Volume 2, Issue 1 April, 2015 http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC Narrative Conflict Coaching John Winslade, California State University - San Bernardino Ashley Pangborn, California State University - San Bernadino Abstract Conflict coaching is a relatively new concept, derived from the domain of executive coaching. The concept has gained a foothold in the conflict resolution literature. There have been references made to a narrative practice of conflict coaching but it has not been articulated as fully as it might be. Here we seek to describe such a practice in relation to Foucault’s concept of the care of the self and Deleuze’s concept of the event. We also outline Deleuze’s approach to the reading of time as chronos and aion and show how these different readings might be put to use. A set of guidelines for narrative conflict coaching are proposed and transcribed conversation is provided as a case study to illustrate the process in action. In this conversation, the conflict coach asks questions which lead the client through an exploration of the series of events that make up the conflict story, the externalizing and deconstructing of this conflict story, and the opening of a counter story as a basis for the client’s preferred future conduct in relation to the conflict. Keywords Conflict coaching, conflict resolution, narrative, care of the self, event, chronos, aion, counter story Recommended Citation: Winslade, J. and Pangborn, A. (2015) Narrative Conflict Coaching. Conflict and Narrative: Explorations in Theory and Practice, 2(1), pp. 90-118. Retrieved from: htt p://journals.gmu.edu/ NandC/issue/2 This wo rk is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommerical-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License For usage questions, please contact John Winslade at [email protected] Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 90 Narrative Conflict Coaching Conflict coaching refers to conversations with one party to a conflict that do not reach the point of becoming a joint mediation. They are particularly pertinent in any of the many situa- tions in which the relational conditions for mediation have not yet been met or may never be met. Such is the case when professional assistance may only be sought by one party, while the other party refuses to participate, or when separate conflict coaching conversations may take place with each party prior to a later joint mediation. Our intention here is to outline some ideas to guide the practice of conflict coaching from a narrative perspective. The goal of those conversations is, strictly speaking, not “conflict resolution”, since that would need to involve the other party. But talking with one party on his or her own can go beyond being just information-gathering ahead of the main event. It deserves consideration as a practice in its own right. The aim of such a conversation might be to help a person articulate how he or she might con- duct himself or herself in the ongoing evolution of the conflict, whether or not mediation is to take place. However, conflict coaching reaches beyond giving direct instruction or advice on performance strategies in a conflict scenario, as strategizing might emerge as a collaborative product of a conversation, rather than as something a professional does to someone who con- sults her or him. So why use the term at all? We do so because it has arisen in the conflict resolution literature and gained some traction in practice. Trish Jones and Ross Brinkert (2008) claimed to have written the first book on conflict coaching (see also Brinkert, 2006). Their definition of con- flict coaching reads: Conflict coaching is a process in which a coach and client communicate one- on-one for the purpose of developing the client’s conflict-related understand- ing, interaction strategies, and interaction skills. (Jones & Brinkert, 2008, p. 4.) They add that it can take place in person, over the phone, or through the internet. They trace the derivation of the concept of conflict coaching from the field of executive coaching (Kil- burg, 2000, Stern, 1994) and go on to suggest some general principles: a flexible model; the potential inclusion of all stakeholders in a particular context; the suggestion that a relational orientation is essential; caveats that conflict coaching is contingent on an incomplete Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2 Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 91 knowledge of the situation and that it is not always appropriate; and emphases on client em- powerment and cultural and contextual sensitivity. Jones and Brinkert also suggest several different approaches to conflict coaching, one of which is a narrative approach, drawing on the articulation of narrative mediation (Monk & Winslade, 2013; Winslade & Monk, 2000, 2008). While their description of narrative con- flict coaching serves as a useful starting place, the current article aims to take it further and to locate a narrative practice in relation to a movement of thought that can be traced through poststructuralist philosophical work, particularly that of Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze. We shall start by conceptualizing conflict coaching as what Foucault would call a “technolo- gy of the self” (Martin, Gutman & Hutton, 1988), that is, a technology aimed at enhancing the “care of the self” in conflict situations. Foucault drew heavily on Pierre Hadot’s (1995) account of Stoic philosophy in his later work on the “care of the self”, partly, at the time, to correct an impression that, in his earlier work, he had represented power relations in ways that were too deterministic. He was at pains to step away from the suggestion that life expe- riences were constituted almost entirely by power. Instead, Foucault wanted to stress that people were actually freer than they thought they were. Despite his compelling documenta- tion of how power relations could internalize certain discourses into consciousness, he main- tained it was still possible to take up subjective positions and act from a sense of agency. The “care of the self” was his effort to speak to the crafting of a subjective position, often in resistance to the internalizing force of power relations. Care of the self was about the inten- tional design of one’s life as an aesthetic project. Foucault also referred to this project as “concern