c


 

cc  
 Y

6


 


c YGarrett CoanY

J

 
    
 

  
 






    
 
 J 
    
    

Y

a
YY
 Y

Y

Let¶s start by identifying where conflicts happen. Think about the kinds of conflicts that happen around
your workplace.

‡ Disagreements over turf (who should do what)

‡ Disagreements over policy (how things should be done)

‡ Conflicts of personality and style


YYY 

Y Y

Y

These are some of the ways we typically deal with conflict. Do you see yourself in any of them?

‡ Avoid the conflict.

‡ Deny the conflict; wait until it goes away.

‡ Change the subject.

‡ React emotionally; become aggressive, abusive, hysterical, or frightening.

‡ Find someone to blame.

‡ Make excuses.

‡ Delegate the situation to someone else.

All of these responses are nonproductive. Some of them are actually destructive. This is why learning
to manage conflict is so important.

 Y
YY
 
 Y

The workplace is a system of relationships. Relationships have many different aspects; here are
several examples:

Trust

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

Teamwork

Quality

Morale

Self-esteem

Loyalty

Respect for boss

When conflicts are handled well, there¶s a positive effect on work relationships. When they are not,
these factors can deteriorate. Productivity and the free expression of ideas are also impacted.

YY YY 

Y
 Y

Y

 Y 
Y



It's better to prevent
unnecessary conflict than to
manage conflict once the
flames have started. To
preview p






 
 


p 

p 


The skills involved in managing conflict are learned behaviors. None of us is born knowing how to deal
with differences of opinion, arguments, or turf wars. Some of the factors that affect how we behave in
the face of conflict are:

1. Status: People in higher-status positions usually feel freer to engage in conflict and are less likely to
avoid confrontation.

2. Company style or unwritten rules: Some companies encourage conflict; others have unwritten rules
that it is to be contained or avoided.

3. Gender differences: Males are generally encouraged to be more confrontational than females.

4. Behavior learned in families: In some families, conflict and confrontation are a communication
style. In others, conflict always remains hidden.

5. Behavior learned from role models: People who have had a teacher or boss who modeled effective
conflict-resolution skills are more likely to develop these skills themselves.



Y 
 
Y

Y

No one is born knowing how to resolve conflicts. Conflict resolution is a set of skills that anyone can
learn. Let¶s look at two important ones: active listening and conflict deescalation skills.

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

  Y 

Y

Active listening is a valuable skill for resolving conflicts because it enables you to demonstrate that
you understand what another person is saying and how he or she is feeling about it.

Active listening means restating, in your own words, what the other person has said.

Active listening is a way of checking whether your understanding is correct. It also demonstrates that
you are listening and that you are interested and concerned. These all help resolve a situation when
there are conflicting points of view.

Active listening responses have two components: (1) naming the feeling that the other person is
conveying, and (2) stating the reason for the feeling.

Here are some examples of active-listening statements:

³Sounds like you¶re upset about what happened at work.´

³You¶re annoyed by my lateness, aren¶t you?´

³You sound really stumped about how to solve this problem.´

³It makes you angry when you find errors on Joe¶s paperwork.´

³Sounds like you¶re really worried about Wendy.´

³I get the feeling you¶re awfully busy right now.´

Actively listening is not the same as agreement. It is a way of demonstrating that you intend to hear
and understand another¶s point of view.

Benefits of Active Listening

If a person uses active listening as part of his or her communication style at work, how would that be
good for resolving conflicts, i.e., what are the benefits?

1. It feels good when another person makes an effort to understand what you are thinking and
feeling. It creates good feelings about the other person and makes you feel better about yourself.

2. Restating what you¶ve heard, and checking for understanding, promotes better communication and
produces fewer misunderstandings.

3. Responding with active listening has a calming effect in an emotional situation.



Y ! 
 
Y

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

veryone has been in an argument that has escalated. Before you know it, it¶s blown out of
proportion. Let¶s think for a moment about some actions that will help you deescalate a conflict. In
your experience, what actions put a stop to the defend/attack spiral?

‡ Stick with ³I´ statements; avoid ³you´ statements.

‡ Avoid name-calling and put-downs (³A reasonable person could see that...´).

‡ Soften your tone.

‡ Take a time-out (³Let¶s take a break and cool down´).

‡ Acknowledge the other person¶s point of view (agreement is not necessary).

‡ Avoid defensive or hostile body language (rolling eyes, crossing arms in front of body, tapping foot).

‡ Be specific and factual; avoid generalities.

Conflict Prevention Skills

Now that we¶ve talked about how to resolve a conflict, let¶s look at how to prevent conflicts from
happening. Here are a few ideas:

Bring issues out in the open before they become problems.

‡ Be aware of triggers and respond to them when you notice them. ‡ Have a process for resolving
conflicts. Bring it up at a meeting and get agreement on what people should do in cases of differing
viewpoints.

‡ Teach everyone conflict-resolution skills and expect people to use them.

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

dorkplace Coach: days to survive a co-worker outburst

c

 



  

 







 

   
 !

!! "

 "


 
!





 "


#
#$
!
%
#%

 

&&



 #
&&
 

 
 

'


 &  
# 


#


 
#
# (
)
 *
 #

  




+# ! 
,+
&&

  


  




- 
 
./

!
" 


!&& !
  

 


# 

!



