Two of the layers of conflict that often accompany one another are positions and interests. These concepts are quite complex and you can learn more about them in the work of Roger Fisher and William L. Ury in Getting to Yes (1981). For now, we will focus on more basic definitions of these terms.

*Our position is often what we want to happen (or not happen) in a conflict situation. 

*Our interests are why we want that thing to happen (or not happen).

Note: Not all conflicts focus on “action,” i.e., wanting to see some sort of change occur, so adjust these definitions as best fit any given situation.

Let’s return to our previous conflict in which Person A believes Person B is not acknowledging their points in an academic debate. We will focus on Person A’s side of the conflict, but keep in mind that Person B also has positions, interests, feelings, and needs in this situation.

*Position: Person A wants Person B to start acknowledging their points more often.

Interests become much more complicated to identify and are often tied directly to basic human needs, but are more specific to the situation and the investment of each party in it. They tend to be layered and complex, so let’s unpack some interests that might be factors here.

*Interests: Person A wants others to respect them and perceive them as intelligent.

But why?

*Interests: Due to their cultural background, Person A was told throughout their life that they are less intelligent than others and wants to prove themselves.

But why?

*Interests: Person A comes from a marginalized class of people who have historically been labeled unintelligent, and has thus experienced discrimination. Person A wants to have an experience of being accepted in academic discussions.

But why?

*Interests: Person A is deeply invested in pursuing an academic career and wants to experience encouragement from others rather than dismissiveness. 

Do you see how the presenting issue — Person A perceiving that Person B is not acknowledging their points — in this triggering event — this particular academic debate — ties to interests that are far more complex and deep than the current situation might suggest? We rarely know the life histories of the people with whom we interact, their struggles, or their complex motivations. By considering interests that underlie a person’s position, we can work to understand why this issue is important to them, build greater understanding, and consider how we might address the conflict more constructively in the future.

Note that in this situation, Person B’s behavior is likely not the sole reason for Person A’s reaction, nor will Person B adjusting their behavior likely change Person A’s perception about how the people in general treat them based on their history. However, Person B can consider ways to make Person A feel more acknowledged, a small step toward shifting their dynamic, which might in turn help Person A feel more confident engaging in academic discourse in the future. Sometimes little changes can have big impacts.

References

Fisher, Roger, and William Ury. 1981. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. 1st Ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.