Peter T. Coleman > Quotes

“See the system. When you find yourself stuck in an oversimplified polarized conflict, a useful first step is to try to become more aware of the system as a whole: to provide more context to your understanding of the terrain in which the stakeholders are embedded, whether they are disputants, mediators, negotiators, lawyers, or other third parties. This can help you to see the forest and the trees; it is a critical step toward regaining some sense of accuracy, agency, possibility, and control in the situation.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Most of us do not like not being able to see what others see or make sense of something new. We do not like it when things do not come together and fit nicely for us. That is why most popular movies have Hollywood endings. The public prefers a tidy finale. And we especially do not like it when things are contradictory, because then it is much harder to reconcile them (this is particularly true for Westerners). This sense of confusion triggers in a us a feeling of noxious anxiety. It generates tension. So we feel compelled to reduce it, solve it, complete it, reconcile it, make it make sense. And when we do solve these puzzles, there's relief. It feels good. We REALLY like it when things come together.

What I am describing is a very basic human psychological process, captured by the second Gestalt principle. It is what we call the 'press for coherence.' It has been called many different things in psychology: consonance, need for closure, congruity, harmony, need for meaning, the consistency principle. At its core it is the drive to reduce the tension, disorientation, and dissonance that come from complexity, incoherence, and contradiction.

In the 1930s, Bluma Zeigarnik, a student of Lewin's in Berlin, designed a famous study to test the impact of this idea of tension and coherence. Lewin had noticed that waiters in his local cafe seemed to have better recollections of unpaid orders than of those already settled. A lab study was run to examine this phenomenon, and it showed that people tend to remember uncompleted tasks, like half-finished math or word problems, better than completed tasks. This is because the unfinished task triggers a feeling of tension, which gets associated with the task and keeps it lingering in our minds. The completed problems are, well, complete, so we forget them and move on. They later called this the 'Zeigarnik effect,' and it has influenced the study of many things, from advertising campaigns to coping with the suicide of loved ones to dysphoric rumination of past conflicts.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Of course, our natural impulse in these [intractable conflict] situations is to fight or flee. To lash out, blame, attack, or challenge someone, or otherwise try to get out and avoid the situation altogether. These responses make perfect sense in the short term, but likely will have little effect on the 5 percent [of conflicts that are intractable]. In fact, they may make matters worse in the long term.

So if escaping or resolving this conflict is your goal (and we do not assume this is always the case), we suggest a different approach. And it begins with complicating your life.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“It is critical to recognize that we live in an increasingly complex world - biologically, socially, politically, technologically, you name it - that holds many inherent contradictions. In the middle of this complex world are we humans, who have a natural tendency to seek coherence in what we see, feel, think, and do.

When we experience conflict, this tendency intensifies. Conflict is essentially a contradiction, an incompatibility, oppositely directed forces, and a difference that triggers tension. When we encounter conflict, within the field of forces that constitute it, the natural human tendency is to reduce that tension by seeking coherence through simplification. Research shows that this tendency toward simplification becomes even more intensified when we are under stress, threat, time constraints, fatigue, and various other conditions all absolutely typical of conflict.

So what is the big idea? It is NOT that coherence is bad and complexity is good. Coherence seeking is simply a necessary and functional process that helps us interpret and respond to our world efficiently and (hopefully) effectively. And complexity in extremes is a nightmare - think of Mogadishu, Somalia, in the 1990s or the financial crisis of 2009 or Times Square during rush hour on a Friday afternoon.

On the other hand, too much coherence can be just as pathological: for example, the collapse of the nuances and contradictions inherent in any conflict situation into simple 'us versus them' terms, or a deep commitment to a rigid understanding of conflicts based on past sentiments and obsolete information. Either extreme - overwhelming complexity or oversimplified coherence - is problematic. But in difficult, long-term conflicts, the tide pulls fiercely toward simplification of complex realities. This is what we must content with.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Recall that the collapse of complexity that accompanies 5 percent [i.e. intractable] conflicts happens along many dimensions:

- A very complication situation becomes very simple.
- A focus on concrete details in the conflict shifts to matters of general abstract principle.
- Concerns over obtaining accurate information regarding substantive issues transform into concerns over defending one's identity, ideology, and values.
- The out-group, which was seen as made up of many different types of individuals, now are all alike.
- The in-group, which was seen as made up of many different types of individuals, now are all similar.
- Whereas I once held many contradictions within myself in terms of what I valued, thought, and did; now I am always consistent in this conflict.
- Whereas I used to feel different things about this conflict - good, bad, and ambivalent; now I feel only an overwhelming sense of enmity and hate.
- I've shifted from long-term thinking and planning toward short-term reactions and concerns.
- Where I once had many action options available to me, I now have one: attack.