 
 




& 


#




-

 

"
#



  

 


/
' 
 %
 






%

 
 %
 
 
 
#" 

 

#
 %
 0 


 

 
!.
 


 

#

 

 *
  
' 


 
!! 

 
 


 





# 
 *
.

ΠY
 

#
 
1 
 


 2
 
 
!

!
c

  


+


  +
 

 # 
 

!


  

  

- ! 


/
 

#
  

!


 


!
 #



"
 
   
3 

#
 


 
 " 

  

# 
"
 !
 


 

#
! 
 


  





 

 

 


 # 



 !

!

 
 

# $
+
 




 


  
!

# !%+
%
+4  %


" 

 

#
  +
"
 !
 

# 

!

 #2
*
#
 #!


 
 


" 

c
 & 
c





#
!
 

#
! 


#
 

 !


#
+ " +
   
-
# !
 #

 0 /


 

#

  
 "



 
 


#


 

 !

&&
 *
 !

! 
 


  "

"
 
 


 ! %



 &   


 
 
 
 "

#.!

 #

 #
 #

 
 #


 !


 



# &
 




 


#
  


# ! 



*
 #
  #
5 




%

# 
!
!



 




"

 


!
 #
$
+) *
 


 
5 *

#

 



!
+
5 

.

!

%

! 

*
!
).
 



#


 

 

Œ
Y
!!

!
.


.
" 





! 
 " 
c





 


#
.

! 
!!  


 !
.
 *
  2


  






 #
!

 6

  
"

  

  



 
#
! 
"
#!
,!# 


#
 !%

# 

 #!


  "



!!
-
 !%
 
%
/


 
  




 #
7
 




Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y



  

&&
.
*


8 

#%

 
'



 !
 


#

 #


 


9*


 &

# 
 *





#
 !  

 %





 # 

!! " %


  !
 "
4# 
*



 



 "

 "
 


#  

  

#

  

"
!
9

 
 #


"  



"  

!
*
! %
"



7
 
!
  

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

Œe-escalating ConflictsY


Y
YY Y "Y

YYYYYYWhen conflict happens, those involved want something that they cannot have because
they are being opposed - A
   

 Other than games or sporting events,
no one likes being opposed. Keeping me from what I believe is mine or should be mine
causes a reaction ± usually an increase my level of frustration, fear, or anger. When things
³heat up´ between others and me - I get ready to act and my actions can become less
rational. As unresolved conflicts persist, intensity increases, issues multiply, and personal
investment grows. scalation occurs when a relatively small, common sense, not too
personal matter gets larger and worse over time and seems impossible to stop. Like riding
an escalator, tensions rise, distance increases, and the situation moves from less to more
threatening. De-escalation skills are important interpersonal relations tools.YY

 Y Y ! 
 
Y Y

Y#
Y
YYY  Y$YStay focused on the issue at hand and resist distractions
like who started it, whose fault it is, or the introduction of new and related matters.YY

×
‰Y

 YY% &Y YY '
 ± State simply and briefly what you
think the problem is, ³
   
 
 Ask
the other person to state the problem. Acting when the problem is small makes it
easier to solve. Pick a time and a place to meet the person face-to-face. Show a
willingness to work it out with the other person. A
  
YY

×
‰Y

Y

YY Y Y 
" ± I listen and reflect my understanding of
what the other person is says, feels, and means. (Skill - Active Listening)YY
?
I ask open-ended questions. I avoid questions that can be answered with a
yes or no. I want more information. For example, "What are your thoughts?"
Instead of, "Do you think we should do this?" What matters to the them?YY
?
I respect their needs interests. I repeat what others are saying and clarify
often. Understanding and/or appreciating what others want is not agreement
or deciding to go along with them. ³‰ 
 A

  
  ‰
‰
A‰
    
 A
 
!   
  Y
?
I focus on the future not the past. Stick to the issue at hand. Don¶t bring up
the past, what others have said, or new issues. A
  
A


 A"   #
 !


 A  

YY
×
‰Y
Y'  Y‰Y . I pause to think about the problem and remind myself of
my own interests. Before I speak, I have thought about these questions: Y
?
How is this a problem for me? What makes it a problem for them?YY
?
What do I want to happen or fear may happen? How about them?YY
?
What must change to make things happen? What would they say?YY
?
How can I get their cooperation? What can I offer them?YY
×

Y‰Y (Y‰YY   (Y    (Y
(Y
Y
Y " I am not vague
our evasive. I use "I" messages and avoid ³you´ messages. (Skill ± Assertive Skills) I
use words and phrases that de-escalate a conflict including: ³
 
   ‰ 

 
 ‰
 

 !
! ‰´ Y

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

YY




Y
± When I am upset or angry with the other person, I find it hard to
think creatively, listen carefully, and act effectively. Cooling down and staying calm
through tough situations is at least half the battle. Here is what I do. (Skill ± Calming
1 & 2)YY

×
‰Y

YY' 
" When I¶m stressed, anxious or upset, I tend to take short,
shallow breaths. These increase tension. Instead, I take 3-5 minutes to breathe
deeply allowing my stomach to expand as I breathe in and sinks as I breathe out.YY

