CONFLICT ENGAGEMENT AND POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY:
AN OPPORTUNITY TO REFRAME OUR PROCESS
Presented by,
Bryan Hanson
Assistant Director
The Werner Institute
Creighton University - School of Law
Phone: 402.280.3365
Objectives for Presentation

Reflect upon the efficacy of current problem solving
methods

Create a sense of the benefits of positive framing when
engaging in conflict

Increase understanding of positive psychology/AI and
its application to conflict engagement

Practice AI within a workplace conflict scenario
My Hopes for the Presentation

Refine ideas for application

Develop potential lines of research

Feedback from fellow practitioners
The Problem Solving Approach
Identify the
problem/issue
Discuss the
cause
Determine
solution and
plan action
Discuss
solutions
Typical Mediation Process
Opening Statement
Issue Clarification/Agenda building
Discussion regarding the positions and interests within each issue
Option Generation
Develop Agreements
Why Reframe Our Approach?

Placebo

Pygmalion

Positive Affect & Learned Helpfulness

Imbalanced Inner Dialogue

The Positive Image as a Dynamic Force in Culture

Affirmative Competence

Selective Self-Monitoring
(Martinetz, 2002)
Why Reframe Our Approach?
“Relationships thrive where there is an appreciative eye –
when people see the best in one another, when they can
share their dreams and ultimate concerns in affirming
ways, and when they are connected in full voice to create
not just new worlds, but better worlds.”
(Cooperrider, 2003)
Why Reframe Our Approach?
“Treatment is not just fixing what is broken; it is nurturing what
is best. Psychology is not just a branch of medicine concerned
with illness or health; it is much larger. It is about work,
education, insight, love, growth, and play. And in this quest for
what is best, positive psychology does not rely on wishful
thinking, faith, self-deception, fads, or hand waving; it tries to
adapt what is best in the scientific method to the unique
problems that human behavior presents to those who wish to
understand it in all its complexity.”
(Seligman & Csikszentmihali, 2000)
The Power vs Force Perspective
The Power vs Force Perspective
Examples of High and Low Energy Patterns:
Accepting ……….. Rejecting
Diplomatic ……… Deceptive
Appreciative …….. Envious
Conscious ……….. Unaware
Confronting ……... Harassing
Trusting …………. Gullible
Thoughtful ……… Pedantic
Powerful …………. Forceful
(Hawkins, 1995)
Neuroscience Findings
The Appreciative Inquiry Process
Deliver
Discover
Destiny
Dream
Design
(Mohr & Watkins, 2001)
Applications in the Workplace
AI in Action
http://vimeo.com/wernerinstitute/wonderfullifeproject
Priming Potential*
Frame the Priming Potential Process
Seek out the Story
Generate Visions for Satisfaction
Develop Mutual Possibilities
Determine Realistic Options
(*Process in development by Hanson, 2013)
Resources Used (Books)

Barrett & Fry (2005). Appreciative Inquiry: A Positive Approach
to Building Cooperative Capacity.

Hammond, S.A. (2998). The Thin Book of Appreciative Inquiry

Hawkins, David (1995). Power Vs. Force: The Hidden
Dimensions of Human Behavior.

Noble, Cinnie (2012). Conflict Management Coaching.

Kahneman, Daniel (2011). Thinking Fast and Slow.

Levitan, Daniel (2007). This is your Brain on Music.
Resources Used (Articles)

McClellan, Jeffrey (2007). Marrying Positive Psychology to Mediation. Dispute Resolution Journal. November 2007

Martinetz, Charles (2002). Appreciative Inquiry as an Organizational Development Tool. Performance Improvement,
September 2002

Kellermanns, Floyd, Pearson, and Spencer (2007). The Contingent Effect of Confrontation on the Relationship between
Shared Mental Models and Decision Quality. Journal of Organizational Behavior.

Coe, Richard (2010). Neuroscience: a new friend to OD and AI. AI Practitioner, February 2010.

Johnson, Richard (2010). How to Conquer Conflict with Appreciative Conversation. AI Practitioner, November 2010.

Seligman, Martin & Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (2000). Positive Psychology: an introduction. American Psychologist,
January 2000.

Simonton, Keith (2000) Creativity: Cognitive, Personal, Development, and Social Aspects. American Psychologist,
January 2000.

Ryan & Deci (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and WellBeing. American Psychologist, January 2000.
Final Thoughts

What further questions or thoughts have emerged during
this discussion regarding the integration of concepts from
conflict engagement and positive psychology?
For further information regarding our
program please contact:
Bryan Hanson
(402) 280-3365
[email protected]
http://www.creighton.edu/werner