Category: Conflict

8 Tools for the Mediator Leader

Getting Started

The Mediator leader brings a distinctive mindset, operational style and hopefulness to a conflict. The Mediator is a marked contrast with the Demagogue and the Manager. Mediator leaders are not necessarily professionally trained as mediators. In this context, it means leaders who are seeking to bring disputing parties together by seeking bridges of understanding leading to an agreement. Therefore they must approach conflict in a specific way, and use a suite of skills that build relationships, trust and shared solutions.

The 8 tools used by the Mediator leader are outlined below. They are a brief summary from the book Leading Through Conflict: How Successful Leaders Transform Differences into Opportunities, by Mark Gerzon.

Integral Vision

When a conflict erupts the first thought is to try and calm things down and to fix it as quickly as possible. If you are involved as a leader you see people hurting, the congregation threatening to fracture, funding at risk – it seems to demand action. But the first thing to do is – nothing!

If no one’s life is in danger then take a step back. Unless you take time to understand the whole picture – in all its complexity and inter-related parts – then you will make an inappropriate intervention. The vision required of a Mediator leader is an integral vision – one that integrates the parts of a  conflict into a whole.

The skills required when using integral vision are to question, reject and test the validity of anything that seeks to put dividing walls between the parties. This includes rejecting labels, disrespecting the integrity of those with different opinions and nurturing the webs that connect us.

Systems Thinking

Once you are focused on the whole conflict you need to work at understanding how the parts are connected. So you will look at relationships and history between the parts. You will seek to understand the character, goals and values of the different parties to the conflict. The goal here is to think systemically!

The skills one uses here are probing questions that seek to unpack the relationships that give rise to the conflict. For example: Why does this church always push out its Pastor every 3 years? What is the personal and faith history of the people that are on opposite sides of support for a new building project? What is it in our church’s story that makes change difficult?

Think of integral vision as making sure that you have all the pieces of a jigsaw in front of you before you start. Then systems thinking is searching for which piece connects to the next.

Presence

More than our minds are required to solve a conflict. When you bring all your emotional, mental and spiritual resources to the midst of a conflict – this is presence. A leader needs to be very self-aware in order to be present in a conflict. So s/he needs to acknowledge their fears, anguish, hopes, anger, etc and deal with them.

The goal of presence is to be calm, available, attentive and capable of contributing to the transformation of the conflict.

Developing that ability requires the application of specific skills. Leaders address their emotional response to conflict and learn to be peaceful in it through a variety of strategies. Examples include solitude, coaching, prayer and spiritual direction, feedback from colleagues, intentional 360 reviews, meditation, playing music or creative art.

Calm, attentive persons who can bring the whole of themselves to their role as Mediator leader have presence. Presence is the master tool and makes it possible to use all the other tools. Because it is so very difficult to be this detached when one is very involved in a conflict it is wise to know when to bring in an external mediator.

Inquiry

Accurate and comprehensive data and analysis are essential for understanding. Without understanding it is impossible to transform a conflicted situation. It is amazing how many leaders go ahead with proposals on how to end a conflict before taking all the time necessary to understand it.

Mediator leaders value understanding and will not short circuit this stage. They also know that they do not have all the insights required in order to get a handle on the issues in a conflict. Therefore they seek the opinions of others – parties to the conflict, outside observers, professional sources of data. Mediator leaders understand that quality information is what makes it possible to find solutions that meet the needs of the parties.

Two skills go with this tool – questions and listening. Valuable inquiring questions begin with who, when, where, how, what, why, what else. Because understanding requires taking in information a Mediator leader is a good listener. So they always make sure that they “get it”. Often they will check back with a speaker to be certain that they understand the point. In the listening, they are understanding what is accurate and inaccurate; and monitoring spoken and unspoken communications.

These first four steps are preparation. Constructive, trust-building processes are essential to achieving transforming and positive outcomes to a conflict. Skip them at your own peril.

Conscious Conversation

Mediators know that people have choices about the way that they communicate. Their goal is to create a setting in which the parties can relate to each other is more constructive ways.

The skills involved include reminding, or perhaps educating, participants about the different ways they can use to engage in communications with each other. The range includes verbal brawling, debate, discussion, making presentations, negotiation, offering counsel, and silence. A negotiated Behavioral Covenant can be helpful preparation for dialogue in conflict situations.

