adminShelter Chiyeza Change Management
Most companies handle tonnes of issues everyday and the manner in which most managers deal with these determine how they will be resolved.In most cases, if managers are head-strong and tackle issues with a heavy hand, they risk creating an impasse with whoever they are negotiating or dealing with.
Some of the issues that companies deal with that has the potential to create an impasse include wage and deal negotiations.
When dealing with such issues, it is important to keep an open mind to issues that are being raised.
You will find out that the human mind finds it more and more difficult to assume a certain level of change especially when issues are viewed from multiple angles.
Usually, in such instances challenges and underlying assumptions normally arise.
In business, there are certain issues that will not present immediate solutions and they normally end up in an impasse.
An impasse arises when two or more parties reach a deadlock.
Deadlocks normally come about when two sides feel strongly about their positions and are unwilling to make concessions or climb down from their positions.
In business, reaching a deadlock in a potentially good deal is bad.
Instead of putting its foot down, the party that stands to benefit the most from the deal should be flexible enough to accommodate the demand of the other party without losing sight of what it wants.
This requires one or both parties to go back to the drawing board and refocus on their underlying needs, interests and concerns.
You could start looking at the major objectives of the meeting and what your desired outcomes really are.
You could go a step further and evaluate alternatives if you are forced into a position where you have to withdraw from the negotiations.
Reaching a deadlock does not necessarily mean that the negotiating parties have to forget about other issues they have discussed, as well as other solutions they have already negotiated.
Parties should, however, remain focused on their priorities in a realistic manner. I once worked for a boss who did not tolerate our suggestions no matter how good they were.
It is important to appreciate the fact that not everyone views the world through the same lens as yours. What might look as a fact to you may not be one to the next person.
We also had a colleague who after an argument would always clear his throat and say “As a matter of fact, . . . Everyone would say, ‘but whose facts are they?’”
Facts and data are usually open to interpretation and people have different underlying criteria of analysing them.
Normally these positions are always lurking in our speeches when we talk of semantics and sources of data.
We once had a manager who would come up with graphical illustrations of theories that would form the basis for discussion.
Everyone would ask him for his sources and why he was using European situations to describe local situations.
This is because we all accept or discount things based on past experiences, personality, and tolerance for discomfort.
I remember listening to a debate on carbon emissions. One person was advocating that the onus was on the developed countries or the wealthy nations to act since they are the perpetrators of air pollution.
They are the ones that must act first and most aggressively to cut their emissions. However, the wealthy countries have often resisted acknowledging “historical responsibility”, since doing so might affect their economic competitiveness.
And so this impasse has been going on for years, even more than 20 years, and the environmentalists have been saying that time is running out.
The world needs a viable coalition to efficiently and adequately address the issue of emissions reductions.
Managing an impasse is done in stages, it’s a tricky situation, be sure to take some time off for reflection.
Take time to examine the true needs of the situation, and consider possible alternatives that you may have been reluctant to consider in the heat of the moment.
Facilitation and mediators are effective methods of dealing with impasse.
During the breaks, they may allow you to “caucus” in separate meetings in order to give you room to reflect on your frustrations and other resentments towards each other.
Try to change the setting. If you change the location then maybe people might feel like they are starting a new round of negotiations.
This may mean that all of the old assumptions about what would or would not work are almost thrown out the window.
This fresh perspective might be just be what both sides need to go back and revisit the issue that is causing the deadlock.
Have you ever reached an impasse? How did you first try to resolve it? Did this work? How was the deadlock eventually resolved?
Till next week, may God richly bless you.
Shelter Chieza is an advisor in management issues. She can be contacted at [email protected]
Online Reporter