×
‰Y
)YY'Y
Y'  YY  
"YWhen I am attacked, surprised, or
embarrassed, my brain prepares my body to fight, flee or freeze. It takes 20-30
minutes to calm back down. If there is no real or further threat, I cool down.YY
?
I take a time-out. A"   ). I want to collect my
thoughts and release the tension that is building up inside.YY
?
I do something else. I stop replaying the conflict conversation in my head. I
go for a walk. I make myself think about something else. I do a crossword
puzzle - anything that distracts me from the conflict situation.YY
?
I intentionally relax. I use a guided imagery or tense and release activity.YY
×
‰Y Y YYY

"YMy thoughts and my mental habits can decrease or
increase the intensity of the frustration, fear, and anger I may feel. Y
?
I control how upset I feel.YBy naming what bother me, I take back its power
to control my feelings. No one else is responsible or makes me feel anything.
My feelings follow the choices I make. Instead of reacting, A$



  I think about my choices. xample%A‰
   &‰
 
 ‰   
   
 
      
 

 
  ‰' 
 
   ‰
 
YY
?
I am alert to my own irrational thoughts. When things get heated, I can start
to believe the other person is trying to control or destroy me. Rarely is it ³all
or nothing.´ I do not try to be ³a mind reader.´ Other people are not
completely ³evil;´ I am not always ³right´ and ³good.´ Is there a good reason
I am clinging to my position or am I just afraid of ³losing´ or ³looking bad.´
My irrational thoughts increase my distress and sense of threat I feel and see.YY
?
I recall my purpose.YRemembering my goals and values can help me get
through difficult moments. I focus on the big picture; it is not just about me.
This conflict will be one of many in a long and productive relation.YY

YY



Y Y  YY

?
‰Y Y Y Y 
Y. I share turns speaking but listen more than I
speak. I tune into facts, their feelings, and how things make sense to them.YY
?
‰Y YY
Y
Y
 Y YYY Y . I speak softly,
clearly, and slowly. My tone is sincere ± ³no attitude.´ I maintain eye contact. Y
?
‰Y Y
Y
Y'Y  . My body is relaxed; my arms and legs
are uncrossed, and my distance is non-threatening. I control rejecting,
disrespectful or hostile nonverbal reactions (rolling eyes, crossed arms,
tapping foot etc.).YY

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

?
‰Y Y

YY
 !

(Y !
(Y(YY   . I do

not use ³you´ language or other messages that threaten, put-down or judge. Y
?
‰Y YY " A stopper is a way of reminding myself to stop doing
something that is unproductive. Stoppers can be a note to myself that I keep
in my pocket, a question I ask myself, A
   or a place on the
back of my hand I on which I focus to get my own attention. Finally, I have a
³bailout´ ± a way of ending heated conversations or confrontations so I can
return later.YY

YY

Conflicts can and do get out of hand sometimes. Awareness and preparation help keep them
from escalating or becoming destructive. Not every conflict can be resolved. Î

(Y
 'Y
Y Y 
 " When opposition becomes too costly and a one-sided
victory unlikely, people are more eager to come together. Y

Y
Y' Y'  Y

 " Some issues are so important, emotions so intense, or personality differences so
great that the reducing hostility and increasing respect are the only achievable goals. Agree
to disagree for now and move on.   ' (Y

Y
Y
Y Y

" I do
not look for conflicts, and some I cannot escape. I can use conflicts to build better working
relations. I can also reduce the likelihood that things that matter to me will get out of hand.Y

 
Y
 
Y*Y ! 
 
Y

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

Y
c Y

Y
Y
Y
As conflict escalates, adversaries begin to make greater threats and impose harsher negative
sanctions. There is often a greater degree of direct violence and both sides suffer heavy losses. In
some cases, these conflicts spiral completely out of control. Given the highly destructive role that
escalation plays, it is important to develop strategies to limit and reverse this process.

De-escalation involves changes within each of the adversaries as well as new forms of interaction
between them. In most cases, de-escalation does not occur until the parties have reached a prolonged
stalemate in which both sides are being harmed by continuing the confrontation. Once the parties
realize this, they are more likely to be willing to negotiate.

Once initiated, de-escalation tends to proceed slowly and requires much effort. Many small steps must
be taken before more significant de-escalation strategies can be initiated. Indeed, full de-escalation
from war to cooperation involves a series of successive redefinitions of the parties' relationship.[1]
And because de-escalation typically depends on actions taken by both partisans and intermediaries,
these actions must be coordinated if they are to succeed.[2]

This essay will outline various methods intended to limit escalation and promote de-escalation. These
include gradual reduction in tension (GRIT), de-escalation negotiations, media management, and
various efforts to strengthen relationships between adversaries.

J 

 


One way to avoid the dangers associated with escalation is to limit the extent to which a conflict
becomes more intense and severe. Relationships that do not escalate easily are said to be high in
stability. Various factors contribute to stability and make some conflicts resistant to escalation.

×
First,Y
 i
t-imitiYrmsYYistitutisY
YimitYtheYseverit Y Y
 i
t.[YheseYrmsY
YistitutisYt
i
 Y
rhibitYtheYuseY YhrshYt
ti
sYY
itYtY
rbemYsviYsYtheY


r
riteY YtYres
YtY
 i
t.Yu
hYex
e
ttisY
tYsY
eiisYYrmYbehvirYsY
ruesY Y Y
m
etiti.[YY
×
FrumsYYthir-
rt YistitutisYhe
YmembersYtYresveY
 i
tY
e
e u YrtherYthY


eYtYvie
e.[Yimir ,YeistiveYbies,YmeitiYservi
es,YYrbitrtiYservi
esYY
iveY
e
eYYvietYY 
e-sviY YtYresveYis
utes.YY
×
âutsieY
trsY
YsYiYiY
revetiveYi
m
,YusiYi
mti
Ye rtsYtYe-es
teY

 i
tsYcFâ Ythe Ybe
meYviet.YrevetiveYi
m
YmesuresYthtYimYtY
revetY

 i
tsY rmYbe
miYver YsevereYi
ueYer YriYres
sesYYvie
eY
revetiY

tis.YY
×
Œem
rtiztiY
Yhe
Y
rtiesYtYeve
YvietYYustYme
hismsY rYresviY Y
is
utesYthtYrise.YY
×
‰Yiti,YtheY erY Yes
tiY
YbeYim
rttYiYimitiYtheYextetYtYhi
hY
 i
tY
es
tesYutY Y
tr.Y‰ee,Y
 i
tYisYessYike YtYs
irYheY
e
eYreYreY YtheY

tetiY rYsu
hYs
irsYY

ereYbutYtheY
seque
esY Yes
ti.[YtYtheYstrtY Y

 i
t,Y
rtiesYshuYsetYimitsYYhY rYthe YiY.Yhe Y
YreeYtY
utYssesYi YtheY

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

strueYes
tesYtY r,YrYviYeteriYstruesYiYhi
hYetr
metYseemsYike .[YY
×
‰Yiti,YbthYsiesYm YmkeYe rtsYtYesureYthtY
 i
tYesYtYes
teYivertet .Y
FrYexm
e,Ythe Ym YestbishYrumrY
trYtemsYrYtherYr
iY 
ts-veri i
tiY
r
essesY
tY
revetYrumrsY rmYeve
iYYqui
k Ys
rei.Yhe Ym YsYutiizeYes
ti-
imitiYueYtYesureYthtY YsttemetsYmeYbutYtheirYriev
esYreYtY
ue
essri Y
rv
tive.YY
×
heYestbishmetY Ys
iYbsYtesYtYis
ureYtheYuseY YhrshYt
ti
sYYreu
eYtheY
ikeihY Yes
ti.Yu
hYbsYi
ueY
sitiveYttitues,Yres
e
t,Y rieshi
,Ykishi
s,Y

er
eiveYsimirit YY
mmYru
Ymembershi
.[YheseYbsY
Y
uter
tY Y
tismYthtYrisesYverYtheY
urseY Y
 i
t.YheYre
itiYthtYe'sY

etYisYY
memberY YYru
YtYhi
hYeYsYbesY
ru
esY
sitiveYsetimets.YYm YteY
thtYYe e
tiveY YtY
mbtY
riztiYisYtY reYsetimetYbsYbeteeYtYru
sY
b YmkiYthemY eeYthe YreYY
rtY YtheYsmeYrerYru
.YmmYmembershi
YiY

rss
uttiYru
sY
ru
esYbsY Y
er
eiveYsimirit YY
mmYru
Yietit Y
beteeYtheseYiivius.[Y‰YtheYmstYeerYsese,YthisYisYYmtterY Yre
iziYtheY

mmYhumit Y Ye'sY

etsYYi
uiYthemYiYe'sYmrYs

e.YhisY
r
essY Y
humiztiYmkesYitYmu
hYmreYi i
utYtYusti YtheYuseY Yhev Yvie
eYrYressi,Y
YisYthere reYY
er uYtYiYimitiYes
ti.YY

Œ 
 


But what can be done when conflict has already reached a significantly high level of intensity? In these
cases, parties must turn to de-escalation strategies to counteract the escalation process and move
toward a reconciliation.

Conflict de-escalation refers to a decrease in the severity of the coercive means used and in the
number of parties engaged in the struggle.[10] One or more dimensions of the conflict become less
intense and the conflict begins to lessen in size. De-escalation can be directed away from intense
animosity or toward increased cooperation.[11]

The shift from escalation to de-escalation is not a single event, but rather a process that advances in a
broad step-by-step fashion and is produced by pressures that build over time.[12] This process
includes trying to get adversaries to the negotiating table, forming agreements about peripheral
issues, and moving toward resolution of the basic issues.[13] All of this is typically accompanied by a
reduction in hostility and mistrust between the adversaries.

Fortunately, people in an escalated conflict can only do so much damage to each other, and for only
so long.[14] De-escalation typically occurs after parties have reached a hurting stalemate. At this
point, neither party can escalate the conflict further. The point of maximum conflict intensity and
destructiveness has been reached, and neither side anticipates that the balance of forces will change
so that it may triumph.[15] Contentious tactics have failed, resources have been exhausted, and both
sides have incurred unacceptable costs.[16] At this point, the adversaries are likely to realize that
things must change and they begin to develop a new way of thinking about their conflict.[17] Once
they realize that their current strategy cannot triumph (at least not with acceptable costs), they are
likely to begin to pursue a more conciliatory approach. If they refuse to end the stalemate by yielding
or withdrawing, they must work together to find a mutually acceptable way out.[18]

At this point, one side typically makes an important conciliatory gesture. Hostility decreases, the
tendency to retaliate lessens, and the level of coerciveness declines.[19] ventually adversaries may

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

begin to confer benefits on each other and reward each other for cooperating.[20] All of these factors
initiate the process of de-escalation.

