The Circle of Conflict Adaptation

Based on Christopher W. Moore’s Circle of Conflict

1. What is the Circle of Conflict?1

Christopher  Moore’s  Circle  of  Conflict  identified  five  sources  of  conflict:   Contents
values,  relationships,  data,  interests  and  structure.  The  circle  is  adapted   1. What is the Circle
to  include  language  as  a  source  of  conflicts  and  expands  values  conflicts   2. How to apply the Circle
to  include  adaptive  challenges2.  The  adapted  circle  depicts  the  six   3. Conflict Orientation
sources  graphically.  Understand  that  conflicts  often  have  multiple  
sources.  The  size  of  each  segment  reflects  the  likelihood  of  that  source  being  present.  Sources  of  
conflict  that  are  difficult  to  resolve  tend  to  persist  over  time.  

2. Applying the Circle of Conflict

1
Moore, The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict; 2nd edition, 1996, pp. 60-61.
2
Heifetz and Linsky, Leadership on the Line, 2002.
If you see or hear... You might…
VALUES CONFLICTS
• People leaving the room (flight). • Label the type of values disagreement (e.g., cultural, political,
• Strong disagreements about what is right or religious, ideological) to illuminate potential cross talk.
wrong (fight). • Adopt group norms to overcome triggered reactions to values
• Avoidance of specific topics. conflicts, e.g., patient, non-judgmental listening.
• Defensive or aggressive reactions that prevent • Explore assumptions or experiences to identify the source of
discussion of topics threatening to identity or differences in principles or competing commitments3.
perceptions of “the way the world is.” • Use appreciative inquiry to illuminate worldviews and/or belief
systems and to catalyze mutual acceptance of differences.
RELATIONSHIP CONFLICTS
• People choosing where to sit to avoid someone. • Explore relationship barriers by noticing when they occur and how
• Awkward silences and meaningful glances in the tension shows up - between which people or groups.
response to who is speaking. • Find ways for the people holding the tension to experience each other
• Tension seemingly unrelated to the substantive in new ways. As mutual understanding develops, move to address the
topic. pain in the relationship though redress, acceptance or forgiveness.
DATA CONFLICTS
• Differences about data relevance. • Bring the data challenges explicitly into the conversation and name
• Different interpretations of the same data. the differences in the use, definition and interpretation of data.
• Different ways of collecting data. • Encourage the use of the “best available data” and work together to
• Using different criteria for developing data. develop “better data.”
LANGUAGE CONFLICTS
• Same words meaning different things. • Identify the language differences and invite a focus on the meaning
• People unaware that they are not in the same underlying the words, rather than the words themselves.
conversation. • Model and encourage common language with common definitions.
• People “listening for” different things. • Explore MBTI4 communication preferences.
INTEREST CONFLICTS
• Zero sum mentality. • Illuminate the competing interests underlying people’s positions and
• People holding a position. use Interest Based Negotiation5 to achieve a “win-win” solution by: 1)
• People not exploring each other’s interests or separating the “people from the problem,” 2) building relationships,
articulating their own. and 3) adopting criteria to choose options BEFORE making decisions.
STRUCTURAL CONFLICTS
• People looking to other group members for • Name the structural factors influencing behavior.
“permission” to speak. • Catalyze conversations about the structural factors and how they
• Fear or anger about the “way things are.” impact people’s roles and authority.
• Assumption of hierarchical authority in • Name the “unspoken” systemic or organizational frameworks
collaborative settings. influencing assumptions about who has power and who does not6.
• An “inner circle” assuming disproportionate • Develop strategies to:
influence on decision-making. o For structural factors within the authority or influence of the
• Speech and/or behavior inferring that one group move to action, and
gender, race, class or culture are “subordinate” o For structural factors not within the influence of the group,
to another. identify who does have influence and engage them.

3. Conflict Orientation
Everyone has an orientation towards conflict. Take time to reflect on yours and that of others7. Find
opportunities to practice the following that supports movement from talk to action:
a) Conflict is normal and necessary to the work of achieving results, and
b) It is possible to address and resolve conflicts.

3
Kegan and Leahy, “The Real Reason People Won’t Change,” Harvard Business Review, November, 2001.
4
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Consulting Psychological Press.
5
Fisher and Ury, Getting to Yes, 1981.
6
Cameron and Quinn, Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture Based on the Competing Values Framework, 2011.
7
Pillsbury, Results Based Facilitation: How to Move from Talk to Action, V5.61.

Circle of Conflict Adaptation RBL-APPS.COM