By making it possible to have conscious conversations a Mediator leader is offering and nurturing alternative ways for the parties to engage. Thoughtless counter attacks and knee-jerk reactions are replaced with conscious conversations. Then out of these new ways comes deeper understanding and hence new options can emerge.

Dialogue

Dialogue is possible because the first five tools have been employed. The Mediator’s goal in using this tool is to get parties to connect across what divides them. Then from this comes a greater awareness of interests and a catalyst to reduce attachment to the original positions.

The skill required of the Mediator leader is to keep the parties focused on exploring their interests or goals. Usually, people want to focus on their “positions” or strategies that they believe will achieve their goals. Explore interests and not positions.

Interests based mediation or negotiation has been effectively used for many decades in local and international disputes. The classic and still relevant presentation of this approach is by Fisher and Ury – Getting to Yes. This book is an easy to read introduction to the goals and strategies of dialogue.

Bridging

Talk is not enough to resolve a conflict. The participants must do something quite different in relation to each other or in response to the presenting issues that gave rise to the dispute. However, these ideas will not come from the genius of one side or the other. Rather the bridge needs to be built from both sides so that it can meet in the middle.

A Mediator leader is like an engineer who has the drawings and believes in the possibility of constructing something wonderful. However it is the parties that must bring the materials.

The skills that are required are the things that make it possible for the materials to be delivered to the site. They are trust, social capital, respect, healing, empathy, understanding, courage, collaboration, caring, even love. The Mediator leader fosters, protects and encourages these things

When the bridging happens it can come suddenly and surprisingly. At play here is a “fundamental and mysterious truth: the energy between the parties must change in order for conflict to be transformed.” (Gerzon p. 57)

Innovation

Innovation is the breakthrough that now seems to provide an alternative to an ongoing conflict. While such an idea might have been imagined before, it could not be achieved until now.

The Mediator leader sustains the hope of the participants that around the next bend there may be a light at the end of the tunnel. Their skill is to help the parties recognise and celebrate the bridge they are building and to affirm and test the innovations that arise.

Equally as important is to make sure that there are very high levels of agreement with the proposed solution. This is more than some parties sitting silently and sullenly while others rejoice. It means testing that the stakeholders will promote the solutions among their constituencies and resource its implementation.

Afterword

Don’t pop the champagne corks just yet! Things sometimes unravel and great hopes are dashed. Your role as a leader at this time is to support the leaders who have seen an alternative vision for relationships in their community. You do this by reminding them of their agreements and how positive they felt. Coach them in how to carry the conversations forward into their constituencies. Maintain the hope and keep pointing out the path that has been created. Within Christian communities, this obviously includes the use of Scripture, prayer and other spiritual disciplines.

These are 8 tools that really work. They have been used successfully in many apparently intractable conflicts – large and small. Remain hopeful, grow your skills and then use them.

When to use a facilitator

Situations that deserve a third party facilitator

Determining when you need a neutral third party facilitator is an important leadership task.  In times of transition or in situations where the stakes are high, inviting a third party to facilitate a process with your group can make a positive difference.  Facilitators can model the skillsets necessary for your group to improve their interactions with one another.

If you recognize any of these situations in your organization, you may need the services of a third party:

  • Emotional level between parties is high with anger and frustration
  • Communication is poor
  • Stereotypical views of positions and motives are preventing resolution
  • Behavior is negative
  • Conflict is at a high level
  • Parties cannot agree on what information is relevant or required
  • Various issues are present or the matter is complex
  • Values differ greatly and parties disagree on what is fundamentally right
  • The task before you make you realise that “this is beyond us”

What is a third party facilitator?

A third party is a trained leader who is recognized for their ability to work well with a group. They get results.  Examples of a third party leader may be a Mediator, Litigator, or Process Facilitator.  They have usually been certified or have completed a training program.  Most important, they have the experience necessary to lead your group through a situation successfully.

Questions for Consideration:

  • Does the person have the skills necessary to help move your group forward?
  • Where were they trained? When?
  • Can the third party provide references from past work?
  • Are they available to work with you on your schedule?
  • Is their personality a good fit for your group?

How can I find a third party facilitator?

Locating someone who has the skills your group needs is important. Ask your peers who they have used in a similar situation.  Authors of books can also make an excellent resource. You can also find the right person on the internet by researching blogs, articles, and events related to your issue or need.