p



Œ 
 

Some of the same processes that contribute to escalation also Y
contribute, in different circumstances, to de-escalation. The Œrmti
Yevets,Yi
uiYshr
,Y
processes of de-escalation occur within each adversary, in the sueYi
resesYiYtesisYY
relations between adversaries, and among parties in the social uiterYbisY rY
e
e,Y teY
environment.[21] To a large extent, all of these de-escalation mtivteYtheYturiY
itY Y
processes occur as a result of various changes in conflict conditions. mutuYe-es
ti.YvetsYikeY
These changed conditions produce a new context in which de- theYubYissieYrisisYY
escalation policies are more likely to succeed. t'sYvisitYtYerusemYmkeYitY
i i
utY rYe
isiYmkersYY
bthYsiesYtYmitiYtheirY
J
  
 
 


 p
 
estbisheYssum
tisYbutYtheY
retishi
YYm Y r
eYthemY
The process of de-escalation that takes place within each adversary tYre
izeYtheYextetY YtheirY
includes various social-psychological changes and organizational itere
ee
e.YDD 
developments. These processes help people to recognize their own  
YheYŒYtir
se
responsibility for the conflict and to reframe the conflict so that a YY
mutually beneficial solution seems possible.[22]

Social-psychological processes that can contribute to de-escalation include cognitive dissonance,

entrapment, relationship building, and empathy. Cognitive dissonance theory suggests that once
people have made conciliatory moves towards an adversary, they tend to justify their actions. In an
attempt to make their values consistent with their actual conduct, parties may devalue previously
sought goals.[23] If the actions are reciprocated and turn out to be beneficial, de-escalation becomes
even more likely.

Like cognitive dissonance, entrapment often fosters escalation but can be controlled to help avoid
escalation. Indeed, certain aspects of entrapment can contribute directly to de-escalation. Once
adversaries have initiated conciliatory actions, entrapments may help to keep them on course. This is
because de-escalatory actions have costs and involve an investment on the part of the adversaries.
Parties may therefore find themselves yielding more than they had anticipated in order to behave
consistently with past actions. To abandon de-escalation after investing so much would be to admit
that their previous actions had been mistaken.[24]

Sympathy and empathy also contribute to de-escalation and help to sustain it. A person sympathizing
with another is emotionally moved by that person's feelings. mpathy, on the other hand, stresses
taking the role of the other, accurately perceiving the other's feelings and thoughts, and experiencing
those feelings and thoughts "as if" they were one's own.[25] Those who sympathize or empathize with
their adversaries are far less likely to inflict devastating harm on them. In addition, such feelings help
to produce and support further de-escalatory policies.

Several organizational developments within one or more of the parties can also fuel de-escalation.
First, the emergence of groups interested in cooperating with the adversary may lend legitimacy to
dissent from hard-line policies. Constituencies for de-escalation often arise when parties' confidence in
the justness and morality of their cause begins to wane.[26] As a war drags on, many individuals
become impoverished, lose family members, and suffer other heavy losses.[27] Meanwhile, the
wealthy and powerful often profit from the conflict, which can lead to a perceived increase in social

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

inequality.[28] If inequality in the distribution of burdens comes to be regarded as unfair, opposition

to hard-line policies may begin to grow. Public campaigns and demonstrations opposing the conflict
may occur with increasing frequency and contribute to public opposition to the war. If hard-liners try
to suppress this opposition, this may simply create further hostility and strengthen the opposition.
This public pressure sometimes prompts governments to initiate de-escalation policies.

Also, as the costs of continuing the struggle grow, parties may become doubtful about the value of the
goals sought and develop a general sense that the means being used are not achieving what is
intended. The evident failure of past militant strategies may lead them to consider an alternate
approach.[29] In addition, if the majority regards the severe tactics used by one faction as
unacceptable, this extreme faction may lose its support and legitimacy.[30] Alternative leadership that
supports de-escalation and opposes hard-line policies may emerge, leading to changes in government
policy that create new opportunities for de-escalation. If more moderate representatives are involved
in decision-making, there is likely to be more free discussion and a genuine consideration of
alternatives.[31]

A depletion of resources can further contribute to de-escalation. Adversaries have limited amounts of
manpower and strategic materials that they can invest in waging conflict. As these limited resources
begin to diminish, a party's ability to engage in coercive action decreases.[32] This depletion of
resources may eventually hinder aggressive action. Furthermore, parties may decide that
accommodation is better than continuing the struggle and risking total destruction.

Once de-escalation has begun, various organizational developments can make it difficult to turn back.
Leaders who have undertaken the first de-escalatory steps do not want to appear as if they've made a
mistake. If large, public steps have been taken to de-escalate conflict, this new course may seem
irreversible.[33]

‰



  

The second broad class of de-escalation processes pertains to the interaction between adversaries.
Just as the destructive ways in which adversaries interact can foster conflict escalation, other modes
of interaction can contribute to de-escalation. Parties' willingness to participate in de-escalation
negotiations often results from their recognition that they are interdependent and that their goals can
be integrated.[34]

To begin the process of de-escalation, each side must first recognize and respect the other's right to
collective existence. Parties can work to reduce inaccurate perceptions, stereotypes and enemy
images through training in workshops, personal therapy and reflection.[35] And through various
humanization processes, the adversaries can come to recognize each other's legitimacy and
demonstrate mutual acceptance. Changes in relationships can be fostered through reciprocity, issue
containment and developing ties between adversaries.