for the self” in a project of becoming. Rather than the humanistic project of an es- sentialist unfolding of the self from within, Foucault preferred the project of producing one- self to become other than who one had been. Production suggests deliberate and conscious action, rather than the unfolding through self-actualization of a pre-existent potential. Deleuze (1990), in fact, calls it “counter-actualization” (p. 150) rather than self-actualization. Foucault describes this project as: … those reflective and voluntary practices by which men (sic) not only set themselves rules of conduct, but seek to transform themselves, to change themselves in their singular being, and to make of their life into an oeuvre that carries certain aesthetic values and meets certain stylistic criteria. (Foucault, 1992, pp. 10-11) Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2 Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 92 Some commentators get concerned about Foucault’s apparent focus on the individual self and worry about whether it might lead to neglect of the other. Critics have even claimed that Fou- cault was advocating “narcissistic absorption” and “outwardly aggressive self- aggrandizement” (Wolin, 1986, p. 85). In answering these critiques, David Boothroyd (1996) shows that Foucault was not referring to “egoistical self-interest” but to the “practical for- mation of an interiority” (p. 382) as the basis for the construction of relationships with others. The process of becoming a subject thus involves the intentional construction of a subjectivity through resistance to dominant discourse and this can only be achieved through becoming accountable to the other. Boothroyd concludes that: … Only a subject understood in terms of his/her autochthonous self- fashioning capacity and which sustains itself ‘before’ it encounters the Oth- er, can respond without violating the other’s alterity. (p. 382.) What might we be required to do to take care of the self? Foucault (2005) speaks about a se- ries of disciplinary exercises founded on philosophical truths that were advocated by the Sto- ics. Meditation was frequently involved. Nowadays practices of conversation often perform a similar function. Coaching, for example, is one of these and it serves a similar purpose to the ancient Greek and Roman practices of meditation. It allows a person to layer experiences of living reflexively over each other. An experience is lived, and then reflected upon, and then the reflections are talked about and distilled into a form that can be taken back into prac- tice and become again the stuff of experience. Like meditation, it is about producing a sense of truth to guide the ongoing project of living. We, therefore, want to propose that we think of conflict coaching in these terms – as a reflex- ive practice of layering and distilling experience and thoughts, a “practical formation of an interiority” in advance of an “encounter with the Other”. It is an example of what the ancient Greeks called a techne, a method, aimed at the “care of the self”. We would suggest that the English word “craft” is a good candidate for describing this method. It conveys the sense of an art (informed by practical skill) and a science (informed by knowledge). It might be use- ful, then, to describe conflict coaching as conversation in which a professional helps someone craft (the verb can be said to derive from the noun) a sense of who he or she is becoming in relation to another or several others in the context of the events of a conflict. Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2 Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 93 How might we think of conflict? Let us turn to the conceptualization of conflict itself and consider how it might be thought about in ways that enable the emergence of such a practice. There are many possible places to start, such an inquiry, but here we will focus on Gilles Deleuze’s (1990) work on The Log- ic of Sense as a productive starting point, because of its philosophical rigor and its originality. This work of Deleuze is difficult to read, but the account of it presented here has been aided by the explanations of James Williams (2008) and Sean Bowden (2011), who help draw out Deleuze’s purposes. One of Deleuze’s central ideas is the argument that events are logically prior to identities. It is more than an opinion, because Deleuze sustains a systematic philosophical case for it, complete with mathematical proofs. The idea is revolutionary, because the modern “image of thought” habitually thinks of identities first to explain events. In other words, when some- thing happens we seek to explain it by looking for a category of person and understanding events that follow as typical of what that “type of person” would do (Bansel, Davies, Linnell, & Laws, 2009, p. 61). A category of person might be a diagnostic category, a personality type, a social or cultural designation, a political or religious affiliation, a position in a relation (such as victim, perpetrator), or a lifestyle (lesbian, sports jock, surfie, cheerleader, vegetari- an, Manchester United fan) and so on. Deleuze’s concern is that, when we start with identity categories, we notice and privilege sameness over difference. Emphasizing what is “identi- cal” with a category of classification impedes the process whereby people differentiate them- selves, and differentiation is necessary for the development of nuanced practices of living (what Michael White & David Epston, 1990, called “unique outcomes”). Instances of differ- ence are instead squeezed into boxes and people experience discomfort if they do not fit the box. Michael White (2001) referred to this phenomenon as the “cellularisation of life” (p. 20). To be assigned to an identity category can be of little consequence unless the assigned classi- fication falls on either side of a line along which a given society exercises “dividing practic- es” (Foucault, 2000, p. 326). When dividing practices are at work, the identity category can have serious consequences for structuring, as Leonard Cohen (1992) puts it, “who will serve and who will eat”. Deleuze’s logic here resembles Michael White’s aphorism: “The person is not the problem; the problem is the problem” (White, 1989, p. 6). The alternative to an emphasis on identity Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2 Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 