Hiring a third party facilitator

  1. Form a Hiring Team with the responsibility to come up with a recommendation.
  2. Find at least three people who meet the skills you are looking for in a third party.
  3. Contact each person and explain the situation your organization is facing. Let them know that they have been recommended to you and ask if they are interested in working with your group. Answer their questions.
  4. Ask them if they are interested in making a proposal for consideration of services. Be sure that they outline their approach and provide a cost for their services. Ask them to list 2-3 references.
  5. Once you receive their proposals, have your hiring team review them. Sort the applicants into first, second and third. Check references.
  6. Arrange an interview with those your Hiring Team thinks are worth talking to in detail. Decide a clear choice.
  7. Present your top choice to your leaders for their support.
  8. Contract the work and set the timeline and budget.

Conclusion

Leaders who decide hire a Third Party Facilitator to lead their group are smart. It is not possible for local leaders to be all things to all people. Choosing an effective third party frees you to participate in the process as well as learn new skills.  Follow the steps recommended in this blog to find the right person to do the work necessary to help your group resolve issues and move forward together. You will be glad you did!

 

 

 

Uniting The Church – Is it Possible?

Partisanship in the church is not an obstacle to uniting the church. Closed mindedness to the other person and enmity is what is fatal if we are interested in uniting the church.

United Methodist Church (USA) – A Case Study

For many years the United Methodist Church (USA), hereafter the UMC, has been tearing itself apart over a range of issues. The most polarising issue at the moment is the one that it shares with many other churches – the place of LGBTIQ people in the life of the church. In some churches the issue is about whether LGBTIQ people can be members, or even Christians. For other churches it is about ordination or whether the church should conduct marriages or blessings of their love for one another.

In 2016 the UMC General Conference in Portland had the opportunity to talk together about this issue in a new, respectful and collaborative way. The meeting refused to use a new process. There were many reasons for this decision. However a major reason the new rule was not used was because people preferred to fight rather than co-operate. People wanted a fight so that they could defeat their opponents and vanquish them.  They cared less about each other than getting the votes. “To the victor the spoils” was the driving agenda of too many at that meeting.

Later in the meeting the General Conference established a Special Commission on the Way Forward. The aim of the Commission is to bring a plan to a special “called Conference” about how the church can overcome its incessant conflict, splits and the destructive effects on its mission. Tragically the Commission seems to have used the contemporary political approach of bringing the opposing parties together to cut a deal. Inevitably this approach will not succeed in uniting the church. Rather it will entrench the differences as side each jockeys for its agenda to succeed.

Uniting the church is not going to happen through encouraging partisanship and political game playing.  However, it is still not too late for the UMC to deploy an alternative method of respect and collaboration.

Uniting the church – a cynics view

There are many in the UMC, and other churches, who feel that the divide is too great and the enmity too strong to make respect and collaboration possible.

The argument runs

  • trust has been broken
  • with all the power in the opposing camps there is no middle ground
  • leaders get positions of power because they are hyper-partisan
  • bias in communications is so strong there is no room for a middle voice
  • with opposing world views clashing, it’s impossible to respect the other
  • every discussion is framed as a binary “yes” / “no” choice
  • don’t be so naive to think we can respect each other – you’ll get used

This cynicism is rife in many churches. So, in the face of divisions the idea of uniting Christians again seems like searching for the prospector’s lost reef of gold.

Let’s get realistic!

In the American context the churches face a particular challenge. Their political leaders have become more and more disrespectful of each other. The once encouraging ability to work “across the aisle” seems to have disappeared. Hyperbole, denigration and demonising of those with different views is standard discourse in politics and the media. Christians operating in this environment are at great risk of being infected with this poison. That’s a real problem and it needs to be taken seriously.

Fighting each other in the church is destructive of the church’s witness. People can see a political fight anywhere at any time. When they see Christians doing it then they will not hang around. When Christians tell me that it’s important to destroy their opponents so that the true Christian message can be preached I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. People are desperate to see love, experience community, and to receive respect. People are desperate to encounter in their experience of others the love, community and respect that God has shown humanity in Jesus Christ. The mission of God through the church is undermined when Christians prefer fighting to loving one another.

To fight each other in order to gain the spoils of victory will result in a pyrrhic victory. The cost of a victory delivered through lies, power plays and political deals costs the victor so much that it is really a loss. So often we forget that the way we reach a decision can be as important as the decision itself.

Finding a way past hyper-partisanship is the only hope for the church.  Uniting and peace are possible for the church. The alternative of division and discord is depressing and defeatist.

