I never knew, somebody's got to be the better human being and better person and take the, that's kind of like this, is it's about being somewhat vulnerable, and then letting people be, inviting them to be vulnerable with you. And I think that's kind of the only way this probably works. And sometimes it's gonna fall flat. Some people are not going to want to do that, for whatever reason. And it's okay if that happens. representative of another party, when when you're the voice, but it's not your conflict, per se. And so I think that I think that's a good question. One thing that kind of does spring to mind, though, is still just thinking about how, as a representative, you can best, you know, represent the constituents that you're speaking on behalf of, and I think some of what he's saying is how you can yourself kind of avoid making some of those bad judgments or errors in judgment that lead about bad outcomes, because even even when you're representing somebody else, right, like, you're still at the table, like, you're gonna feel that conflict in that moment where there's a disagreement about a particular proposal or something like even though it's, it's not affecting you directly, it's not your group, you're not in the group, you're representing the group, you still feel that you still feel that tension, you still feel that conflict. And I think that can lead to making some bad decisions if you get too stuck in that conflict. And so I think some of what he's saying, is still applicable to the representative. Even though the representative is not the one that's necessarily you know, directly in conflict with the other party,
Emily Martin:I'm wondering if representative is such a neutral word, that people actually don't always think of themselves as just the representative, they might think of themselves as a defender or protector, or an advocate or a champion, or have seen a lot of representatives in conflicts. And they're doing this work because they think it's important work, and they're doing this work, because they are providing a service and they're doing this work, because they're good at it. And they're good at, you know, helping people who need help. And that can be really, really useful in so many times in a bargaining table, but does that sometimes, does that sometimes that persona or that self or that role, take over in a way that blinds opportunities or or accelerates the conversation in a way that wasn't as mindful as it could be? Do you know what I mean if you're, if you're missing the point, cause you're on a campaign to grab that gold ring, is there something lost there? So I'm just, I don't know, lots of bad analogies. But I'm wondering is there, is there synonyms to representatives that help us understand the different kinds of parts that people have, as they function, especially in conflict? And where these are valuable, and also where these might have some weaknesses, that that'd be good for the people to keep in mind?
Chris Casillas:Yeah, that's fair. And to build off that further. I would say sometimes I think for folks that we work with, like, the, the conflict is the point. And, and and it's not it's not a it's not a bad thing. It's not something that's going to lead to errors and judgment. It's, it's that tension that needs to be highlighted to bring about some kind of change. And I think, I think that's the world that we live in, that is maybe different than, you know, some of the experiences that Riskin is talking about in the book. And so I don't, you know, his his thesis is kind of, as I said, like, you know, conflict leads to errors in judgment, which leads to bad outcomes, which leads to kind of bad feelings. But that's not necessarily always the case with with labor relations, like sometimes conflict is the point. And that tension can create some amazing things, right? Like, it's, it's not, it's not, it doesn't have to be kind of this pejorative negative cycle. And so I want to acknowledge that. And I think your point, Emily brings that out as well.
Emily Martin:Yeah, no, I wasn't saying that these roles are bad. They're just part of what what happens. And I agree with you that, that the conflict can lead to really great results and good change and good conversations and good problem solving.
Matt Greer:That was great. That's the whole point of a book club, right? Is somebody asked a question, because they were challenged by something and people have, you helped me through that, I can see how those things might resonate. But it does require a little bit translating, though, which I think is not not a bad thing. I think most good books, when they're putting up these great concepts does require a little bit of translating to your world. So thanks for helping me through that.
Chris Casillas:Yeah, that was fun. Thanks, everybody. Anybody have any last thoughts or comments? Points of wisdom?
Matt Greer:I don't think so. I just want to thank you, Chris, for suggesting that we read this. It was it was an interesting read.
Chris Casillas:Yeah, yeah.
Emily Martin:Well, I think at the end of every book club meeting, you always say what's the next book and I don't have an answer, but if anybody comes up with an answer or a suggestion, then..
Chris Casillas:Ping us! You could be the next episode of the PERColator Podcast asking insightful and thoughtful questions as posed here today. So good to be with everybody. Until next time.