×
First,Yre
i
r
it YiYiter
tiY
Yhe
Y
 i
tsYtYmutu Ye-es
te.YY
?
‰ Ye
hYsieYre
tsYtYYequivetYeveYtYtheYther,YbthYsiesY
YviY
tiYiY
 sYthe YthikYm Y
rvkeYrYiviteYhrsherY
tisY rmYtheYtherYsie.[YY
?
‰Yiti,YeriY rmYex
erie
esYithYtheYversr Y
Yhe
Y
rtiesYtYestimteY
hYtheYtherYsieYiYre
t.YhisYreu
esYtheYikeihY YuitetiY
 i
tY
es
ti.YY
?
Fi ,YversriesYhYeve
YshreYrmsY Yiter
tiYm YbeY
strieYiYtheY

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

ereeYtYhi
hYthe Yes
teY
 i
t.YY
×
e
,YissueY
timetY
Yhe
Y
 i
tY rmYbe
miYYe
m
ssi.YhisY
Y

urYiY
Yvriet Y Y s.YY
?
‰YsmeY
ses,YYversr Ym Yiteti Y

etrteYY YitsYeer YYYs
e
i i
Y
.YY
?
s,Y
rtiesYhY iYtYttiYtheirYrYsYm Y iYsettiY rYhtYthe Y
YetY
tYbeYtheYbestY
ti.YY
?
â
eYtheYmttersYiY
tetiY
YbeYbrkeYYitYsub-issues,YsmeY YtheseY
issuesYm Y

erYesierYtYsetteYYtre- sYmYthemYm YseemY
ssibe.[YY
?
Fi ,Yi mmtr YissuesYm YbeY
tieYb YtheYeve
metY YshreYs.YFrY
exm
e,YversriesYhYbeieveYthtY
tiueYes
tiY
sesYtheYriskY YmutuY
estru
tiYm Ye
ieYtYrkYtetherYtYviYsu
hYYresut.Y‰Yiti,YtheY
i
resi YiterteYbYe
m YYtheYshreYY Ye
mi
Yex
siY
e
ureY

ertiYYmtivteY
rtiesYtY iYi-iYut
mes.[YY

×
st ,YsYmembersY rmYe

hYsieYeve
YtiesYYestbishY
mmui
ti,Ythe Ym Y

iitteYe-es
ti.YheseYiiviusYserveYsYqusi-meitrs,Y
ve iYim
rttY
i rmtiYtYtheY

siYsiesYYhe
iYbthYru
sYtY iYY YtYe-es
teY
 i
t.Y
he Ym YsYeve
YbsYithYe
hYtherYY rmYshreYex
e
ttisYbutYhY utureY

 rttisYiYbeYhe.[YY

^  

The final broad class of de-escalation processes concerns the roles played by outside parties and the
ways in which they relate to the adversaries to foster de-escalation.

×
First,YtheY
rese
eYYitesit Y Yss
iteY
 i
tsY teYhsYYim

tYYtheY
ssibeYe-
es
tiY YtheY
rimr Ystrue.[ YsYtheYYrYbeYtYsubsie,Y rYexm
e,YtheseY

hesYhYYim

tYYm Y
 i
tsYthruhutYtheYr.Yikeise,YtheY
hiY
 mi
sY YreiY
 i
tsY
Yhe
YtY
reteYYtms
hereY
u
iveYtYe-es
ti.YY
×
e
,YutsieY
rtiesY
Y
rvieYmesY YtheY Ye-es
tiYm Y

ur.YFrYexm
e,Y
the Y
YestbishY
r
euresY rYim
emetiY
ese iresYrY rYtrsitiiYtYeitimteYeY
vermets.YY
×
hir,Ythe Y
YsetYimitsYY
 i
tYes
tiYYiterveeYtYe r
eYthseYimits.[ Y
‰tertiYvermetYriztis,Y rYexm
e,Y
Yhe
YtYesureYthtYversriesYY
tYuseYver Yestru
tiveYmesYtY
hieveYtheirYs.YYiesYhY eeYthreteeYb YY

 i
tYm Y
ressureYtheYis
utiYtisYtYe-es
te.YY
×
Furth,YutsieY
rtiesY
YserveYsYitermeiriesYtYhe
YtheYversriesYre rmeYtheY
 i
tY
Yis
verYYmutu Ybee i
iY YtYe-es
teYit.Y‰YmstY
ses,YtheY
rtiesYreYmreY
ike YtY

e
tY
r
ssYsuesteYb YYmeitrYrtherYthYb YYeem .Yhus,YheYutsieY


trsYtkeYY
tiveYY
sitiveYreYiY
 i
tYmemet,Ythe Yi
reseYtheYikeihYthtY
e-es
tiY
i
iesYiY
rveYsu

ess u.YY
×
Fi th,YreiYme
hismsY rYis
uteYresuti,Ys
e
iizeYitertiYriztisYY
 âsYikeiseY
 YYreYiY
revetiYe Y
 i
tYY steriYe-es
ti.[
YheY
iteYtis,Y‰ âs,YY âsY
Y
ressureYvermetsYtYe-es
teYithYs
tis.Y
‰termeiriesYsmetimesYrkYtYrizeYiueYru
s,Y
rbem-sviYrksh
s,YrY
ssist
eY
rrmsYtYhe
Yeve
YistitutisY rYmiY
 i
t.[YY

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y



 ‰




Finally, social education and the media play a significant role in the de-escalation of conflicts.
Currently, education is highly ethnocentric and influenced by propaganda and inflammatory media.
However, schools, communities and the media also have the potential to promote cooperation and
foster pro-social behavior. For example, schools can design activities to increase children's ability to
identify others' emotional responses and to take the perspective of another. Such empathy training
fosters cooperation and mutual understanding. ducation about non-violent modes of conflict
resolution is also crucial. This would include leadership seminars that focus on problems of
ethnocentrism, prejudice, violence, economic development, and the proliferation of weapons.
scalation training that exposes disputants to the dangers of violence and escalation and outlines de-
escalation strategies might also be helpful.

