Evolution of a Field: Personal Histories in Conflict Resolution

This book features 23 chapters written by founders, thinkers, inventors, reformers, disrupters and transformers in the field of conflict resolution, thus allowing readers to explore the field’s real, on-the-ground reasons for being and evolving. The contributors include mediators, facilitators, arbitrators, ombuds, academics, system designers, entrepreneurs, leaders of conflict resolution organizations, researchers, advocates for conflict resolution, and critics of conflict resolution. They share their personal and professional stories as well as the values, aspirations and characteristics of the field that inspired them to become involved in conflict resolution, develop their careers, and both influence and wrestle with the field’s evolution. ContributorsPeter S. AdlerHoward BellmanLela Porter LoveIan MacduffLucy MooreGeetha RavindraNancy A. WelshJohnston BarkatChris HoneymanColin RuleAndrea Kupfer SchneiderThomas J. StipanowichLisa Blomgren AmslerJacqueline N. Font-GuzmánHoward GadlinDavid HoffmanCarol IzumiMarvin E. JohnsonHomer C. LaRueBernie MayerCarrie Menkel-MeadowChristopher W. MooreEllen Waldmanhttps://open.mitchellhamline.edu/dri_press/1011/thumbnail.jp

Conflict Resolution and Systemic Change

Two assumptions about ADR – its inability to elaborate public values and its unaccountability – lie at the heart of the ADR critique. This Article suggests that, contrary to the assumptions underlying the scholarly and practitioner debate, individual conflict resolution can produce systemic change, and in the process, generate institutional practices advancing public values and addressing issues of common concern. Conflict resolution systems often segregate individual casework from systemic interventions – those aimed at addressing policy issues, examining recurring problems, or redesigning organizational systems. We demonstrate the value of integrating (but not merging) systemic thinking into individual casework, and individual cases into the project of understanding and addressing systemic concerns. We document this novel form of conflict resolution that begins by attending to individual cases, but proceeds through a critical methodology to produce systemic interventions advancing public values. We demonstrate that, under certain circumstances, informal conflict resolution can produce systemic changes that adjudication cannot achieve, and can thus solve public problems and generate public values. Indeed, we argue that, in some situations, effective individual conflict resolution depends upon its linkage to systemic problem solving. The linchpin is a methodology of inquiry and intervention for case work, which uses a form of root cause analysis to identify and, where possible, address underlying problems. The methodologies used to link individual and systemic conflict resolution also provide a kind of accountability presumed to be unavailable without appellate review. The article question the conventional assumption that detached neutrality is the only or even the best way to achieve impartiality and reduce the expression of bias. It introduces the idea of multi-partiality – critically analyzing a conflict from multiple vantage points – as a way to check the inevitable biases in decision making that must be continually surfaced and corrected. Multi-partiality can be achieved through institutional design that builds in participatory accountability - ongoing examination and justification to participants and a community of practitioners. This reflective practice, if institutionalized, provides a check on conflict resolvers\u27 biases, by requiring conflict resolvers to subject their analysis to the scrutiny of their peers and to explain and justify their choices as part of doing their work. It also provides a way to learn from and build on experience. This Article considers the implications of this framework for conflict resolution and theories of law. Extrapolating from the case study, it identifies the elements of a conflict resolution program that can perform the role of integrating conflict resolution and systemic change. It mines the lessons about how to aggregate knowledge from individual cases and prompt structural change, and considers the implications of this analysis for the design of informal conflict resolution systems as well as for adjudication. It provides a concrete setting to test the possibilities for intervention that advance public values and still preserve the capacity to afford individual justice. Finally, it offers a reconceptualization, or at least an expanded understanding, of core rule-of-law values, such as impartiality, principled decision making, and accountability

Discovering Our Field in Our Stories

It’s the people who make a field. This book draws on the thought-provoking, diverse, delightful, sometimes painful, and ultimately beautiful personal histories of some of the thinkers, inventors, influencers, reformers, disrupters, and transformers who have created—and continue to create—the field of conflict resolution. The authors of the essays in this book play a variety of roles: mediator, facilitator, arbitrator, ombuds, academic, system designer, entrepreneur, leader of public or private conflict resolution organization, researcher, advocate for conflict resolution, critic of conflict resolution. They represent the various waves of people who have populated our field, the founders, the institutionalizers, and the leaders of change

Expertise in research integration and implementation for tackling complex problems: when is it needed, where can it be found and how can it be strengthened?

