Stakeholder Facilitation In Project And Conflict Management Education Essay

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Conflict is an open clash between two opposing groups or individuals. (Thomas Paine, 1976). Conflict could be understood as a social interaction during which the actors trust to interact decrease. (Lars Hallgren). Conflict has different reasons to emerge. Many authors worked on the conflict resolutions and presented their theories that how conflicts should be resolved. First of all, I would like to discuss that who thinks what about the conflict and what may be their consequences. According to Friedrich Glasl, political, economic and cultural changes creates a conflict and a better solution for this, is to help people develop their social skills, so as to enable them to deal with conflict situations themselves. (Friedrich Glasl, 2002, pp. 2-3). Friedrich Glasl talked about the different types of attitudes of individuals. On the other hand, Marshall B. Rosenberg says that the conflicts can be managed, if a certain quality of human connections established between the conflicting parties. According to Marshall B. Rosenberg, emphasise as important strategies for conflict management i.e. a process called "Nonviolent communication" which consists of good communication skills and thought that empower us to connect compassionately with others and ourselves. According to Steven E. Daniels and Gregg B. Walker understanding the conflict situations, states that instead of suppressing conflicts, specific channels could be created to make this conflict explicit and specific methods could be set up by which the conflict is resolved. In this Steven and Gregg talked more specifically on the environmental conflicts. As collaborative learning provides a method for mutual learning about environmental conflicts and generating improvements in the management of those situations. With its emphasis on dialogue and deliberation, collaborative learning offers a setting for asking the appropriate questions and "solving the problem". (Mitroff, 1998). According to Folger "the nature of conflict" that as long as humans have encountered one another, there has been conflict. Conflict is inevitable part of human interaction, regardless of the arena in which it occurs. (Working through Environmental Conflict, 1997, p.6).

Well doing comparison of the author's views about conflict and making up my own mind for conflict and conflict management, In Friedrich model, he explained the basic assumptions behind the conflict avoidance, conflict capability and belligerence behaviors. As Friedrich Glasl describes the conflict capability concepts and methods and also emphasise as important strategies for conflict management i.e. recognizing signs of conflict in yourself and in your environment as early and as clearly as possible, being able to use various methods for expressing your own position without worsening the situation substantially, understanding the mechanisms that intensify and entangle conflict situations. With the help of these key features, an organization can be more conflict capable and can deal with the frictions, tensions and differences constructively. (Friedrich Glasl, 2002, p. 4). The theory of Marshall i.e. non-violent communication is totally based on respectful practices that foster the genuine cooperation. This strategy indicates that if there are a non-violent interactions and communications among the political activities, personal lives and the work settings etc, which will give the peaceful outcomes without the emergence of any conflicts. The non-violent communication practices that support conflict resolution involves, expressing our own needs, sensing the needs of others are expressing themselves, checking the needs are accurately being received, translating the proposed strategies or solutions into positive action language, providing the empathy people need in order to hear the needs of others. (Marshall B. Rosenberg, 2005.p.g, 1, 3). According to Mitroff, methods for effectively managing environment and natural resource conflicts, such as Collaborative Learning, must be responsive to their complexity. So, understanding this complexity begins with a basic review of the nature of conflict situations.

In conclusion, all the authors has given different views and definitions about conflict that how conflict emerge and given different strategies for the management of conflict. I think in common, nonviolent, belligerence avoidance and understanding the conflict situation are the best strategies for conflict management.


Confronting Conflict, a first-aid kit for handling conflict Friedrich Glasl.

Non-Violent Communication, Marshall B. Rosenberg, 2005.

Q2. In the excursion you have been interviewing. not just quote your project report?

During the excursion, we have been interviewing different persons about their thoughts and views on natural resource management and rural development issues. Fore instance, in our case of project work; we were supposed to find out the problems facing by the small organic farmers regarding "KRAV" certification in Sweden.

So, according to my perception that both the stake holder's which small organic farmers and "KRAV" were having conflict and that conflict was based on communication factor. The reason that both the stakeholders did not manage that how to communicate and reach on the mutual consensus, because one stakeholder i.e. small organic farmers think that there is huge paper work and the most important thing was expensiveness for getting the certificate from KRAV. So by keeping that in mind, I can easily link it with the concepts and models of Marshall B. Rosenberg which I already mentioned in question 1. The theory of Marshall i.e. non-violent communication is totally based on respectful practices that foster the genuine cooperation. This strategy indicates that if there are a supportive interactions and communications among the different stakeholders. So, that will give the peaceful outcomes without the emergence of any conflicts. The non-violent communication practices that support conflict resolution involves, expressing our own needs, sensing the needs of others are expressing themselves, checking the needs are accurately being received, translating the proposed strategies or solutions into positive action language, providing the empathy people need in order to hear the needs of others. (Marshall B. Rosenberg, 2005.p.g, 1, 3). So, with the help of Marshal's model, it easily indicates that if KRAV putting forward the situation of small organic farmers in Sweden and their capabilities in terms of paper work and income. So, KRAV should sense their needs and make their certification process better for them. This particular model of Marshal B. Rosenberg can be used and put it any situation for the further analysis of such situations.

B: I would design a meeting between two or more of my interview persons with different goals or/and opinions on the NRM issue and motivate my suggestions. Fore instance, if I would play the role as a mediator between these two stakeholders i.e. small organic farmers and KRAV officials for the solution of their problems and conflicts. So, first of all I will try to understand that, what small organic farmer wants to get the KRAV certificate under a desired situation. Secondly, I will also consult with another stakeholder i.e. KRAV officials. After being consulted with both the stakeholders, the next step which I would like to take is; to bring both the personals and open the platform for them to talk about their problems. So, this would be my best suggestion to bring both the stakeholders for open discussion. By putting forward this scenario, I would expect both the stakeholders to talk clearly about their concern issues. As a mediator, with a focus on the social and communicative process; I would try my best to bring them on the mutual consensus by undermining their open claims. And hopefully, I would expect good outcome by keep motivating both the stakeholders. On the other hand, the difficulties and options I think I could meet as a facilitator of the meeting such as time management between both the stakeholders, understanding each individual's view, communication i.e. language barrier, organizing place for meeting etc.

3. During one week of preparation…...Use relevant theory to analyse each situation?

I have learnt many things during my preparation, field work and writing up while doing work in a project group. It was nice experience for me at the same time as doing work in the form of group. I selected the group which I think was so interesting to me, because I have already worked with those project group members. And the reason, that we had already build the good communication, same country background and working relationship among us. On contrary of that, if I were supposed to choose another group so, I would have faced a lot of problems like communication, understanding each member psyche. So these things could take extra time which I did not have for winding up this project.

In support of this group, it was possible for me to learn many things like picking the topic, fixing the meeting with stakeholders and other proper ways of doing the project work etc. Our group had both the internal and external tasks; but we group members decided to revolve the responsibilities among all the group members in order to let all the members learn at all aspects. In internal tasks I was chosen, to facilitate the initial contacts. I was interested in this particular task and the other group member also wants me to perform this duty because they were satisfied with my English fluency. Every member has full authority and options to choose for themselves the desired responsibility. Initially, I tried to find out the contacts of our concern project stakeholders and then I phoned to each stakeholder to serve the purpose of our project. On the phone, I fixed the timings with stakeholders for meeting and interviews. As my all group members were satisfied that I convinced the stakeholders to give us a time for meetings and interviews. The external task was conducting interviews with the help of other group members. According to the course theme, I believe that I accomplished many important things in a very short span. As the course theme reflects stakeholder facilitation in project and conflict management. Actually facilitation is a very extensive word and we perform the facilitation to a certain limit. By perceiving the course theme, I learnt the conflict management strategies and leadership facilitation while doing work within the project group. The primary condition is a facilitation process within a group and its impact on the stakeholders which plays a significant role in doing the project work. According to my perceptions some group members trying to be dominant by putting forward their capabilities. And usually that person is accepted as a leader but the other group members are not expressing that. As a result of that person becomes a facilitator and formulate the group member's task by requesting them to do more specifically which was totally based on their individual's capability. This will lead that individual to appreciation and being assumed as their leader. On the other hand conflict is another state of affairs which is created by the opposing feelings in the group.