94 categories and on explanations based on who persons “are” is to start with events. Bronwyn Davies (2009) puts it simply: Being a person in this way of thinking is not to belong to a category, but more in the nature of an event, or a series of events. (p. 19) Accordingly, Deleuze advocates that we understand problems of living by starting with the priority of events. To this end, Deleuze expounds a “logic of sense” which serves the pur- pose of explaining the relationships between events and persons. How we might think about events in a conflict Deleuze’s first assertion is that an event always takes place as part of a series of events that coalesce to form a narrative. A narrative conveys a sense of movement through time and a series also refers to moments in time organized into a sequence. For Deleuze, each event in a series stands out, because it is (perhaps only slightly) different from earlier events. On the other hand, each piece of difference can only be recognized when it is part of a sequence and, therefore, significant, because of its participation in the series of events. The concept of series thus has explanatory value. It helps explain how events developed in the way they did. Deleuze argues that such explanations do not rest on the usual grounds of formal causal logic. Events in a series do not determine each other. If anything, events in a series mutually “cause” each other’s participation in the series. Deleuze does not reject the causal logic that has been so important in modern science. It is more that he wants to add to it and mark out a space for a different form of logic to be also accorded value, particularly in situations of complex human interaction. Deleuze, therefore, interrogates the nature of the connection between events in a series. His argument for such connections relies on what he calls “sense”. Sense is felt rather than logi- cally determined but nonetheless operates to hold events in sequence with each other. Deleuze illustrates it with reference to paradox (where we can sense a connection that defies strict logic) and to nonsense (where something is logically impossible but still hangs togeth- er). He uses Lewis Carroll’s (1865) “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland” to illustrate how nonsense events need not interfere with narrative consistency. Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2 Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 95 Chronos and aion Following the ancient Stoics, Deleuze (1990) also argues for the parallel existence of two dis- tinct readings of time – which he calls chronos and aion. Each of these readings amounts to a discrete, consistent system of thinking about time. Each is “complete and excludes the other” (p. 61). Chronos refers to the conventional conceptualization of time as divided into the dis- crete categories we call the past, the present and the future. In the modern world, we divide time further into days and hours and minutes and measure it precisely. Aion is a more elastic reading of time in which the past, present and future are conceptualized in an unbroken line. From this perspective, the past flows into the present and the future is already implicit and exerting an influence right now. This more fluid understanding of time draws upon Henri Bergson’s (2001) concept of “duration”. Thinking in terms of aion produces an awareness of the arc of time, as if we are viewing events from above, rather than from within the immedia- cy of the present. Deleuze does not argue for one of these readings of time as more important than the other. Both have their value for different purposes. It is, nevertheless, worth pausing to note that modernist culture has exercised a preference for chronos. In fact, many texts in humanistic psychology (for example, Krug, 2009) have emphasized staying in the “here and now” as a preferred value. The present has been established as the territory in which feelings and emo- tions take place and their spontaneous expression has come to represent authentic presence. Consider, for instance, the current fascination with mindfulness. To live as much as possible in the present is taken by many people in the therapy field to be a cherished goal and the mes- sage is reinforced in many products of popular culture (songs, television shows, and movies). On the one hand, much of this emphasis is worthy of value. To live in the fullness of the pre- sent is necessary to get the full value of certain experiences, such as the tasting of a fine wine, the successful sporting performance “in the zone”, and the experience of the joys of sensuali- ty. The intrusion of the past or the future into each of these experiences would interfere with their impact. On the other hand, a reading of time through the lens of aion also has value. It opens up a cer- tain flexibility of perspective that is not possible within the confines of the present. The sense in which events from the past continue to live in the present is one such value. A sense of aion allows us to dwell in what we remember and hold a sense of movement over the span of a series of connected events, over a lifetime. The future too, can haunt or can animate the Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2 Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 96 present and even the past. What we imagine might happen can motivate us to work for a de- sired future outcome or away from a feared one. Deleuze (1990) asserts the value of reading time as aion in relation to the process of personal becoming: … becoming does not tolerate the separation of or the distinction of before and after, or of past and future. It pertains to the essence of becoming to pull in both directions at once. (p. 1) We need a reading of time as aion in order to hold a sense of a career, for example. Career counseling, thus, is not just about the expression of identity in the present moment, but ex- plores how a person’s interests and commitments might propel them through time. The tem- poral trajectory of such exploration always invokes a sense of relationship with a past, a pre- sent and a future. We also need the reading of time as aion in order to invoke “a life”. In conflict coaching we might inquire into the life of a conflict story, or the life that a counter story might promise. Or we might inquire into the values that a person might hold dear and wish