The Six Dimensions of Conflict Transformation

The concept I want to present today is the Six Dimensions of Conflict, which comes up in Chapters 2 and 3 of The Crossroads of Conflict by Ken Cloke.

Ken has a model where he breaks down conflict and how we approach it into six areas, and then looks at that sextet from 4 different angles.

(I wrote this as notes for a podcast episode: #00120 on the Ten Thousand Heroes Show)

Angle 1: Orders of Resolution

The first way Ken looks at conflict is through resolution. He calls it “The orders of resolution”. The 6 orders of resolution are:

  1. stop fighting / de-escalate
  2. settle the issues
  3. resolve underlying reasons
  4. forgive our opponents and ourselves
  5. reconcile with opponents and renew relationships
  6. design systems that make it more difficult for future conflicts to appear

In the mediations I’m observing and performing, I see this every day…

Ken says:

“Each of these orders, like the Richter scale for earthquakes, requires exponentially greater skill and sensitivity than the one beneath it, along with greater integrity, commitment, and permission to proceed on the part of everyone involved. Each takes longer to achieve, goes deeper into the heart of the problem and permits a different set of issues and resolutions to emerge. Each leaves less of the conflict remaining after it is completed.”

The claim is that every conflict has all of that potential in it. It could take us right to the top of the game. Forgiveness, reconciliation, total transformation of our society: it’s all there in every conflict.

The key is just — as a participant in the conflict– what do you want to get out of it?

And then (of course) do we have the skills to get there?

Angle 2: Math analogy

Helpful for the geometric thinkers… He maps each of those 6 orders to an image.

He starts with a lack of resolution: Impasse

point – 0 dimensions – impasse

And then goes through the first three as the 3 dimensions in geometry we know so well:

line – 1 dim – stopping the fighting / de-escalation
plane – 2 dim – settle the issues / bargaining
cube – 3d – resolve underlying emotions / finding a win-win

It’s nice that the cube introduces depth, which corresponds well to finding the underlying interests or needs beneath someone’s position.

The next three dimensions are all figures I can’t really imagine, and I think most humans are like me.

Which aligns nicely with Ken’s metaphor because each of these orders of resolution is correspondingly rarer to experience with any given conflict.

They seem magical and fantastical like that house in Encanto.

But, of course, they’re actually right around the corner…

Angle 3: Conflict Location

Ken then maps each of those 6 orders of resolution to a location.

  1. stop fighting / de-escalate
  2. settle the issues
  3. resolve underlying reasons
  4. forgive our opponents and ourselves
  5. reconcile with opponents and renew relationships
  6. design systems that make it more difficult for future conflicts to appear
  • The Physical Body / stop the fighting
  • Minds / settle the issues
  • Emotions / resolve the underlying reasons
  • Energetic / forgiveness, attachment to the past
  • The Heart / reconciliation, change our attitude, renew relationship
  • The Systems Around Us / conflict system design.

Angle 4: Mediation style

Given that conflict is happening in all these places, someone well equipped with conflict would have tools to address conflict in each of those places.

Like my flute teacher told me — even though a bamboo flute was designed to make playing a song easy in one particular scale, which depends on the size of the flute, a real flute player must be able to play every scale on every single flute.

So then Ken goes through in a very thorough fashion and outlines how each conflict location gives rise to a certain style of addressing conflict (or mediation). And then he shares all these common patterns and techniques that fit each style.

Six Styles of Mediation based on those locations:

  • Physical bodies
    • Conciliative:
      • Paying attention to body language, physical movement, and sensory awareness
      • Speaking directly from one body to another
      • Separating the parties and shuttling if necessary
  • Mental:
    • Evaluative:
      • Directive, logical, analytical
      • Mental calming
      • Compromise
  • Emotions
    • Facilitative:
      • looking for resolution through emotional calming
      • listening, empathy, acknowledgement
      • reframing, dialogue
  • Spirits/Energy/Attitude
    • Transformative:
      • Focus on personal transformation, meaning-altering, responsibility, relationship building, forgiveness
      • “Forgiveness consists of releasing ourselves from the burden of our own false expectations”
  • Heart
    • Transcendent:
      • Heart-to-heart based, , compassionate inquiry
      • Focus on reconciliation
      • Mindfulness, wisdom, insight
  • Systems
    • System design style:
      • Look at systemic dysfunctions
      • Alter context, culture, and environments

Of course, as a pragmatist and expert who has been doing this for 40 years, Ken only really advocates one style, which could be described as

Eclectic
Everything
or
Being in the moment.

Basically, depending on what people are willing to do (which will change from moment to moment) and what we’re experienced with, we should use whatever is the best tool at our disposal.

After that he then gives these very long lists of specific behaviors and techniques to each style, but I think that would be a bit too much to get into right now.

For me, the point is to look for each of these levels in every conflict you experience and see if you learn something or are surprised by what you find.