I had some kind of problems during my project which was initially contacting the stakeholders for getting the relevant information from one of the interview. So, there was a language barrier when I contacted the stakeholder then he referred me to contact some other stakeholders and this has been happened with me for several times. So, then I think and decide that I should use some methodologies to encourage them because I had no other option but to get information from them. Then I tried to encourage them by enlisting some problems which they probably they could face and told them to choose that which one is relevant to them. I think this helped me a lot and I could able to get some of information regarding my project work.

So, I think I can relate this particular situation to the communication theory of Lars Hallgren. He describes that when the trust to the interaction is low or decreasing, then the focus on intervention first of all then we must be able to increase their trust to the interaction. We should also use some supporting tools to increase the trust. In order to increase trust it is necessary to Meta-communicate, to start talking about the preconditions for communicating and about how the actors relate to each other. (Lars Hallgren, "lugna upp sig").


- Hallgren, Lars. Unpublished paper in progress. To "lugna upp sig" - The social responsive character of environmental conflict.

Q4. Choose one participatory method from…….that can "ruin" participation?

Participatory rural appraisal "PRA" is an approach used by the non-governmental organizations and other agencies involved in international development. PRA approach does the analysis of local problems and the formulation of tentative solutions with local stakeholders. PRA provides a structure and many practical ideas to help stimulate local participation in the creation and sharing of new insights. (Chambers, 1997). PRA employs a broad range of methods to enable people to express and share information, and to stimulate analysis and discussion. For example, Venn diagram, Matrix scoring, Timelines, Semi-structured interviews, Transact walks, and Social mapping.

I chose the Logical Framework participatory method from the lectures to discuss. I will talk about its purposes and usefulness as well. The Logical Framework Approach is an analytical, management and presentational tool. The logical Framework approach has evolved since the 1970s as a methodology for improving the systemic planning of development projects. Using the Log frame approach for project design imposes strictness in assessing what is to be achieved and the assumptions behind what actions will be required. The main purpose of Log Frame Approach for planners and managers is to present a summary of the project in a standard format and to analyse the existing situation during project preparation; to identify a logical hierarchy of means by which objectives will be reached. To establish how outcomes might best be evaluated and monitored. The key steps and usefulness in the Logical Framework Approach are to establish the general focus and scope of the project. To agree on the specific design process, terminology and planning framework. It develops the project strategy i.e. objective hierarchy, implementation arrangements and resources; and also undertakes a detailed situation analysis. The other most important key step in the Logical framework approach is to analyse and identify the risks and assumptions for the chosen strategies and modify the project design if assumptions are incorrect or risks are very high.

In each step of Log frame analysis; there is a need of participation from different stakeholders in problem analysis, stakeholder analysis, development of objective, objective hierarchy and selecting an ideal working strategy. There is a need of participation in problem tree. Problem tree is a core tool in the Log frame and its main purpose to establish and identify the effect and cause relationships between these problems. Here participation is necessary for stakeholder analysis. Stakeholder analysis is important method to use in order to well design and whom to involve in which steps of the process. It can assist you to recognize that which stakeholders to engage in re-designing the project and to assess their interests and how these relate to project. An objective tree is a hierarchic flowchart of objectives. Participation also plays a vital role in objective tree. If we talk about the mistakes that can ruin the process of participation while doing problem analysis; However, if we could not analyze problems properly and correctly then it can ruin the Logical Framework approach. Ultimately, it will affect the whole project. In "stakeholder analysis" of Logical Framework approach, if we failed to analyze all the stakeholders in the specific project according to their importance, then it can lead towards the failure of Logical Frame approach. While trying objective tree, we should be carefully and precisely identify our objectives which are necessary for the success of project. In conclusion, the mistakes that can ruin the process of participation by not involving project stakeholder in all the stages of Log Frame analysis. Fore example, problem analysis, stakeholder analysis, objective tree and objective hierarchy.


Logical Frame work Analysis:

Available at (Accessed 10march 2010).

Robert Chambers. Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last Intermediate Technology Publications, London, 1997, p. 106

Literature review

Q5: Book Review: "Non-Violent Communication by Marshall B. Rosenberg"

I chose the "Non-Violent Communication by Marshall Rosenberg" for my book review. In this book, Marshall Rosenberg teaches a superior method to convey and get information. The skills all the way through are very useful interpersonally as well as in the relationship with the one. Marshall is totally accurate that our existing mindset and language in the American culture "obscures a personal sense of responsibility".

