IMPLICATIONS FOR TRAINING

The preceding implications cry out for new roles, innovative practices, and transformed policies and institutions to creatively deal with differences among diverse groups. Whether one is a member or representative of a group in con­flict, or a third party charged with facilitating conflict resolution, the challenge in terms of the qualities and skills required is daunting.

The list of analytical and especially behavioral skills to enact the facilitation role in resolving intergroup conflict is a long one indeed and is drawn from mul­tiple areas of professional practice, including human relations training, coun­selling, cross-cultural communication, community development, organizational consulting, intergroup relations, and international diplomacy. No one intervenor can aspire to develop the full skill set required to facilitate productive con­frontation at the intergroup level, and it is therefore assumed that such work will involve teams of professionals, often from different but complementary dis­ciplines relevant to the particular context of the conflict, for example, organi­zational, urban community, or international region.

Analytical Skills

Analytical skills from many domains of understanding are useful, but at the core of this practice is the ability to apply knowledge about social conflict, its causes, forms of expression, processes of escalation, and mechanisms for its de­escalation, management, and resolution. The task of the intervenor is to offer theoretical interpretations and insights at apparently useful points. Often these inputs will illuminate the functioning of groups in conflict, such as normative pressures toward aggressive actions, or dynamics of the interface between the groups, such as the typical manner in which majorities and minorities relate to each other. Further understanding of the context and the culture(s) in which the intergroup conflict is occurring is essential, whether one is working in an urban American community, a human service organization, or a particu­lar region of the globe. In this regard, facilitators who are from the context and culture in question, and even from the parties in conflict, can play an especially illuminating role, if they are able to rise above their biases and preconceived notions about the conflict and its resolution.

Personal Qualities

At the personal level, intervenors require many of the qualities and skills of any professional, reflective practitioner, such as integrity and detachment. Consider­able self-confidence and assuredness (although not overly so) is necessary to move into the cauldron of intergroup conflict. A high level of self-awareness is essential in terms of how one is affected by the behaviors of others, such as crit­icism or attack, and how one’s own behavior is usually perceived by and affects others. One needs the capacity to tolerate considerable ambiguity and to respond constructively to defensiveness or resistance to one’s efforts. Sensitivity to gen­der, cultural, and other differences needs to be coupled with a respect for and capacity to work well with the wide variety of individuals and people that may be encountered.

Interpersonal Skills

In terms of interpersonal functioning, facilitators of interpersonal conflict should develop many of the commonly trained communication and relationship-building skills of the helping professions. The ability to speak in genuine and respectful ways and to convey messages in a concise, organized fashion needs to be cou­pled with the skills of reflective, empathic listening. Included are the importance of being able to give and receive feedback on behaviors and the ability to pro­ductively discuss differences in perceptions that often arise. Advanced skills of relating are also often useful, for example, confrontation (sensitivity to incon­sistencies in another’s behavior and the capacity to describe these in a clear and nonjudgmental manner) and immediacy (the ability to relate another’s implied statements to your relationship or the situation at hand). In short, a team of facilitators needs the ability to respond to whatever messages members of antag­onistic groups bring forward in a constructive and respectful fashion that does not antagonize individuals or escalate differences.

Group Leadership Skills

The third party role at the group level is that of a facilitative leader, who has the capacity to help the antagonistic groups work together toward their shared goals in the intervention and in the longer term. This requires a deep knowledge of group processes and the capacity to facilitate group interaction. With regard to task leadership, the facilitator needs the abilities to design and implement agen­das that engage conflicting parties in productive confrontation and to keep them on track as necessary. On the socioemotional side of leadership, the facilitator needs to provide encouragement and support, release tension at certain points, and harmonize misunderstandings.

Intergroup Skills

Another important role for the intervenor involves the ability to manage the intergroup problem-solving process toward de-escalation and resolution. Although based in models of group problem solving, the process at the inter­group level has additional challenges and pitfalls. The facilitator needs to under­stand that at best only an uneasy coalition can be built between members or representatives of different identity groups. That is because of the constant pull of ingroup forces in ethnocentric directions, including all of the cognitive and social biases noted. Thus, moving the groups through the problem-solving process has to be a shared and mutually accepted experience at all stages. If any one stage, such as initial diagnosis or the creation of alternatives, is imbal­anced through the domination of one group or biased in the interests of one group, the outcomes will not be sustainable. Mutuality and reciprocity are the keys, and the parties need to be constantly reminded that only through joint involvement and shared commitment can they be successful in dealing with their conflict.

An additional set of skills for individuals who intend to orchestrate intergroup confrontation revolves around the ability to manage difficult interactions at the interface of two or more groups. Building on all the previous skills, this chal­lenge requires the facilitators to design and implement constructive interchanges between individuals from the conflicting groups that will move them toward resolving their difficulties and toward a renewed relationship. The ability to con­trol disruptive interactions (arguments, debates, mutual accusations, and recrim­inations, attacks on the third party or the process) needs to be combined with the skill to manage a charged agenda over time, to stay on track, and to move toward accomplishment and closure.

Consultation Skills

This approach to intergroup conflict resolution sees it as a form of professional consultation, wherein the help giver uses his or her expertise to facilitate the problem solving of the client system. Thus, skills and ethical practices that are necessary to implement the process and attain the outcomes of consultation are the final requirement for this line of work. The skills of consultation revolve around the capacity to initiate and manage the phases of consultation, from con­tact to closure. Contact with the groups in conflict should come from a base of credibility, legitimacy, and impartiality, even in the case of a facilitation team composed of members of the two groups, where intervenors are respected within and outside their communities and balance on the team provides for overall impartiality. In the entry process, the consultants need to assess the antagonists’ perceptions of these qualities, and all parties need to assess the goodness of fit between the intervenors’ values and capabilities and the client system’s need for consultation. If entry is successful, the consultant next concentrates on the critical process of contracting, wherein expectations of all parties are clarified and ground rules for the intervention are specified. Thus, the consultant must spell out the rationale, methods, and objectives of the pro­posed intervention and seek agreement of the parties on these.