to interested scholar-practitioners to collaborate,
explore, and build on the approach together.
When identifying opportunities for the generalist, Hansen
suggests that the approach “is well suited to settings where
there are diverse, complex conflicts that may require a wide
range of interventions, as well as situations where conflict
parties have ongoing relationships, like a community or
organization.” Consider the multi-faceted conflicts faced by
members of migrant and displaced communities, which may
include differences over environmental, intergenerational,
inter- and intra-community, cultural, or other matters whose
origins may be poorly defined. The community itself may be
resistant to traditional conflict resolution approaches due to
concerns about justice and social authority.
One of the great advantages of the generalist
approach is that [the guidepost of] decision
making can take on more of a ‘both/and,’ rather
than an ‘either/or’ character. [The] parties may
choose to engage in more than one intervention
simultaneously or in sequence. . . . [T]here is no
‘most suitable’ type of intervention or theoretical
lens. [The generalist] assists the parties to
determine the interventions and theoretical
approaches that they feel the most comfortable
with, are most likely to lead them to their goals and
preferred futures, and are conducted in a way that
best suits their values and dispositions.
Any work attempting to break new ground is likely to
be met with some skepticism, and we recognize that the
strengths of this Guidebook are to some extent its weaknesses as well. First, Hansen proposes in his meta-theories
the ability to utilize different theories and models simultaneously while acknowledging that some may be fully
incompatible. Terminology alone could become confusing; for
example, the references to justice and power dynamics.
Other issues might arise around the relationship between
the generalist and conflict parties. Hansen recommends an
empathic and supportive relationship, that some could see
as a lack of impartiality which is detrimental to resolution.
Some may be concerned that he yields too much control to
THe information presented, from a strong theoretical framework
to well-analyzed examples and cases, can be helpful at any
career stage to support both research and application.
the parties in selecting theories and interventions. There
may also be questions about the relationship between
generalist and specialist.
Hansen does not advocate against the use of specialists
and makes clear that a specialist in one area might
adopt a generalist approach during initial
interactions. However, he does not clearly
define the circumstances that would
require specialized intervention or how
responsibilities would be allocated. He
also does not make clear how customized
interventions can be evaluated – can the
practitioner take lessons learned from a
one-off approach?
Hansen acknowledges some of these
weaknesses and challenges the practitioner
to assist in the discovery and resolution of them. “The
generalist approach explicitly asks for guides to develop
themselves as scholar-practitioners . . . and to continually
advance the field of conflict resolution.”
As new practitioners seeking to integrate classroom
theories into practical application, we were drawn to the
generalist approach to augment our own diverse areas
of social and corporate expertise. Consider a corporation
that relies on the expertise of many different people to
be successful. Parties from different departments within
the same organization working towards the same goal
frequently deal with conflicting positions over resources,
priorities and perceptions. Deteriorating cooperation
and even latent conflicts ultimately increase risk for the
whole organization, especially when the scale of matters
may involve external stakeholders such as regulatory
agencies, independent auditors, external counsel, and the
media. The generalist approach provides the framework
to engage all parties equally within the mutual area of
concern, methodically identifying the key challenges
and leveraging the parties own strengths, resources and
knowledge to collaboratively identify the path forward.
It also offers a long-term approach to educate and
empower parties that are codependent and accountable
beyond their immediate conflicts.
The Generalist Approach to Conflict Resolution: A
Guidebook has value for students, new practitioners and
experts in the field of conflict resolution. The information
presented, from a strong theoretical framework to well-analyzed examples and cases, can be helpful at any
career stage to support both research and application.
Whether practitioners are fully in agreement or not with
the proposed concepts, Hansen’s work should be seen as
an interesting and comprehensive manual well worth your
consideration.
VOCESCHOCESSOLUTONS