Being realistic includes:

  • resisting the power of local culture as it seeks to shape the character of Christian communities
  • grieving over the way that Christians fighting pushes people away from the Christian faith
  • recognising that the way we win can cause more harm than good
  • continuing on the hyper-partisan route is hopeless
  • Christians are a people of hope who have the promises of God about what our future can look like
  • we have the Holy Spirit with us so that we do not lose the way

What are the options

1.   Treat each other as sisters and brothers

See each other first as sisters and brothers in Christ. Avoid the temptation to demonise each other. Yes that is a real act of will. Actually it is an act of faith too! Do you have faith that God has made us family? If so what are you going to do about that when you disagree with someone?

2.   Talk to each other about your faith

In the last 20 years one of the great movements of the Holy Spirit in uniting Christians has been the Global Christian Forum. Pentecostal, Evangelical and Catholic Christians were not members of established national and international ecumenical bodies. In the case of Pentecostals and Evangelical Christians it was because they saw ecumenical Christians as theologically liberal and politically “progressive”.

Catholics and the other groups have had significant levels of enmity. Catholics considered that these churches were proselytising their members. Many Evangelicals and Pentecostals did not regard Catholics as Christians. Their leaders attacked each other and distrusted them.

In the face of these harsh realities uniting these groups seemed impossible. The Global Christian Forum was established to address these issues. It’s methodology is very simple – meet each other as fellow disciples of Jesus Christ. The structure of their fellowship is for people to share the stories of their faith – how they came to it, what nurtures it, what they hope for because of their faith.

3.   Learn from groups that are uniting their communities

I have just started reading the latest book by Mark Gerzon The Reunited States of America: how we can bridge the partisan divide. Mark is a mediator and an expert on political bridge building.

In the book he takes a realistic view of the obstacles to co-operation that exist in the American political context. He tells exciting stories about grass roots action for change. Mark Gerzon has biases. He prefers one candidate over another. One set of policies are viewed as better than others. However he has chosen not to be hyper-partisan in support for them. One key insight that makes this possible for him is that he has owned that he both liberal and conservative. Recognising that we are not monochrome, but are diverse in ourself, makes it possible to be comfortable with difference in others. The self talk we do as we explore our internal differences can be applied to the dialogue we have with others.

His four core strategies for uniting American citizens again across the partisan divide are:

  • reinventing citizenship
  • leading from across the borders that divide
  • championing the whole truth
  • serving the people

I highly commend The Reunited States of America: how we can bridge the partisan divide. You can access a copy here. If you purchase anything through this link within 24 hours we receive a small commission. This helps us to cover the costs of this website.

4.   Apply consensus building resources in your church

Don’t just think about the problems – work on the solutions in your context. There are many simple things that you can do to change the culture and practices of your church. Use the tools that have been proven to be effective in uniting Christians.

This website is devoted to making resources available to people who want to do consensus building in their church. If you are newlease browse and find more support. For a comprehensive resource we recommend our book The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together. You can purchase a copy  from Cokebury here or from Amazon.

Conclusion

There are many conflicts in the church. Many seem intractable. However relationships can be turned around – uniting divided people is possible. The good news is that God is committed to the goal of uniting us as brothers and sisters in Christ. We have the gift of the Holy Spirit to help us, faith to live out of, and many resources from inside and outside the church to resource us. Don’t give up!

What’s wrong with the way we make decisions?

Recall some recent decision points

Think back to your last big church meeting decision. It may have been about building a new sanctuary, firing a youth worker or starting a second worship service. As you think back on the debates and discussions about that issue, which image below best describes your experience?

(a) A ‘shootout at the OK Corral because some members want to win at all costs; or
(b) A positive experience of Christians conferencing together to discern the will of God?

(a) A meeting where the lid is kept tightly tied down on creative options that have not been thought of first by a vocal leader; or
(b) A space where all feelings, hopes and ideas are encouraged to come forward?

(a) A discussion dominated by a few articulate, domineering people; or
(b) A meeting where all voices are empowered, listened to and respected?

What happened at the time?

Perhaps a reasonable solution was offered to resolve a matter. Yet someone blocked its consideration with a passionate battle cry of “not in my church!” Then the meeting ground to a halt.

A crucial issue is addressed. However its discovered that the final decision was made in the parking lot after the official meeting ended.

