A Turn of Tables
Not too long ago, I was getting ready to be at a meeting that was wrapped up in a change-induced turmoil. As I tried to prepare my heart and mind to attend, I reminded myself of a change of perspective that I picked up at a Conflict Seminar at the Lombard Peace Institute many years ago.
One seminar leader addressed the idea of table arrangements and how they are usually set up for failure. You know the table setup: The party of the first part sits on one side of the table. The party of the second part sits on the opposite side of the table. The mediator sits off to the side. This arrangement makes sense if you see the time as a battle with the adversaries squared off against each other and the innocent mediator staying out of the fray.
The trap in that arrangement is that the parties may start off with the situation and the problem laid out on the table between them. But as the discussion continues the issue on the table is lost and the people on the other side of the table become the problem.
This leader offered another arrangement. All parties sit on the same side of the same table with the mediator and the problem out in front of both of them (I picture a great white board out there that the mediator uses to keep track of the current state of discussion). The image shown and even explicitely named for all is that we are partners together seeking a common and best case solution to the issue and the situation. The mediator is always celebrating and challenging the participants to be creative in coming up with the best solution.
It also helps to keep in front of everybody’s thoughts the goal of finding the best way to enhance the entire situation and not just one faction (fraction?) of the group. No one issue is more important than another. No one person is less important than the other.
At the meeting we didn’t have to get that far, but I was ready if we did.