This is the bad news about the 5 percent, but it's also the good news. The collapse of complexity occurs on so many levels, all leading to a similar state of 'us versus them' thinking, that reintroducing a sense of complexity and agency can also be achieved in a wide variety of ways. There are therefore many places to find points of leverage to rupture the certainty and oversimplification that rules in these situations.

The question is how to find them.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Almost fifty years ago, John F. Kennedy made this appeal:

'Too many of us think [that peace] is impossible. Too many think it is unreal. But that is a dangerous, defeatist belief. It leads to the conclusion that war is inevitable, that mankind is doomed, that we are gripped by forces we cannot control. We need not accept that view ... Let us focus instead on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions - on a series of concrete actions and effective agreements which are in the interest of all concerned. There is no single, simple key to this peace; no grand or magic formula to be adopted by one or two powers. Genuine peace must be the product of many nations, the sum of many acts. It must be dynamic, not static, changing to meet the challenge of each new generation. For peace is a process - a way of solving problems.' (Close quote.)”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Social network complexity: People with more diversified, complex social networks have been found to be more tolerant of out-groups and more supportive of policies helpful to them. They tend to have more positive out-group experiences, share more interests with people outside their own groups, and learn more about the contributions of out-group members and the problems they face.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Movement is key to dissipating negativity in community relations. Typically, dominant powers will attempt to ghettoize their opponents during periods of open conflict, in an attempt to better monitor and control them. We have found that these are the ideal conditions for the intensification of malignancy in conflict; hostilities are more likely to fester and grow when groups are constrained in one location. This is exactly what occurred during the independence struggle in Algeria in the 1950s and 1960s, when the French limited the movement of non-French Algerians to the Kasbah. This constraint led to the festering of resentments and the organization of insurgents. Alternatively, systems where negativity is relatively unconstrained, and where members of groups are allowed to travel and disperse, will tend to show a dissipation of negativity over time. This is a counterintuitive finding with substantial implications for policy and practice.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Primary power refers to the ability to affect those basic activities (such as laws, ideology, morality, symbolism, the media, policies, agendas, and decision-making processes) that shape the playing field. Secondary power involves the many strategies and tactics used while playing on the field to influence others.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“The participants playing the subordinate would attempt a strange combination of submissiveness and inflexibility as they tried to prevent going from less power to powerless. They appeared helpless and passive but would also automatically reject even the most reasonable solutions.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“Power with is based on an incrementalist theory, which views power as an expandable resource that can bring about constructive and satisfying outcomes for all. It tends to motivate people to search out one another’s abilities and competencies and to encourage and appreciate their contributions, and to exchange resources that will help both parties be more productive.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“Violent acts often represent a tipping point in conflicts, a threshold very difficult to return from. Fortunately, most communities have laws and other prohibitions against physical violence, establishing what we call 'repellers' in complexity parlance. In fact, archeological research suggests that communal taboos against violence have existed for the bulk of human existence, and were a central feature of the prehistoric nomadic hunter-gatherer bands. Indeed, a key characteristic of peaceful groups and society, both historically and today, is the presence of nonviolent values, norms, ideologies, and practices.