Situations like these, which undermine true community, highlight unhealthy patterns in religious organisations.  Have you experienced that it’s not what we decide but how that makes the difference?

Churches are experiencing growing incivility as members engage with each other around matters about which they have very strong feelings. So we see people shout at each other, keep information secret, overgeneralize, and argue for their ‘side.’ Frequently it seems that there is little or no concern for the perspectives or feelings of others. Therefore churches lose valuable time and resources because of pervasive conflict. Is this your experience?

What is happening to us?

Sadly, people have become accustomed to this kind of behavior. So they leave it unchallenged even while knowing, deep down, that it isn’t right. They know that a “winner take all” mindset and the subversive tactics that make it possible are wrong. Yet they tolerate it by their silence. It’s time for the church to stand up and challenge this prevailing culture.

Trust in society, and in the church, is in short supply. So is discernment. The polarized atmosphere of many church meetings has led to a breakdown of trust and to people disengaging from the life and mission of the church. Therefore younger generations shy away from leadership. Older members bear emotional scars.

Let’s be clear. The prevailing meeting rules that are used in many churches and community groups actually foster disharmony and encourage negative outcomes. What is this adversarial style that is causing so much pain and harm? It is known as “Parliamentary Procedures” or simply: “Robert’s Rules of Order.” It was actually intended to help people complete an agenda in an orderly fashion. How’s it working for you?

How Robert’s Rules of Order work

In a parliamentary process of decision-making, primacy is given to succinct reason and logical argument, which validates a conclusion. Many times we hear it said with disdain in church meetings “Oh, I wish he would just get to the point!” It is as though emotion, story, reason, and experience have nothing to offer in the search for wisdom and meaning. How far this is from the truth! In fact, emotion, story, experience, and reason have moved to the very center of how people find and understand true insight.

Not only does Robert’s Rules create “winners” and “losers,” it also ignores spiritual ways of developing insight and making decisions as disciples of Jesus Christ. This process cares little about supporting the values for which the church says that it stands. For example being humble, gentle, and patient or bearing with each other in love.

The alternative

Fortunately, there is an alternative way of reaching a decision that is theologically, socially, culturally, and relationally more appropriate today. It has its roots in Scripture. Also it is engaging and easily understood.

Clues to this alternative approach come from multicultural communities. They make decisions through processes that are very different to a parliamentary process. Careful conversations take place before action is decided. Options are wisely considered.

Also the increased participation of women and young adults in the leadership of the church has led to a significant number of people wanting a more collaborative rather than combative or adversarial way of making decisions. They recognize that a divided community eventually falls.

The case for using a fresh approach for making decisions is getting urgent because:

  • 95 percent of Americans agree with the statement: “People on opposite sides of an issue demonize each other so severely that finding common ground seems impossible.”
  • 75 percent of Americans agree with the proposition that we should give moderate voices more emphasis and “stop letting the people on the extreme ends of the issues dominate the discussion on important issues.” (Research released at the Q Conference)

A consensus-building approach can assist a congregation or organization to discern the will of God for its life. It does so in ways that are inclusive and consistent with Christian values by:

  • creating a respectful environment where people are able to name what is important for them
  • assisting everyone to have a full understanding of the issues and the implications of their decisions
  • collaborating to generate better options
  • helping participants come to a place where they can accept the views of the majority even if they are not their first choice
  • allowing people to know that they have been heard and taken seriously.

In short, this new process provides a credible Christian witness in the world even when considering complex issues.

The way forward

We believe that church leaders want a new way of making decisions. A way that honors diversity, respects all participants, is collaborative, builds a sense of real community, and uses time wisely. However, what is lacking is a step-by-step guide and training that assists leaders to articulate their experience and vision.

Leaders need to know:

  • how to prepare for an alternative way of decision making
  • the meeting procedures and tools to can use to build consensus
  • how to make decisions they can implement

We step into that void with a process that has three distinct phases:

  1. Information Phase
    2. Deliberation/Consideration Phase
    3. Decision Phase.

Through various methods, including small groups, these phases create spaces where listening, creativity, respect, vulnerability, and collaboration are fostered and expressed. You can read more in The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together.

Robert’s Rules tend to be more condensed and focused on the decision phase. It gets confusing when used to generate fresh ideas.

Christians deserve a new way of making decisions in their congregation and throughout the church’s decision-making systems. They yearn for a way that honors diversity, respects all participants, is collaborative and strengthens community. Many churches around the world have changed their business procedures away from the parliamentary style because of the damage that it was doing to their life. They have developed processes that create a healthy culture that is consistent with Christian values.

