As a mediator and conflict resolution specialist I work with neuroscientists. I also follow the Greater Good Science Center at the University of California at Berkeley. I want to share key findings from one of their recent articles and expand on the article by sharing insights from three recent clients that tie into this commentary. The article is entitled "Three Steps to Resolving Big Conflict” by Jill Suttie. Her article provides insights from a new book by William Ury from Harvard’s Program on Negotiation entitled “Possible: How We Survive and Thrive in an Age of Conflict” in which Ury stresses the need to embrace conflict, engage each other respectfully, while working toward potential positive outcomes. Three steps to what Ury calls “The Circle of Possibility” are summarized in a blog post from April 26, 2024: 

In sum, William Ury suggests three major steps to conflict resolution, which he calls “The Circle of Possibility.”

Putting this three-step concept into action, Ury suggests that we proceed as follows: 

  1. “Go to the balcony.” This is the place of calm and perspective where we do the inner work of conflict resolution. When we feel the heat of conflict, we pause and reflect on how we’re feeling and what we are experiencing. After zooming in to how we feel, we can zoom out to see the big picture. And from there we can respect both sides to de-escalate the situation.
  2. “Build a golden bridge.” – Consistent with the great Chinese General Sun Tzu in The Art of War, we humanize the other side by taking small steps to ease tension. According to Ury, “we build a golden bridge by listening and discovering what the other party really needs and what they are most worried about.” The key to building a golden bridge is giving and getting respect. The golden bridge is where get creative. Again according to Ury, “By listening deeply we discover that positions may be rigidly opposed, but their interests may not be.” Said a little differently from my experience, we respect everyone and listen actively in order to understand.
  3. “Engage the third side.” – We find and we realize that everyone is connected, and this includes each and every one working together for the good of the whole. According to Ury, the third side involves three powers. “The first is the power to host – to welcome and connect the parties. The second is the power to help - to help the parties go to the balcony and build a golden bridge when it is not at all easy to do. The third is the power to swarm, which brings the full influence and leverage of the community to bear.” The third side is when the parties in conflict consider how all the people around us and around the parties are impacted.

Ury’s process gives us a template for uncovering interests underneath a conflict which are the seeds to a possible solution. 

Three Real-Life Examples

Three conflicts which I recently mediated illustrate my application William Ury’s three elements in real-life situations.  

1. Partners in an East Coast law firm with a founder being bought out (virtual mediation)

Recently I was asked to help a law firm with two 50% senior business partners (with other attorneys and staff) to assist one 50% owner in buying out the other 50% owner. Having met with each separately they were asked to take an 8½ by 11 inch piece of paper and identify what they thought were the facts, issues, feelings about the issues, and their interests.  The most senior partner provided six issues. The other 50% owner filled the page with information and five issues. This set the stage. Working between the parties on Zoom with breakout rooms, de-escalated commentary was shared back and forth until they were able to engage in commentary together face to face. There were concerns about how the existing staff and how clients might perceive the process as well. During that interaction both parties could agree to nine points that I documented. These were sent to the 50% partner first to review and edit. He did so and discussed this with the more senior partner. In the end they modified the final agreement with 10 points and reached a signed agreement.

2. An Internal tribal dispute with an outside contractor (in-person facilitation)

In this instance there were two factions that did not trust each other. The first party felt that the second party was more aloof and was not doing all the work they should be doing. The second party felt like they were being micromanaged and were distrusted as professionals. Neither party fully understood what the other party did. Meeting with each party in person separately, the parties sat in a circle and one person spoke at a time to share their concerns. Everyone was heard. Documentation of the issues and the intensity of the emotion on the issues demonstrated the desire to meet the good of their common constituents in the tribe. This was a very strong motivating factor.

The sessions were confidential, but generic commentary was shared with the Tribal Leader and with President of the Outside Contractor separately. Based on these conversations the Tribal Leader and President of the Outside Contractor realized that they needed to communicate more often and for longer durations. They also realized that their employees needed to be educated about a day in the life of the first party by the second party and second party with a day in the life of the first party as a starting point. Going forward there will be team building exercises, and periodic meetings to bring up and discuss mutual concerns. A follow-up meeting with me as the facilitator had been scheduled, but that was determined by everyone that the follow-up meeting was not needed, because they had come up with an approach that would be very workable for them going forward. Their internal constituents would be better served in the future and both parties respected the work done by the other party.

3. Valuing a business in a divorce (virtual mediation)

In this four-year-old divorce the parties were concerned that the judge in the case simply would not be able to address the business valuation. Both sides found that this type of issue was not the strong point of the judge. All other issues had been resolved. The “in spouse” (business owner) had an expert valuer that valued the business at $6 million. The “out spouse” had valued the business at $20 million and wanted at least $10 million to tell others that he had received $10 million. The parties, attorneys, and experts were all involved in the first meeting with me as the mediator meeting separately with each side. Trust was developed with me as the mediator with each side. The first Zoom meeting started with two break-out rooms and lasted for two hours.  The out-spouse appraisal was found to have a serious flaw. The in-spouse appraisal had some adjustments too. A second Zoom meeting was scheduled without the appraisers. The starting position was at $10 million for the in-spouse and $13 million for the out-spouse. The in-spouse would not go over $6 million for half of half of the business. The out-spouse would lose face if the value were less than $10 million with outside family members, but did not care about terms. An agreement was made to pay the out-spouse $10 million over 7 years that had a present value today of $6 million. Both sides felt respected and satisfied. Several personal issues arouse during the discussions that helped with understanding both parties. The impact on the children, other family members, and other stakeholders played a major role in reaching an equitable resolution.

What were common themes of the mediator in resolving these three conflicts?

  • Listened to the parties ahead of time separately to build trust, de-escalate the situation, turn down the negative rhetoric by remaining impartial
  • Helped each party to structure what they see as key facts, issues, the emotion around each issue, and their interests
  • Everyone had to agree to respect everyone else
  • Presented commentary by one side to the other side in impartial and neutral terms
  • Explored how other stakeholders might perceive the situation and any recommended solution
  • Worked with the parties to help them generate ideas on how they can work with each other to develop a solution that each party can live with going forward

Check out these links to my publications if you would like to learn more about collaboration, conflict resolution, or enhancing your servant manager skills.

About the author

Mike Gregory is a professional speaker, an author, and a mediator. You may contact Mike directly at mg@mikegreg.com and at (651) 633-5311. Mike has written 12 books (and co-authored two others) including his latest book, The Collaboration Effect: Overcoming Your Conflicts, and The Servant Manager, Business Valuations and the IRS, and Peaceful Resolutions that you may find helpful. [Michael Gregory, ASA, CVA, MBA, Qualified Mediator with the Minnesota Supreme Court]