In our interview series, titled "PERSPECTIVES", we reach out to thought leaders in the fields of negotiation and dispute resolution, ask them questions, and invite them to share their ideas and insights.

We had the pleasure of interviewing Professor Michelle LeBaron, a conflict transformation scholar and practitioner at the University of British Columbia Peter A. Allard School of Law and member of the Singapore International Dispute Resolution Academy's faculty.

1) From your perspective, what are the top three global trends that are shaping the field of negotiation and dispute resolution? Why do you think these trends are important?

1. An emphasis on the symbolic aspects of dispute engagement and negotiation.

Increasingly, dispute engagement scholars and practitioners are aware of the limitations of their work. For too long, we have emphasised the scientific, so-called rational aspects of theory and practice, but without generating the hoped-for successful track record for our work. This is because we have neglected the symbolic aspects of disputes.

Symbolic aspects have to do with identity, meaning-making and the deep grammar of being that may be implicated in a dispute. When these aspects are ignored or not adequately engaged, all the technical expertise in the world will be insufficient. It is not enough to identify issues and analyse complimentary and exclusive interests in relation to material aspects of disputes. What the issues and interests mean, and how they are linked to identity and sacred belonging is also important.

For example, if a dispute has religious or worldview aspects as a part of it, these need to be considered as part of dispute analysis and intervention planning. In a dispute over land, if one group feels they have a God-given right to the territory, this must be engaged, not seen either as something negotiable or ignored. Approaches that engage the symbolic level include arts, rituals, narratives and sacred practices like prayer or contemplative practices. Elements of these approaches can and must be included in parallel to or within negotiation and dispute engagement practices if symbolic elements are taken seriously. Only when parties feel dispute engagement processes incorporate recognition of what is most meaningful to them, including their identities, will they participate fully and will negotiation have more likelihood of success.

2. Technological advances.

The rapid advance of technology-assisted negotiation and dispute engagement including non-local and synchronous/asynchronous tools is something that must be a part of practitioners’ education. Given its increasing use and the accelerating pace of change across a range of settings, the importance of proficiency with technology cannot be ignored. At the same time, technology can alienate and exclude those who are less conversant or who have fewer tools. Assuming, for example, that everyone will feel comfortable with a particular online platform is almost certainly incorrect. Many times I have prepared for conversations with international colleagues only to find that the technology did not function as needed, or that those involved were not able to use it effectively through their own lack of proficiency or technical challenges, or all of the above. Keeping up with advancing technological change and its effects on disputing is a challenge that must be met, yet one that will get increasingly difficult in the future.

3. Cultural and worldview issues in a globalised world. It is well accepted that globalisation trends are accelerating. At the same time, people around the world are seeking belonging in neighbourhoods, religions, interest groups, ethnic groups and other ‘tribes’. Globalisation does not mean that we have all folded our heritages into one homogeneous culture; far from it! Rather, globalisation has meant that people have become even more adamant about their distinctiveness and—in some ways—more inward looking. Recent events with Brexit in the UK and the election of Trump in the US are emblematic of this trend. Thus, developing ways of working across cultural and worldview differences is more important than ever.

2) In light of these trends, what can negotiators and dispute resolution practitioners do now to position themselves well for the future?

I will respond to these questions with material corresponding to numbers 1-3 above.

1. An emphasis on the symbolic aspects of dispute engagement and negotiation.

Given this trend, practitioners should develop their capacities for engaging the symbolic dimension of disputes by getting appropriate training. Trainings on experiential, arts-related approaches including theatre, dance, visual art, music or multi-modal, expressive arts are ideal.

Dispute engagement has always been interdisciplinary, yet the fields of political science, international relations, law and economics have had far more influence on theoretical and practical developments than arts and humanities. As Elaine Scarry writes in her wonderful book On Beauty, incorporating aesthetic dimensions is to awaken the essential qualities of curiosity and wonder—both important to effective dispute engagement. Scarry relates the story of Odysseus encountering the beautiful Nausicaa, illustrating that beauty actually disrupts our assumptions about ‘how things are’. As every experienced negotiator knows, interrupting parties’ fixed and limiting assumptions is an essential element of change. We negotiators are in the ‘change business’, so befriending not only conflict but its symbolic and aesthetic dimensions is important.

2. Technological advances. Given this trend, practitioners should familiarise themselves with the technologies most widely used within their client and colleague groups. They should also work to democratise access to technology for those otherwise left out. At the same time, they should make clear boundaries in relation to their use of technology. Turn off the internet, leave the phone in a basket before an in-person meeting, create times for sanctuary when technology is not mediating interaction. Balancing prowess with technology with its wise use is an essential life-skill.

3. Cultural and worldview issues in a globalised world. Given this trend, practitioners should work to develop cultural fluency. Cultural fluency is the capacity to anticipate unwritten communication and sense-making rules in a range of diverse contexts, and to respond appropriately and with empathy to others. It is a developmental process and should be an ongoing focus for every effective negotiator or dispute engagement expert. One way that negotiators can improve their cultural fluency is by putting themselves in unfamiliar situations and then reflecting on their learnings via journaling or peer-group dialogue.

​3) What do you think are the three biggest problems / challenges that people face in their negotiations and conflicts?

The three biggest problems are the inverse of the above:

• lack of analytical frameworks or tools to understand or engage the symbolic dimensions of disputes and negotiations;
• lack of access to or facility with technological tools, and lack of boundaries or balance around their use; and
• lack of awareness or capacity about the salience of cultural and worldview dimensions of disputing and negotiation.

4) What can people do to effectively overcome such problems / challenges?

The recommendations in question 2 above are my answer to this question. In general, seeing negotiation and dispute prevention/engagement as life skills means constantly engaging in improving those human capacities essential to effectiveness in these areas.

K-12 education should be infused with these capacities, and leaders should seek ongoing training to increase their cultural fluency and their understanding of symbolic aspects of communication and social relations. Incorporating physical awareness into work in these three areas is also essential; the body has too long been ignored as a key wisdom source for negotiators and dispute intervention practitioners.

5) What will make you stop and say, "Wow, that person is a good negotiator/mediator"?

Here are some of the most important qualities a negotiator or mediator can cultivate:

• creativity;
• flexibility;
• innovation;
• self-awareness;
• welcoming change and unexpected developments;
• adaptability;
• empathy;
• awareness of social justice; working to create fair processes and a more fair world;
• relationally able; cultivating the capacity to elicit trust from others; and
• coalition-building.

Other conversations: