{"id":269,"date":"2009-09-17T13:30:32","date_gmt":"2009-09-17T20:30:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/?p=269"},"modified":"2013-11-23T18:29:22","modified_gmt":"2013-11-24T01:29:22","slug":"creating-a-faith-based-conflict-management-system","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/2009\/09\/creating-a-faith-based-conflict-management-system\/","title":{"rendered":"Creating a Faith-Based Conflict Management System"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Brian Bloch<\/p>\n

Download the full article (pdf)<\/a><\/p>\n

Every organization has to deal with conflicts. Many deal with them on an ad hoc basis without articulating a standard way to process conflicts.\u00a0 Few have gone to the extent of designing a conflict management system (CMS).\u00a0 Faith-based organizations (FBOs) are no exception.\u00a0 While many FBOs have well-developed programs for conciliation, mediation, and scripture-based peacemaking, very few religious communities have taken advantage of the CMS approach to their internal conflicts.\u00a0 I\u2019ve had the privilege of attempting to create a CMS in conjunction with the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON).
\nThe first part of this paper describes the previous method of dispute handling in ISKCON, the shortcomings of which served as an impetus to create a CMS.\u00a0 It also covers the various steps taken to create the CMS, the components of the CMS, the special role of the ombudsman, and the challenges encountered.\u00a0 Part Two focuses on the nature of disputes and their causes.\u00a0 A subsection of Part Two samples one particular case, that of the role of women in ISKCON.\u00a0 While this paper concentrates on ISKCON, both because of my familiarity with the organization and my inability to find other FBOs taking a CMS approach, I try whenever possible to apply the principles highlighted here to FBOs in general.<\/p>\n

Part One\u2014Creating a Conflict Management System in a Faith-Based Organization
\nISKCON\u2019s Pre-CMS History of Conflict-Handling
\nDuring the life of its founder, Swami Prabhupada, ISKCON\u2019s conflicts were handled mainly through power-based decisions, often with reference to Vaishnava\u00a0 theology.\u00a0 In spite of Prabhupada\u2019s many requests to his disciples to cooperate and avoid conflict, disputes invariably arose.\u00a0 Major conflicts were handled by Prabhupada himself, while lesser conflicts were settled by members of the Governing Body Commission (GBC\u2014the highest management body) or by ISKCON\u2019s middle management (temple presidents).\u00a0 After Prabhupada\u2019s death in 1977, ISKCON struggled to solve its conflicts, primarily because the organization had no developed mechanism for conflict management.\u00a0 Some of the leaders intuitively made interest-based attempts to stave off or contain conflict (without the language to name what they were doing), but power-based decisions by GBC members and temple presidents remained the rule.\u00a0 Rights-based approaches were rare.\u00a0 Alternative dispute resolution was unknown in ISKCON at that time.\u00a0 Jennifer Lynch, Q.C. writes about such a situation: \u201cOften those in positions of power provide no options whatsoever for dealing with conflict\u2014the \u2018like it or lump it\u2019 approach that leaves conflict festering or induces managers and employees to quit.\u201d\u00a0 With apostasy rates rising among older members, ISKCON struggled to find a balance between individuals\u2019 needs and the needs of the otherwise growing organization, and between mercy and justice.
\nThe authority structure Prabhupada set in place remained strong after his death, and power-based decisions leaned firmly toward a top-down, justice-over-mercy approach.\u00a0 Leaders emphasized the organization\u2019s needs over the needs of individual members, and rules were enforced firmly.\u00a0 It was also common for some or all of the rank and file members to be excluded from the decision-making process.
\nBut as the years passed, the leaders began to mature.\u00a0 They were no longer twenty-somethings but had fully entered the adult world, and with their increased maturity they began to perceive the shortcomings in how they had been dealing with disputes.\u00a0 They also began to perceive how debilitating it is to deal with conflict without a structure or plan.\u00a0 In 2001 I asked the thirty-eight GBC members, \u201cHow many of you spend 25% of your time dealing with conflict?\u201d Nearly all of them raised their hands.\u00a0 I continued to ask the same question, raising the percentage each time.\u00a0 There were still hands showing at 50%.
\nThe time was ripe to introduce a conflict management system.<\/p>\n

Impetuses to Create a CMS
\n\u201cOrganizations do not set in motion a process of wholesale shift to new systems unless there is substantial dissatisfaction with the old.\u201d\u00a0 SPIDR\u2019s Guidelines for the Design of Integrated Conflict Management Systems within Organizations states that the \u201c\u2026four causal factors that act as catalysts for the design of an integrated conflict management system are culture, cost, crisis, and compliance.\u201d\u00a0 It is unlikely that the authors of the SPIDR document were thinking of organizations like ISKCON\u2014a volunteer religious community\u2014when writing these guidelines, yet this excerpt from their report covers the primary reasons I proposed to look into dispute resolution in ISKCON.<\/p>\n

Cost
\nMy initial impetus for considering alternative dispute resolution in ISKCON was cost.\u00a0 The SPIDR report describes the cost factor: \u201cThe organization is incurring heavy costs from its current disputes and from its current dispute resolution processes (or lack of them).\u00a0 Direct costs include costs of litigating cases externally and processing them internally.\u00a0 Indirect costs include loss of personnel through sick leave or early retirement, loss of personnel to competitors, the costs of new employee recruitment, loss of productivity and opportunity, bad publicity, petty sabotage, waste, theft of intellectual property, increased insurance claims and fees, and customer dissatisfaction or customer loss.\u201d
\nISKCON was spending enormous amounts of time on conflict, and this loss was compounded by poor outcomes. ISKCON was also paying the price of seeing a number of its members form splinter groups, partially in response to how it was dealing with conflict, especially with those who went on to become the leaders of these splinter groups.<\/p>\n

Crisis
\nI was also driven to create a CMS because of the crisis ISKCON was facing at the time.\u00a0 This crisis was not simply a particular event but the culmination of a number of small shocks such as the genesis of splinter groups, moral lapses amongst leaders, and financial shortfalls.\u00a0 It occurred to me that there must be better ways to discipline and manage ISKCON\u2019s members, especially when they had conflicts with leaders.\u00a0 It was common for those who had been disciplined to feel scapegoated; most felt they had been treated roughly and without concern for their personal needs. Many of these individuals left ISKCON.
\nI also noticed that few interpersonal disputes were ever fully resolved.\u00a0 Splinter groups were often populated by those who felt mistreated, and the members of these groups clashed repeatedly with ISKCON\u2019s core members.\u00a0 Lawsuits ensued, and splinter groups worldwide canvassed ISKCON members to join their ranks.<\/p>\n

Culture
\nWhen I read the following passage in The Argument Culture by Deborah Tannen, I thought it offered insight into ISKCON\u2019s conflict culture: \u201c\u2026 conflicts can sometimes be resolved without confrontational tactics, but current conventional wisdom often devalues less confrontational tactics even if they work well, favoring more aggressive strategies even if they get less favorable results. It\u2019s as if we value a fight for its own sake, not for its effectiveness in resolving disputes.\u201d
\nIf ISKCON could find a healthy way to deal with conflict it could influence the group\u2019s overall culture.\u00a0 The SPIDR report describes this factor: \u201cEfforts to effect a cultural transformation have stalled or failed; the organization\u2019s internal culture is out of alignment with its mission and core values; the organization\u2019s culture is out of alignment with its external services.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0 ISKCON\u2019s teachings of compassion, equanimity, peacefulness, and equality often didn\u2019t match the manner in which conflicts were dealt with or justice administered.\u00a0 I hoped to align ISKCON\u2019s approach to conflict resolution more closely with its espoused values.<\/p>\n

Finding the Champion
\nThe SPIDR report states:
\nAt least one senior person must be a visionary who champions the cause of creating a conflict-competent culture through developing and maintaining an integrated conflict management system.\u00a0 The champion\u2019s passion inspires others to act. It is this ability to connect others to a vision that often drives the success of a program.\u00a0 Champions are trailblazers who build an integrated conflict management system piece by piece\u2014never losing sight of the difficulty of creating change.\u00a0 They are able to \u201cgrow\u201d programs that work, abandon programs that are struggling, and, perhaps most important, identify areas of new opportunity.\u00a0 Champions must be great innovators and good marketers of their ideas, for without effective communication, the \u201cflame\u201d dies.<\/p>\n

For a few months I pondered how to introduce effective conflict resolution into ISKCON while addressing the hesitations some leaders had voiced.\u00a0 I hadn\u2019t read the above quote at that time, but I knew I needed a champion.\u00a0 I wondered if I could do this work alone.
\nIn June 2002 I was introduced to Arnold Zack, a renowned mediator and arbitrator.\u00a0 After first checking with theology and sociology professors to assure himself that ISKCON was an authentic religious tradition rather than a new cult, he wholeheartedly embraced the idea of introducing ISKCON to conflict resolution.\u00a0 He and I exchanged over a thousand e-mails between June 2002 and June 2003 planning this introduction.\u00a0 He was passionate about the work.\u00a0 He told me it was one of the most significant efforts of his career.\u00a0 After much planning and discussion, he flew to India to make a presentation at the annual meeting of the GBC body on the implementation of what would later become ISKCON\u2019s CMS, ISKCONResolve.\u00a0 In this presentation, he addressed the benefits the GBC members would derive from establishing a conflict management program, and he was convincing and humorous\u2014the GBC members enjoyed his presentation.\u00a0 It was also the first formal presentation made to the GBC by someone who was not a member of ISKCON.
\nHere is the GBC\u2019s resolution, passed unanimously, after his presentation:
\nResolution 302\/2002. Mediation and Ombuds Services in ISKCON
\nWhereas, The GBC Body seeks to demonstrate its interest in the concerns of ISKCON devotees, and seeks to encourage the timely voluntary resolution of disputes within ISKCON;
\nWhereas, international organizations almost universally provide a system for prompt resolution of internal disputes;
\nWhereas, ombudsmen provide an effective and confidential means of addressing individual concerns with an organization;
\nWhereas, voluntary mediation undertaken by two disputant parties with the help of a trained mediator is proven to resolve interpersonal disputes to the mutual satisfaction of the disputants;
\n[GUIDELINE] Resolved, That the GBC Body announces their strong support for establishment of a voluntary dispute resolution system to facilitate the resolution of ISKCON members\u2019 concerns.
\nTo this end the GBC Body urges regions and local temples to establish regional based ombuds and mediation systems.
\nMembers of the GBC Body pledge to support the development of these structures and to be responsive to the concerns of members brought to their attention through these processes.
\n[ACTION ORDER] It is further resolved, That a subcommittee of Brian Bloch and Arnold M Zack shall coordinate these efforts in ISKCON on behalf of the GBC Body.<\/p>\n

With champions in place\u2014both inside and outside of ISKCON\u2014the components of ISKCONResolve started to develop.<\/p>\n

Building ISKCONResolve\u2014Adding the Components
\nNearly all organizations that venture into establishing a CMS already have elements of a conflict resolution procedure in place.\u00a0 Back in America shortly after this resolution was passed, Zack introduced me to Mary Rowe.\u00a0 Rowe has been the ombudsperson at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology since 1973.\u00a0 She believes that no one person can change an organization\u2014instead one needs a systems approach.\u00a0 In the attached chart \u201cAnalyzing Your Conflict Management System\u201d she lists the many functions that may be needed to assist a person who is experiencing difficulty, and at least thirty-eight offices that might exist in a corporation, agency, or university to handle complaints.\u00a0\u00a0 Outside of the GBC members and the temple presidents, ISKCON had none of these offices and few of these functions in place. I saw this as an advantage; it left me free to create a CMS from scratch.
\nLipsky et al state: \u201cImplementing workplace systems requires a well-planned multistep process that takes place over several [six] phases.\u201d\u00a0 ISKCONResolve\u2019s implementation followed the general direction of these phases, but in a simplified and far less costly way.\u00a0 Below is a description of the components gradually added to ISKCON\u2019s CMS:<\/p>\n

