Stuart Wilde in his book “The Quickening” tells the following story:
I was wandering the Souk (market) in Marrakesh, when I became attracted
to a leather bag hanging from one of the trader’s stalls. I asked how
much he wanted, and he replied, “10 diram.” I shook my head and offered
him 11 diram. He shook his head and said the best he could do was
9. I shook my head and insisted that I would pay no more than 12.
He waved his arms about told me about his wife and eight kids. Then
he said it was daylight robbery, but he would, on this occasion, accept 7
diram and this was his very last offer. I “uhmed” and “ahed” and stroked
my chin, and said that 15 was my final offer. He eventually agreed
to sell the bag for 5. He agreed to take 5; I increased my offer to
17. His concentration was on the 5 diram he was about to get.
I wasn’t about to contradict his reality. I paid him 5, thanked him,
wishing him the strength of a hundred camels in the courtyard. I wandered
on.
Perhaps the story is true, perhaps not. I tend to believe it because
Mr. Wilde’s experience in the Marrakesh market closely resembles the type
of communication I see when people are disputing.
Conflicts arise fundamentally because people have interests that are
not being satisfied or are experiencing injustices that are not being reconciled.
As a conflict intensifies, each person becomes more focused on his or her
personal needs and tunes out the needs of the other person. At some
point, a person’s capacity to listen disappears. This seems to occur
at about the same time the need to be heard becomes paramount. Each
person is focused on personal needs, wants desperately to be heard, and
is so intent on being heard that he cannot hear the other person.
This is when the peacemaker is most valuable. First, the peacemaker
slows the process down. One person speaks at a time without interruption.
Everyone has an opportunity to speak as much as necessary, but only one
at a time. To further slow the process down and help people listen,
the peacemaker may ask the non-speaking person to be prepared to summarize
what has just been said. A tradition in a 16th century French monastery
required an accurate summary of what was just said before a monk could speak
to the matter at hand. When the speaker is finished, the listener
summarizes back. Now the speaker is feeling like she is being heard
and her needs are beginning to be acknowledged. The listener does
not feel as compelled to marshal facts and arguments in an immediate defense
of what has been said. Consequently, the listener is now focusing
on hearing correctly what has been said rather than concentrating on a blistering
response. In this way, the dialogue of disputing is disrupted.
As the process continues, the listener becomes the speaker, talks without
interruption, and is heard as the new listener summarizes back.
The peacemaker consequently adds a new element to the conflict.
By creating a new talking environment, the peacemaker allows the parties
to move past the frustration of not being heard. The peacemaker becomes
a sort of umpire, regulating when people can talk, how they talk, and how
they listen. Thus, the peacemaker provides a service the parties cannot
furnish themselves—structured discourse about difficult and emotional topics.
As the parties learn that they can speak, listen, and be listened to, they
see that they can work together. Thus, the beginning of collaborative
problem-solving is established.
If the trader in Marrakesh had listened to Mr. Wilde, he would have profited
handsomely. Instead, he chose to focus on his own needs, resulting
in a much smaller profit. Remember the trader when you face your next
conflict.
Douglas E. Noll, Esq. is a lawyer specializing in peacemaking and mediation
of difficult and intractable conflicts throughout California. His firm,
Douglas E. Noll and Associates is based in Central California. He may
be reached through his website
and email at doug@nollassociates.com