As we are taught right from the beginning to talk using "you" statements and to hold responsible our internal experience on our conditions, here the author draws attention to the essential difference between the stimulus and cause of our way of thinking. So, what others do is the stimulus but not the basis of our emotions. Our requirements, most commonly our unmet requirements are the actual cause of all our feelings. The principle of the book is, as you may have guessed that how to communicate in a non-aggressive and respective manner. There is a good progression from how to create thinking in a different way about communicating throughout the genuine techniques. The book of "Non-Violent Communication" is filled with actual world conversations that can be used as examples of the approaches being discussed; and these actually secure everything together in a proper way. Marshall Rosenberg is asking about the first thing to deal with, is to formulate a distinction between phrases indicating observation against those indicating appraisal. Rosenberg also conceives that this distinction is often vanished in the English language and commonly leads to tough feelings. Fore instance, "she is angry" is a phrase containing an appraisal. I could not probably know that she was angry unless she told me about that. So, the phrase that, "she yelled at me" is kind of an observation, and if that occurred, I afterward evaluated the position and determined that she was angry. So, Rosenberg presented the first input to a non-violent communication, is to focus on speaking simply in terms of interpretation. This guides to a technique of reflective dialogue in which you just observe what the other individuals are saying and repeat it back to them in order to indicate that you are trying to comprehend. Fore instance, it gives the impression that you are displease and your boss yelled at you and would like her to be additional admiring of your efforts, is that right? According to Marshall, the steps to more effectively expressing anger are identify judgmental thoughts, stop and breathe, connect with our related needs and express our feelings and unmet needs.

In this book, there is a whole multitude of great advice and examples. So, by reading this book I find the significance of identifying the other party's need and listening compassionately rather than judging.

Reference: Marshall B. Rosenberg, 2005, Non-Violent Communication.

Q6: Extra Book Review, because Vanessa told me if I don't attend the compulsory seminar on 23march and the reason I confirmed my ticket to Pakistan on 21march for my internship course. So, then I have to present another book review. So I tried my best to submit all the requirements right on time for passing this course.

Book Review: "Learning for Action: A Short Definitive Account of Soft Systems Methodology, and Its Use Practitioners, Teachers and Students" by Peter Checkland and John Poulter, 2006.

I chose the "Learning for action" for my book review. In this book, Checkland presented a soft system methodology. For couple of motives, Checkland want this to become a perfect description of the approach; firstly, for the reason that different authors are sure that over the last decades the methodology has satisfactorily developed to necessitate complete and perfect codification, and secondly the reason, that something needs to bring to an end the irritating excess of imperfect interpretations of "Soft System Methodology" in the derivative literature. In this book, Checkland and poulter are presenting a useful introduction to the "methodology". And it has been divided into two sections, i.e. conceptual in which "Soft System Methodology" has been described in three passes, and the other section focuses on the management situations and other difficult situations in the information system. Soft system methodology is very constructive input to the field of systematic difficulty solution. It unites the conceptual firmness with flexibility in application to actual world challenging circumstances. Soft System Methodology does not refer to the problems but also to problematical circumstances. As it describe that we don't speak about organizations but also in relation to human activity systems. So, all these dissimilarities are really important in navigating away from a hard systems approach that clarifies the process of investigations.

At one point of view Soft System Methodology is easy, but on the other hand it requires the very skilled facilitator. So with the progress of Soft System Methodology, Checkland played a very important role in presenting the solving problems strategies. As for as I do reflect, so "definitive account" is incredible addition to the Soft System Methodology literature. As a result, both new-learners and professionals desire to get more knowledge about this approach. In this book, there has been an argument about craft skills in which Checkland and Poulter throw a light more specifically on the methodology. "Craft skills" concerned in influencing potential clients to accept the methodology, and Soft System Methodology could not be useful brand to signify the approach. Some ones impulsively introverted from the idea of systems, as a result they think that it has something to deal with gadgets and computers and cannot deal with their real life problems.

In short, Soft System methodology users can generate well-structured process of investigation and learning by building-up models of successful outcome. Checkland is exceptionally ideological about a non-ideological position, to be exact that these models should reflect a single and pure worldview.