Although nonviolent norms are practiced in many communities around the globe, they are often overwhelmed by more violent ideologies and social modeling. Yet there exists a wide variety of parenting and educational methods for fostering more nonviolent, pro-social attitudes and skills in children: violence prevention, tolerance, cooperative learning, conflict resolution, and peace education curricula, to name a few. The socialization and indoctrination of constructive, nonviolent methods of problem solving for both children and adults is a central force for dismantling the war-system of the 5 percent [of conflicts that are intractable] and sustaining peace.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“extreme, power with can lead to inefficiencies, irresponsible leadership practices, chronic consensus seeking, and nepotism at work.6”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“better understand, cultivate, and more effectively leverage power for constructive conflict management.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“Conflicts, even trivial ones, tend to have a lasting impact on us. They affect how we feel about ourselves, how we feel about the others involved, and how we feel about the place in which the conflict occurred. They are formative.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“Similarly, power shifts and disparities in power often create conflict.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“employing a predominantly controlling approach to power at work can have negative consequences. It can produce alienation and resistance in those subjected to it. This, in turn, can limit your ability to use other types of power that are based on trust and increase the need for continuous scrutiny and regulation of subordinates. If your goal is to achieve compliance and commitment to the job from your subordinates, then sole reliance on a power-over strategy will prove costly.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“being mindful of these different assumptions and theories can help control or enhance them.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“Crude Law of Social Relations”—that cooperative conflict engenders more cooperation in the future, and competitive conflict, more competition.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“There may be fewer overt conflicts in a dictatorship, but the hidden conflicts and the passive-aggressive resistance are terrible.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“[Resolving intractable conflicts] takes time. John Paul Lederach once said that he almost got thrown out of a meeting in Northern Ireland regarding the conflict there when he suggested it might take them a long to get out of the conflict as it had to get into it (centuries). This is of course not always the case, but it is a prudent consideration.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Those without power feel zapped of motivation, thwarted, and even occasionally driven to subtle forms of retaliation and sabotage.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“In conflicts, relative power is key: our ability, relative to the ability of the other stakeholders, to cause or prevent things from happening.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“just about any intergroup conflict is essentially about power.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“Conflict Structure: This refers to the actual, objective goals associated with a conflict (not how they are perceived). Conflicts can range from consisting of purely cooperative, win-win (also known as integrative) goals, where the disputants share the same underlying concerns, to those with purely competitive, win-lose (also known as zero-sum) goals, where the only way for Disputant A to achieve his or her goals is for Disputant B to lose.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“You may also need to move a conflict from high intensity to lower intensity so that threat, fear, anxiety, and impulsive reactions recede and a sense of possibility, hope, and reason returns. This often begins with space: allowing yourself and the disputants some time and space away from the demands of the conflict in order to regroup.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“Channeling conflict and dissent constructively: During the formation of the conflict [in Mozambique], disagreement became a punishable crime and the consequences were serious. As soon as the invitation to seek what unites and not what divides was welcomed by both parties ... the possibility of disagreement and corrective feedback was paradoxically restored, making it possible for constructive tension to be recognized and welcomed back in the system. Today in Mozambique, it is clear that to say no to a policy is not treason and that dissent is not only permissible but also an effective tool for growth and development. Clearly, successful peace processes are less about agreements per se and more about how disagreement is allowed and is managed.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“Franklin D. Roosevelt, when addressing the Great Depression, realized that it was far too complex to understand and know how to intervene effectively. So he decided to begin as many positive initiatives as possible, thanking that it would increase the odds that some of them would help. To some degree, this is how we should view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What would help is vision of how a comprehensive set of initiatives can increase the probabilities for constructive dynamics and decrease the probabilities of destructive dynamics or war. These activities can come from many sources: from grassroots to national leaders to international powers and agencies.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts

“The power-with approach in organizations has its own pathologies and detractors. An overreliance on power with can result in what hard-liners call a well-intentioned pipe dream: an idealistic vision of something ultimately unattainable. Given the ruthless jungle of the marketplace and of most organizational environments, they argue, the possibilities for mutual enhancement through cooperative power are limited.”
― Peter T. Coleman, Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement

“[Standard social science approaches to analyzing conflict] too often miss the unintended consequences of well-intentioned acts. Dietrich Dorner is a German psychologist who studies leadership and decision making in complex environments. He has suggested that there is more harm done in today's world by well-intentioned people trying to do good, who are unaware of the unintended consequences of their actions, than by people actually trying to cause harm. Remarkably, this may well be true.”
― Peter T. Coleman, The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts