The Pros and Cons of Working With Only One Side to a Conflict

Analyzing the Impact of Conflict Management Training in a Polarized Context

Abstract

This reflection examines the decision of the Bridgeway Group, a conflict resolution non-profit organization based in Massachusetts, to exclusively offer negotiation preparation and training to one party in a conflict context in the United States. The Bridgeway Group has historically focused on conflict contexts outside of the US, helping parties in conflict to find less violent and more constructive solutions to their differences. Generally, the Bridgeway Group works with all parties to a conflict, enhancing negotiation and conflict management skills and analysis. The aforementioned decision was taken when the Bridgeway Group embraced the opportunity to work on a deeply polarizing domestic issue in the field of reproductive health, embarking in a new direction for the organization. The project shed light on the importance of value alignment and clearly articulated goals when pursuing new work. The Bridgeway Group's experience underscores the challenges associated with working with only one party to a conflict. The two-year engagement with the client, a reproductive rights organization, revealed important lessons about the need for an explicit, mutual commitment by the client organization and The Bridgeway Group to improve negotiated outcomes, enhance sustainable solutions, and engage ongoing learning, all without contributing to further political polarization. Mr. Konradt was tasked with writing this reflection as part of his research fellowship. The project was completed before he joined the organization.