Beginning with Mediation and the Ombuds Office
\nOur first priority was to introduce interest-based options into ISKCON\u2019s way of dealing with conflicts.\u00a0 ISKCON\u2019s first mediator training took place in the summer of 2002.\u00a0 Three of those attendees took further training and subsequently went on to train over 500 ISKCON members on six continents in basic mediation.
\nLipsky et al discuss the choices CMS designers have in terms of using internal and\/or external processes and resources.\u00a0 ISKCONResolve started and continues to use primarily internal processes.\u00a0 Though recent co-mediations that included one non-ISKCON mediator have proven successful, the mediators are generally ISKCON members and are mediating pro bono.
\nIn early 2003 I became a member of the International Ombudsman Association (IOA; then, TOA\u2014The Ombudsman Association).\u00a0 Two ISKCON colleagues and I attended IOA\u2019s Ombuds 101 course in Boston.\u00a0 Shortly afterwards, we established ISKCON\u2019s first ombuds office and, after a slow start, began to receive visitors.
\nISKCON has centers in 103 countries with a membership of well over one million.\u00a0 Yet the core membership is relatively small (perhaps 40,000), and there are probably only a hundred or so well-known leaders among this core group.\u00a0 It was this small group of leaders who first took advantage of the ombuds office and mediation process, having heard about the project through the GBC meetings.\u00a0 They referred disputants to us and often expressed how liberated they felt being able to refer the conflicts to trained, third-party persons.\u00a0 These referrals told others of their experience either in mediation or with the ombuds office (or both), and gradually our existence became known via word-of-mouth.
\nEach year, the number of mediations and ombuds visitors has increased.\u00a0 I have not been able to track every mediation since many have taken place without ISKCONResolve\u2019s notice, but the number of ombuds visitors has gone from fifty in our first year of operation to approximately 400 for 2007.\u00a0 This statistic doesn\u2019t reveal that about twenty-five percent of these cases were high-profile, cross-cultural, multi-issue, cross-generational, involving multiple jurisdictions, or cases with multiple stakeholders.\u00a0 Such cases can take hundreds of hours of an ombud\u2019s time.\u00a0 It also doesn\u2019t reveal that these figures grew without a systematic attempt to advertise the office to ISKCON\u2019s general members.<\/p>\n

Facilitation, Dialogue, Negotiation, and Conflict Assessment\/Analysis
\nIn developing the CMS, it struck me how group facilitation could address, in a mutually respectful atmosphere, a number of the larger conflicts ISKCON faces, such as the role of women in leadership, the cultural divide between ISKCON in the West and in the East (particularly in India), and the role of gurus after Prabhupada\u2019s death.\u00a0\u00a0 The service has evolved into providing strategic planning facilitation on local, regional, and (most recently) international bases.\u00a0 This development has benefited ISKCONResolve as ISKCON members are now turning to us for positive, proactive relationship- and project-building.
\nThe next step was to add dialogue to the services ISKCONResolve offered.\u00a0 I noticed that ISKCON members supported the concept of mediation but hesitated to participate in the process.\u00a0 They reacted to the suggestion \u201cWhy don\u2019t you have a mediation?\u201d the way people react to a suggestion that they see a mental health professional.\u00a0 I have also discovered that in some cases people aren\u2019t ready for a formal mediation, especially with the possibility of ending up with a signed agreement as a necessary part of the process.\u00a0 They may agree to talk, but they may not want further commitment.
\nFinally, I decided that offering the service of assessing larger conflicts was another important service ISKCONResolve could offer.\u00a0 Since starting this service, models by Dugan, Lederach, Curle, Leas, Susskind and Thomas-Larmer, and Docherty have been applied to ISKCON conflicts.\u00a0 I\u2019ve found Dugan\u2019s \u201cNested Theory of Conflict\u201d model especially helpful.\u00a0 In using that model, the facilitator helps disputants look at four levels of influence on a conflict: the issues, the relationships, the sub-systems, and the systems.\u00a0 The model encourages the disputants to \u201cgo to the balcony\u201d and look at the dispute more objectively, taking into consideration a number of factors they may not have previously considered.<\/p>\n