Can we do anything less? Please comment on this post with stories, good and bad, from your church experience about how important decisions get made. Do you follow parliamentary rules?  Or have you switched to a different process when considering significant strategy, changes or opportunities?

Enough! It’s time to show some courage.

Where are the leaders who are ready to show some courage? Where are those who will risk losing everything for the sake of the reign of God?

People are tired of the fighting

I talk with a lot of people from around the world. Many come from churches where there are major disputes. Most Christians are sick and tired of the aggressive, disrespectful way in which debates happen. So, they want leaders who will find a way to resolve problems in the church without trying to control and remove their opponents.

Framing debates as “yes” or “no”; “left” or “right”; “liberal” or “conservative” is not helping. Forcing people to argue from the extremes is proving to be ineffective in resolving conflict. Yet people in many churches seem to be rewarded for being warriors for their extreme position. However this is alienating for people inside and outside the church.

People are looking for leaders who have courage. The church needs people who have the courage to take the risk of not fighting! People in the pews are tired of the paralysis that afflicts their church when disagreements go on and on.

What does courage look like?

Courage is being prepared to

  • give up my desire to control others
  • value relationships over power
  • trust that God knows best and so be open to change
  • believe that God desires the unity of his family
  • acknowledge that I have made God in my own image when God hates all the same people that I do
  • do unto others as I would have them do to me
  • love my enemies and pray for those who persecute me

Please add to this list from your own heart. What is hard for you to do in support of fostering a faithful, loving, quality Christian community?

Seek relationships instead of control

The only way to get past the paralysis that comes from hyper partisanship is by seeing the other person as a fellow human being.

There are many examples of where constructive and life giving options have been generated as people stop seeking control and work on the relationship. Perhaps the most powerful and common example is in divorces and setting up parenting plans. When a couple have a toxic relationship it harms the children; makes them bitter for longer; it is destructive and costly; makes later adaptations to the plan difficult;  and limits the number of options. As couples focus on the children and take time to understand the needs of the other person, they generate better solutions that are easier to live with.

It’s the same for disputes in the wider society and the church. Of course it is not easy for people to just switch off their desire for control – that’s why mediators are needed. It isn’t easy for some Christians to stop wanting to demonise their opponents and to get their way -that’s why facilitators are needed. Taking up the alternative of showing respect, de-escalating the tension and looking for alternative solutions does not come easy.

Seek relationships over control. You don’t have to change your mind on the issues in dispute. But you should change your attitude to the other person and the issue.

Will people seek relationships over control?

I like to think that the Holy Spirit will make it possible! But faith is an act of will, as much as it is a gift of grace. People have to choose to be obedient to Christ.

God has created a community through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. We are incorporated into that community through trusting (faith) in what God has done in Jesus. Our responsibility as disciples is to live in this community that gathers around Christ. This community is our primary identity. It is God’s will that we be one for the sake of the witness of Christ in the world.

When we are convinced that the quality of our discipleship as Christians is more important to God than our opinions on theological and ethical issues then we will choose relationships over control. The early observers of Christians did not say “Look at those Christians – see how they agree with one another.” Rather it was said “Look at those Christians – see how they love one another.”

People will seek relationships over control when they have the courage to believe the Gospel that we are one in Jesus Christ. However, this unity is not achieved by what we do, but by what God has done in Jesus Christ.

Does it happen in real life?

It is somewhat sad, but perhaps encouraging, that most of the examples of success come from outside the church. It is encouraging because if fighting spouses, political enemies, and hostile opponents on moral issues in society can do it then Christians should find it easier.

People move from control to relationships when they:

  • know that the present way of working is destructive
  • have a hope that things can work better
  • have a unifying principle, eg being citizens, family, fellow believers, etc
  • show courage by giving up power
  • habit disrupting rules are put in place
  • firm structures are put in place
  • thoughtful questions are offered

Mark Gerzon in The Reunited States of America, offers numerous examples of community organisations that are helping people to make the move from hyper partisan and aggressive approaches to healthy and respectful discussions. I recommend that you buy the book.

You can also look up some previous posts on this site for how change can happen, for example here. Or find examples of where and how change has happened in The Church Guide For Making Decisions Together.

Be of good courage, keep the faith, hold strong to the calling that you have in Jesus Christ.