to express in re- sponse to others. Such values may transcend any particular moment in the present and sug- gest an arc that runs through the past, present and future. Reading time from this vantage point allows us to sense the duration through which commitment to a particular value en- dures. It also allows us to step out of the immediacy of feeling in the present and to see a conflict in wider perspective. In the process, events which have caught us up in their thrall can reappear as more trivial in the greater scheme of things. If this leads to a shift in re- sponse, then conflict coaching may be demonstrated to contribute something of value. The process of conflict coaching In what follows we will outline a map (see Figure 1) for a narrative process of conflict coach- ing. Of course, no map fits exactly to the contours of any given conversation and this one should not be read as prescriptive. What such a map can do, however, is to serve an orienting purpose for a conflict coach. It might guide the building of a conflict coaching conversation and render a conversation more purposeful than haphazard. That is the spirit in which this set of guidelines for conversation is offered. In broad terms, these guidelines move through three territories of conversation. Within these three different territories some specific lines of inquiry that can prove useful for each territory are suggested. The first territory is focused on understanding the conflict story. The second Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2 Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 97 territory involves asking questions to deconstruct the conflict story, make visible the lines of force (Deleuze, 1988; Winslade, 2009) that run through it, and loosen its authority. The third territory involves asking questions to grow a counter story (Nelson, 2001), an inquiry rooted in a reading of time as aion. We shall introduce some of Deleuze’s (1990) terms into each of these territories of inquiry in order to ensure that the conflict story is fully understood and the lines of force that run through it are made visible. To help understand the story of what has happened in a conflict, the guidelines draw from Deleuze’s (1990) account of an event in order to specify what we might listen for. Deleuze begins his account of an event by including Bertrand Russell’s (1962) explanation for an event, which features the three criteria of “denotation”, “manifestation” and “signification”. Denotation is about the facts of what has happened. Few would disagree that listening to un- derstand a conflict story would need to include an inquiry along the lines of, “What hap- pened?” Manifestation is the name for the second line of inquiry. It refers to the persons in- volved and is founded on the idea that we cannot understand an event without inquiring into the “beliefs and desires” (Bowden, 2011, p. 26) of those involved. For conflict coaching this means asking about what the events of the conflict make manifest about the beliefs and de- sires of the person consulting the conflict coach, and also what this person guesses to be the beliefs and desires of the other party or parties. The third inquiry is into signification. Signi- fication refers to the relationship between what happened and its “conceptual and logical im- plications” (Bowden, p. 27). This is a recognition of how meanings circulate within a discur- sive field and influence what people say and do. For this reason, a conflict coach should maintain a stance of curiosity about the discourses that dominate a particular situation, the concepts that are salient in the discourse, the positions established for people by particular language uses, and the “images of thought” (Deleuze, 1994, p. 129) that are conveyed by the words uttered. Deleuze argues that these three aspects are necessary, but insufficient for purposes of expla- nation and need another element to be added. To this end, he outlines the location of an event as always part of a “series” (1990), and then he proposes that “sense” is the element missing from Russell’s account and, what is more, that sense is the glue that holds Russell’s other three criteria together. Thus the conflict coach should remain alert to the ways in which one event is explainable through its connections with other events in a series of events, none of which can be said to have caused other links in the chain, but none of which would be likely to have taken place without the sequence having occurred. Sense is the glue that holds such a Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2 Winslade Narrative Conflict Coaching Page 98 sequence of events together. It refers to a form of narrative logic that need not reach the standard of causal determinacy, but is enough to satisfy the disputing parties that things are connected. Figure 1 includes these elements in a suggested road map which might guide a conflict coaching conversation. It also includes some other concepts which will be further discussed below. Figure 1: Narrative Conflict Coaching Understand the conflict story 1. Denotation Establish the facts. What happened? 2. Manifestation Inquire about people’s desires What was your hope? What do and intentions. you think the other party in- tended? 3. Signification Ask about the influence of dis- What concepts, meanings, dis- courses and systems of meaning. courses govern the situation? 4. Series of events Establish how events are part of What was the sequence of a series. what happened? 5. Sense Ask what holds the series of What is your sense of what is events together. driving this situation? Deconstruct the conflict story 6. Double listening Listen to both the conflict story It sounds like … happened, but and the counter story. you would prefer … Is that right? 7. Ask deconstructive Loosen the authority of dominat- How much were gender sto- questions ing discourses or lines of force ries, or race, or the conven- that run through a series of tional family idea, or normality events. etc., affecting what happened? 8. Explore assump- Inquire into background assump- What were you assuming? tions tions. What was the other person as- suming? 9. Externalize the Help people separate from the What would you call this situa- problem story conflict story by naming it as tion? outside them. Narrative and Conflict: Explorations in Theory and Practice http://journals.gmu.edu/NandC/issue/2