© 2020, The Author(s). Expertise in research integration and implementation is an essential but often overlooked component of tackling complex societal and environmental problems. We focus on expertise relevant to any complex problem, especially contributory expertise, divided into ‘knowing-that’ and ‘knowing-how.’ We also deal with interactional expertise and the fact that much expertise is tacit. We explore three questions. First, in examining ‘when is expertise in research integration and implementation required?,’ we review tasks essential (a) to developing more comprehensive understandings of complex problems, plus possible ways to address them, and (b) for supporting implementation of those understandings into government policy, community practice, business and social innovation, or other initiatives. Second, in considering ‘where can expertise in research integration and implementation currently be found?,’ we describe three realms: (a) specific approaches, including interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, systems thinking and sustainability science; (b) case-based experience that is independent of these specific approaches; and (c) research examining elements of integration and implementation, specifically considering unknowns and fostering innovation. We highlight examples of expertise in each realm and demonstrate how fragmentation currently precludes clear identification of research integration and implementation expertise. Third, in exploring ‘what is required to strengthen expertise in research integration and implementation?,’ we propose building a knowledge bank. We delve into three key challenges: compiling existing expertise, indexing and organising the expertise to make it widely accessible, and understanding and overcoming the core reasons for the existing fragmentation. A growing knowledge bank of expertise in research integration and implementation on the one hand, and accumulating success in addressing complex societal and environmental problems on the other, will form a virtuous cycle so that each strengthens the other. Building a coalition of researchers and institutions will ensure this expertise and its application are valued and sustained

Re-thinking scientific teams: competition, conflict and collaboration

In this talk, Dr. Gadlin will discuss the organizational barriers and breakdown of collaboration in the scientific community while focusing on recurring themes in collaborative disputes. He then presents means for resolving and responding to conflict confidentially through dispute resolution programs and pre-nuptial agreements between collaborators

Effects Of Stimulus Duration And Inter-stimulus Interval On The Path Of Perceived Motion.

PhDPhysicsUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/184546/2/6708253.pd

Evolution of a Field: Personal Histories in Conflict Resolution

This book features 23 chapters written by founders, thinkers, inventors, reformers, disrupters and transformers in the field of conflict resolution, thus allowing readers to explore the field’s real, on-the-ground reasons for being and evolving. The contributors include mediators, facilitators, arbitrators, ombuds, academics, system designers, entrepreneurs, leaders of conflict resolution organizations, researchers, advocates for conflict resolution, and critics of conflict resolution. They share their personal and professional stories as well as the values, aspirations and characteristics of the field that inspired them to become involved in conflict resolution, develop their careers, and both influence and wrestle with the field’s evolution. ContributorsPeter S. AdlerHoward BellmanLela Porter LoveIan MacduffLucy MooreGeetha RavindraNancy A. WelshJohnston BarkatChris HoneymanColin RuleAndrea Kupfer SchneiderThomas J. StipanowichLisa Blomgren AmslerJacqueline N. Font-GuzmánHoward GadlinDavid HoffmanCarol IzumiMarvin E. JohnsonHomer C. LaRueBernie MayerCarrie Menkel-MeadowChristopher W. MooreEllen Waldmanhttps://open.mitchellhamline.edu/dri_press/1011/thumbnail.jp

Discovering Our Field in Our Stories

It’s the people who make a field. This book draws on the thought-provoking, diverse, delightful, sometimes painful, and ultimately beautiful personal histories of some of the thinkers, inventors, influencers, reformers, disrupters, and transformers who have created—and continue to create—the field of conflict resolution. The authors of the essays in this book play a variety of roles: mediator, facilitator, arbitrator, ombuds, academic, system designer, entrepreneur, leader of public or private conflict resolution organization, researcher, advocate for conflict resolution, critic of conflict resolution. They represent the various waves of people who have populated our field, the founders, the institutionalizers, and the leaders of change

Collaboration & team science: a field guide

Science is at the center of the interdisciplinary collaboration. The challenge to be solved provides the basis for bringing a group together with varied backgrounds and expertise to address the problem. If the dynamics of the collaboration are not tended to, the team can derail and end up focusing more time on managing issues like data sharing or miscommunications. (Taken from page 2 of poster