INKOVEMA Podcast „Well through time“

#144 – The art of conflict escalation.

Escalation needs in conflict.

In conversation with Rolf Balling

Well through time. The podcast about mediation, conflict coaching and organisational consulting.

Contents:

It often happens that in an organisational role – or generally in social exchange relationships – you don't get what you think you are entitled to.

Escalation then refers to the strategy and its implementation in order to obtain the service after all. Successful escalation is difficult, especially because it is not only about obtaining the "outstanding", but also about (re)establishing exchange relationships that are as intact as possible, i.e. not causing unnecessary damage to organisational / professional / personal relationships.

To achieve this, it is usually necessary to fight, but a "war" that is about victory/triumph or defeat/disgrace, and specifically about rendering the "enemy" incapable of fighting, should be avoided wherever possible.

The following rules have proven to be effective when escalating:

1. escalate step by step; always take the smallest possible step on the escalation staircase.

2. The Non-Leisters addressed in their special rolethat The problem of non-performance remains in the foreground. As a person with special characteristics/behaviours, he remains excluded. So separate the problem from the person and from a human relationship.

3. no devaluations, In particular, no insinuation of bad intentions on the other side. No indignation or even insults. The emotional quality of the demand must be caring - at best "disappointed" or "perplexed". If you have already accumulated a lot of anger in the process, a colleague should check documents for subliminal insults before they are sent.

4. the "shifting of bad feelings" is an important and legitimate guiding principle. If only for your own mental hygiene. You have to think about how you can make the non-leader feel worse than you do. Can the matter become embarrassing for him? or does it require more and more effort? or does he have to justify himself more and more? or is he threatened with a loss of money/resources/face? or does he lose the fun of the uproar?

5. if the other side has a problem as to why it cannot perform, that is in principle their business. Do not provide diagnoses or proposed solutions without being asked, at most an offer to co-operate in their improvement activities under certain conditions.

6. escalation always as an emergency solution to preserve the rules of give and takeand always combine this with an offer of de-escalation in the event of a claim. Therefore, build in golden bridges that the other side can cross without losing too much face.

7. if the other side uses dirty tricks, such as lying or bluffing, it is important to show that this has been noticed. However, it is usually better to refrain from moralising. Rather ask uncomfortable questions or press for clarification from a third party.

8. gradually increase the number of people involved, also involve informal forces that can be helpful, usually before escalating to formally higher hierarchical levels.

9 Precise documentation of non-performance or poor performance can be very helpful. Compile pure facts here. The emotions can then arise all the more in the reader.

10 It is legitimate to threaten with consequences. However, in a form that avoids defiant reactions as far as possible. Keep threats rather unspecific, because you absolutely have to carry out the threatened measures once the designated trigger event has occurred; otherwise you will lose credibility. It is usually better to just describe the "terrible" measures that are on your mind and then emphasise that you don't actually want them.

11 If the other party is behaving increasingly irrationally, it is usually a good idea to involve a professional third party. In other words, mediators, arbitrators, suitable staff positions. Also remote organisational functions such as supervisory boards, works councils, associations, etc. At some point, lawyers and even courts.

12. If you are in a constant exchange of services, you can also withhold your own services that are actually due or refuse to co-operate in other areas. Here, however, you must pay close attention to appropriateness so that you do not put yourself in the wrong.

13. Before every escalation, you have to check internally how far you really want to go if the other side remains "stubborn". Because sometimes it is better to leave the battlefield - even with losses at some point. Once this has been clarified, you can plan the appropriate resources in terms of time, money and advice.

14 Effective escalation requires intelligent, adult behaviour. This becomes difficult when one's own involvement, accumulated injuries and memories of bad experiences make it impossible to remain calm and detached. This is when it becomes important to organise support in the form of coaching or supervision.

15. if the escalation is successful – the other side has delivered – you can be happy and show it. However, behaviour that could be interpreted as a triumph should be avoided. A reconciliatory ritual may then be needed in order to return to normal relationships.