The media, including radio and television, also plays an important role. mphasizing the voices of
political demagogues in the media can inflame feelings of fear and anger and contribute to invidious
distinctions between in-groups and out-groups. Such inflammatory reporting often fuels the escalation
spiral and adds to the destructiveness of conflict.

However, the media also has great potential to reduce tensions between countries and can be used to
promote understanding between adversaries. Both radio and television can help to clarify important
issues and promote public understanding of the conflict. It can also highlight the terrible costs
associated with war and violence and help people to recognize that they are on a disastrous course. In
addition, mass media communication about possibilities for conflict resolution, including
documentaries about successful resolution efforts, might prove highly valuable. In general, these sorts
of peace media strategies can help to balance out the voices of extremists.












Œ 
 
J 

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

There are many policies and strategies that various parties can Y
pursue in order to de-escalate intractable conflicts. In selecting a !riusYt
ti
sY
YbeYuseYtY
policy, an analysis of the prevailing conditions and trends relating to iititeYtheYe-es
tiY
r
ess:YY
the struggle should be made. No single kind of de-escalating effort
will work for every conflict in every situation. Instead, a wide range .
â
eiYYeY
heY Y
of alternative policies should be reviewed to ascertain which policies
mmui
ti.YY
are likely to attain particular goals under various circumstances.[44]
.
us
esiY Ys
tis.YY
Which policies of de-escalation will prove to be most effective will .
emvY YextremistY
depend in large part on the level of escalation that has been eershi
.YY
reached. .
ubi
Y
keemetY
 YsmeYres
sibiit Y rY
While conflict that has reached only a low level of escalation is theY
 i
t.YY
usually the easiest and least costly to resolve, the political will is .
e
itiY YtheY
often low.[45] Because the seriousness of these conflicts typically versr 'sYexiste
eYY
goes unrecognized, intermediaries often do not act.
eitim
.YY
.
esstiY YvietY

er
i.YY
To avoid further escalation, parties should use non-provocative
.
rti
i
tiYiYi rmY
methods, such as protest or non violent resistance, as opposed to is
ussisYbutY
violence. They should keep the issues in contention narrowly focused sutis.Y
and isolated from other issues, and limit participation. One way of
doing this is to reduce or counter inflammatory rumors and establish
--Yp
   YheY
rumor control mechanisms. For example, in periods of rioting or tm Y YŒe-es
ti!Y
other racial disturbances, the Community Relations Service, an arm
of the U.S. Department of Justice, sometimes establishes rumor
control centers to provide accurate information about what is going on. On call all of the time, they
provide a phone number citizens can call to seek verification of stories they have heard.[46]

Intermediaries can attempt to limit the sale of weapons in the country where conflict is underway.
Non-proliferation strategies, arms embargoes, and arms limitation agreements are all ways to block
the flow of weapons into unstable areas. In addition, intermediaries help to prevent the spread of
conflict by providing peacekeeping forces, as well as provide mediation, information gathering and
consultation services.[47] Long-term de-escalation policies include the development of crosscutting
group ties, institutionalized conflict resolution procedures, and the creation of shared identities. They
also involve efforts aimed at improving the social, economic, and cultural way of life of the
disadvantaged and marginalized members of society. This includes establishing a legitimate electoral
system, educational system, and procedures for protecting fundamental human rights.

Such measures not only limit inadvertent escalation, but also aid in de-escalation.YGradual Reduction
in Tension (GRIT), a term coined by Charles Osgood, refers to those strategies whereby mutual
tension and fear can be interrupted and the de-escalation process begun through conciliatory moves.
One of the parties announces and initiates a series of small cooperative moves, and invites the other
side to reciprocate. These moves are continued whether or not there is immediate reciprocity.[48] If
the opponent does respond positively, the first party can make a second concession, which sets a
"peace spiral" in motion.

If the first initiative is ignored, on the other hand, it can be followed by a second or even a third
attempt. These concessions should be designed to build trust and indicate a willingness to cooperate,
but should not be terribly costly. These disarming moves help to break down parties' negative
perceptions of each other and allow a step-by-step process of conflict de-escalation to begin.

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

Anwar Sadat's trip to Jerusalem in 1977 is an example of confidence building through GRIT. Before his
trip, hostility and suspicion between gypt and Israel was very high, and several wars had already
occurred. Sadat announced that he wanted to visit Jerusalem to increase trust and to diminish
tensions between the two nations. While this conciliatory move cost him very little, it greatly improved
his image and helped to reduce tensions between the two countries. It also helped pave the way for
the historic Camp David Accords a year later.[49]

Problem solving is another de-escalation strategy. When they are ready, the adversaries can engage
in joint, problem-solving workshops facilitated by intermediaries. Various techniques contribute to
problem solving success.

