Guest Post by Malcolm Peart (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)
In conflicts, or just differences of opinion, people push-back when opinions or ideas are different to theirs. These differences may not necessarily be wrong, but, a mere difference can constitute change to somebody and, as with any change there is inevitably some resistance to a greater or lesser extent.
As Newton discovered, ‘For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction’ and the same is true of people. This reaction, in the absence of open minds, may not only be opposite but, if coupled with ineffective communication produces increased resistance to change and, inevitably, friction.
Friction, working against any resistance, causes heat and in any heated discussion words can become a little wild. Rather than a Keynes-like controlled assault on the unthinking, an argument ensues, and dispute fills the air. And all because of a breakdown in effective communication.
Communication, or rather its lack, is blamed for many things. These include failed personal and business relationships, project failures, labour disputes and even wars. Contrary views, although perhaps communicated with good intentions, are sometimes misunderstood and subsequent explanations can be taken the wrong way. The consequent opposing views, just like two negatives, make for a positive conflict.
What can be done? Unless the original aim was to provoke an argument and embark on a destructive course of action most communication is to exchange information in a constructive manner. Constructive communication results in conflict resolution rather than propagating dispute and wasting effort on overcoming resistance.
Obstacles or Advantages
Resistance can be defined in many ways; it depends on the context. In communication terms it’s typically about the refusal of some to accept or comply with the ideas of others. It’s also about the ability not to be adversely affected by such ideas. In electrical terms ‘resistance’ concerns the reduction of the electrical energy that flows through a circuit and this, in turn, depends on how these resistors, are arranged or configured.
The same is true of people. The resistance to any communication effort depends on the way we deal with people, manage their resistance and align them. We can deal with every resisting obstacle individually or align their similarities and reinforce commonalities to reduce the net effect. In electrical terms this is akin to having resistors in parallel or in series.
If we try to overcome each resistance sequentially this can take considerable effort. We must then deal with the total sum of all the resistance. If we align the resistance the total is measured by the sum of their reciprocals which, assuming “communication resistance” as at least unity or greater, is obviously lower.
Overcoming and Exploitation
Resistance, in electrical terms, is about arithmetic, it’s about summing up individual resistances or adding up the reciprocals. And when it comes to communication and managing resistance it’s about either joining communicating parties or encouraging their reciprocity.
“If you can’t beat them join them” goes an idiom from the 1930’s which alludes to the concept that if you can’t defeat your opponent, then you might as well work alongside them and join forces to have a greater resistance to others. Conversely if one’s opponents can’t be managed individually it may be better to deal with them collectively and capitalize on their internal differences and potential disputes. Increasing resistance can work in both ways when it comes to communication management. However, it remains a truism that disputes will arise to a greater or lesser extent in direct proportion to the number of resisting parties.
Trying to get everybody on the same page about everything can take time and effort as well as resorting to frequent compromise. Unending compromise can also produce increasing resistance as parties try to force issues, no matter how unpalatable, on each other. The ‘joiners’ and the ‘joiner’ can exploit any situation under the guise that they’re all ‘a team’ and the end result is oftentimes just procrastination and more friction. A recourse to internal lobbying and clique forming under promises of future favors in a wheeling-and-dealing culture makes for familiarity. Unfortunately, in the familiarity of compromise, contemptuous behaviour and internal conflict can well result. Just look at the former USSR, the expanding European Union and any other alleged ‘union’ or ‘alliance’ that mankind purports to have created
Alternatively, a “Divide and Conquer” approach can be taken. Not in the sense of carving up a situation binarily into the ‘ayes’ and ‘nays’, or ‘believers’ and ‘non-believers’, or those who would be ‘with-us’ or ‘against-us’ but segregating issues so areas of similarities and harmony can be identified and reinforced. The number and magnitude of potential differences may then be reduced and the opportunity to overcome the resultant resistance is increased. Any resulting goodwill and commonality can be used as a catalyst for resolving difficulties and any ensuing differences or potential conflict can be confronted in a constructive manner.
Conclusion
Good communication relies on dealing with resistance. For the most part, resistance can be overcome through the alignment of the communicating parties. But, if a situation demands it resistance may need to be increased. If annihilatory behaviour occurs, then resistance will need be developed in a positive manner to confront a potentially destructive situation.
Communication is also a matter of joining or dividing. Dividing can reduce friction through identifying areas of commonality allowing time and effort to be spent addressing a reduced number of potential conflicts. Joining not only increases the resistive power of a group but the resultant group may be dysfunctional in its approaches and merely give the veneer of a resistance-free and communication-enabled organisation.
Communication is not just about resistance though. It has also been likened to the lubricant for transmission of information and ideas. Just like the lubrication in an engine it not only reduces friction through reducing resistance but makes for smooth running and prolongs life. Communication is also a glue which holds people and organisations together and is the basis for trust and respect. And without trust and respect any constructive communication will inevitably fail no matter what its efficacy.
Bio:
Malcolm Peart is an UK Chartered Engineer & Chartered Geologist with over thirty-five years’ international experience in multicultural environments on large multidisciplinary infrastructure projects including rail, metro, hydro, airports, tunnels, roads and bridges. Skills include project management, contract administration & procurement, and design & construction management skills as Client, Consultant, and Contractor.
Leave a Reply