Map a conflict one quadrant at a time

Lay out what each side feels, does, believes as a group, and is constrained by, before trying to resolve anything.

なぜ効果があるのか

In many conflicts each party is arguing from a different quadrant — one about fairness, one about facts, one about rules — so they talk past each other. McGuigan and Popp organize their analysis of a long-running fishing-rights conflict quadrant by quadrant for this reason. Mapping both sides in all four quadrants shows where the disagreement actually sits and where there may be shared ground.

やり方

1. Name the conflict and the main parties, including yourself if you are one of them.
2. For each party, write one line per quadrant: what they feel and fear (I), what they do (It), what their group values and assumes (We), and what rules, money or structures bind them (Its).
3. Mark the quadrant where the parties differ most, and the one where they differ least.
4. Start any conversation from the quadrant of least difference, and name the quadrant of most difference explicitly.

エビデンス

McGuigan and Popp’s Integral Conflict (SUNY Press, 2016) applies Wilber’s AQAL model to conflict, with a chapter for each quadrant built around the Fraser River fishing-rights conflict in British Columbia. It is a theoretical and case-study work, not a controlled test of the method. (anecdotal)

Evidence comes from one book’s case analysis. Mapping a conflict does not resolve it, and a serious dispute may need a trained mediator.

出典

• McGuigan, R. J., & Popp, N. (2016). Integral Conflict: The New Science of Conflict. SUNY Press.

よくある間違い

Mapping the other side in detail and yourself in one generous line. Your own I and We entries are usually where the hidden part of the conflict lives.