×
First,YbrekiYYtheYimmeiteYis
uteYitYYseriesY YmreYmebeYsub-is
utesY

Y
he
YversriesYtYeYithYtheY
m
exit Yss
iteYithYiter
kiYissues.YrtiesY
Y
re
hYreemetsYbutY
eri
herYissuesY irstYbe reYthe YmveYYmreY
etrYissues.[ Y
hisYseque
iY YissuesYsYthemYtYeve
YYbiit YtYrkYtetherYbe reYthe Yt
keY
theYmstYi i
utY
rbems.YY
×
e
,YtheYire
tY
t
tYY
mmui
tiYivveYiYitYis
ussisYsYtheY
versriesYtYex
iYtheirY
tisYsYthtYthe YYtYei
itYe esiveYre
tis.Y‰tYsYsY

rtiesYtY urtherYuerstYe
hYther'sYmtivesYYsesitivitiesYYebesYthemYtY
tYiY
 sYthtYiYtYu
setYe
hYther.[ YhisY 
iittesY
rbem-sviYis
ussis,YiY
versriesYtY
mmui
teYeesYY
riritiesYYresveYvriusYissues.YY
×
‰ter
tiYm YsY
tributeYtYtheYestbishmetY Y
sitiveY
ersYbsYbeteeY
versries.YYstretheY

ertiYY
revetYvie
e,YitYisYim
rttYtY
reteY

itisYuerYhi
hYm Yi eretYietit Yru
sY
Y
existYYrkYtether.YFrY
exm
e,Y
rtiesY
Yeve
Yru
s,YetrksYrYriztisYi
uiY
erssY rmY


siYsies.YhisYsYthemYtYetYtYkYe
hYtherYYeeYiYiue.[
YY
×
therY YtYbriYru
sYtetherY rYe-es
tiYisYthruhYtheYeve
metY YshreY
sYYitY
re
ts.YhisYivvesYtheYeve
metY YYbe
tiveYthtYisY
mmYtYbthY

rtiesYYrequiresYtheirYitYe rtYY

erti.YhieY
t
tYthtY

ursYuerY
u vrbeY
itisY Ysus
i
iYYuequY
erY
YstirYu
YtesisYYrei r
eY
steret
es,Y rie Y
t
tYiYtheY
textY YequYsttusYY

ertiY
Yim
rveY
ttitues.[YrkiYtetherYYtheseYshreYsY
YverrieYru
Yi ere
esYY
eh
eYtheYbsYbeteeYversries.YsYthe YrkYtether,Ythe YreYike YtY 
usYY

mmitiesYrtherYthYi ere
esYYeve
Y
sitiveYttituesYtrsYe
hYther.[YY
×
YstretheYshreYietities,Y
rtiesYshuYsY sterY
rss
uttiYrYver

iYru
Y
membershi
s.[YheseY
rss
uttiYretisY
e
tYsubru
sY Ys
iet YiY sYthtY
ver
meYi-ru
ut-ru
Yisti
tisYY
reui
iYsteret
es.[YsYmembersY Y
i eretYru
sYrkYtetherYrY
 Ytether,Ythe YiYYseseY YshreYhumit .Y
u
ti,Y
uturYYs
ieti i
Yex
hes,Y rYexm
e,Y
Yex
Y vrbeY
t
tY
beteeY
e
eY Yi eretYru
sYYtisYY
rmteYmutuYres
e
t.YcuiiYsu
hY
briesYhe
sYtYreu
eY
 i
tYitesit .YY

^‰  

 ^ 

Y
 rtsYtYe-es
tiYreY
mstY
ertiYtYbeYureriY
rYtYestYmu
hYmreYi i
utYi Y
theYsitutiYisYtY
r
itiusY rY

Y
Y
c


 
cc  
 Y

Timing is a critical factor in de-escalation efforts. William Zartman theirYe e

ts.YDD"
 
coined the term "ripeness," to indicate when a conflict was ready for  #$
%
&' 
de-escalation and resolution. Parties may try to de-escalate when J 
( D
&!!Y
the time is wrong or fail to try when the time  right. If de-
escalation is attempted at the wrong time, it is likely to fail. Once
made and rejected, a de-escalation proposal might become tainted. While it may have succeeded, had
it been implemented at a more suitable time, it becomes less credible once rejected. In addition, failed
attempts to de-escalate conflict may contribute to parties' view of the conflict as intractable.[57] Any
other de-escalation efforts may come to be regarded as hopeless.

In addition, parties may fail to initiate de-escalation policies when the time is ripe. A chance to reach a
beneficial outcome has been lost, and it is possible that conditions may not be right for that
settlement again.[58] Furthermore, if parties have only limited time to reach an agreement, the
failure to take full advantage of an opportunity may lead to a lengthy delay. This allows the conflict to
persist and possibly escalate. Hostilities may become institutionalized, making de-escalation more
difficult in the future.

Finally, parties can initiate de-escalation when the time  right, and yet still fail to achieve the full
range of desired results. That has many reasons, which can be summarized by saying that intractable
conflicts are entrenched, complex, and somewhat unpredictable. What will work to de-escalate one
may not work for another. Yet disputants themselves as well as the parties must be willing to risk de-
escalation at some point, or else the conflict, with all its destructive results, will go on indefinitely.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Y

Y
Y