The Need for a Rights-Based Option: Adding Arbitration
\nWhile the above-mentioned interest-based options were operating well, it was becoming clear that not all conflicts could be dealt with using such an approach.\u00a0 Rowe estimates that 5\u201325% of a given population will favor formal, retributive justice as their preferred method of solving disputes.\u00a0 My experience in ombudsing and arranging mediations supported Rowe\u2019s statement.\u00a0 Some disputants were simply not comfortable with interest-based attempts.\u00a0 They classified them as \u201ctouchy-feely\u201d or \u201cnew-age\u201d concoctions.\u00a0 A few of ISKCON\u2019s leaders were especially uncomfortable with the thought of opening a dialogue with subordinates.\u00a0 It was evident that a rights-based option was needed.
\nBut could a rights-based system be introduced without rights being formally spelled out?\u00a0 ISKCON was (and still is) in the midst of writing a constitution, but it hasn\u2019t been made law.\u00a0 The ISKCON law book spells out some rights and responsibilities, but few of the leaders and almost none of the general members refer to it on a regular basis.\u00a0 I asked Rowe: \u201cCan an organization have a rights-based, adjudicatory process if it has not finalized a code of rules\/ laws?\u201d\u00a0 Rowe replied, \u201cWonderful question \u2026 Yes I think so if there is a credible group making the decisions. Remember we have: criminal offenses, illegal but not criminal, offenses against the organization\u2019s policies, offenses against values.\u00a0 Any group seen as credible can make decisions along any of these lines.\u00a0 And so can a monarch if he or she is seen as credible, e.g., your Founder. The key will be \u2018seen as credible.\u2019\u201d
\nSince introducing the arbitration option only a few arbitrations have taken place. Significantly, however, many opportunities to take advantage of the option have been offered.\u00a0 The very nature of arbitration, which Lipsky et al list as a concern , has had a positive effect on ISKCONResolve.\u00a0 The offer of arbitration proved to be a WATNA\u00a0 for disputants.\u00a0 When presented with the options available to them, disputants generally remarked that they preferred to maintain control of the process and therefore chose an interest-based approach.
\nHaving a rights-based mechanism in place has nonetheless been invaluable.\u00a0 In addition to its WATNA effect, arbitration assures disputants that if interests-based attempts fail, there is another process available; they are not forced to surrender to a power-based decision.\u00a0 It also addresses the mindset of those who are more comfortable with a formal process.\u00a0 And, finally, the availability of arbitration provides leaders with an alternative to having to make power-based decisions.<\/p>\n

ISKCONResolve\u2014A CMS
\nBy adding arbitration, ISKCONResolve now had elements of interests, rights, and power in place.\u00a0 By making this addition I also started to sense how the three complement each other.\u00a0 They are not separate units without overlap; rather, they represent a flow of options for both general members and for the leadership.\u00a0 Having the options of power and rights has made interests more attractive.\u00a0 The availability of interests also lines up with the culture ISKCON wants to create. \u201cRights\u201d satisfies 5\u201325% of the general members, and the lowered emphasis on power decisions makes the rare power decisions that do occur more emphatic.
\nISKCONResolve could now offer choices as to how members wanted their concerns addressed.\u00a0 Preference was given to interests-based approaches , but people could \u201cloop forward\u201d to rights and\/or power-based approaches\u00a0 , or, after having chosen rights or power, they could \u201cloop back\u201d to interests.
\nLynch writes: \u201cWhen organizations go beyond ad hoc, case-by-case dispute resolution and turn their focus to systematically integrating all of these approaches into their day-to-day business, plus add processes that shift their conflict culture toward prevention, the new phenomenon is called an \u2018Integrated Conflict Management System.\u2019\u201d
\nEstablishing this CMS has required educating members in new ways of dealing with conflicts.\u00a0 I have found myself talking constantly about \u201cinterests, rights, and power\u201d in public presentations, one-on-one meetings with ombuds visitors, and in e-mails.\u00a0 Leaders have wanted to know, \u201cCan I still just make a decision on a matter without considering this whole CMS process?\u201d My reply: \u201cCertainly.\u00a0 ISKCONResolve is not designed to take away the legitimate authority\u00a0 of your position.\u00a0 That was established by Prabhupada.\u00a0 Rather, we are here to lessen your burden and help you serve the members in your area of responsibility when some problem arises.\u00a0 You can refer members to our Ombuds office, suggest to them that they consider mediation and our other services, and you can take advantage of our services yourself should you find the need.\u00a0 We help leaders lead by helping them deal with conflicts in a healthy way and by unburdening them so that they can get on with their mission.\u00a0 We also serve them by establishing a fair process when complaints against them are lodged.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Special Role of the Ombudsman
\nIn the companion article, Rowe presents key roles an ombudsman can play in a CMS.\u00a0 Certainly, the key figure in ISKCON\u2019s CMS is the ombuds.\u00a0 The ombuds acts as an informal process facilitator , mediation encourager and arranger; generally they are the first point of contact, a mediator, an option provider, an information giver, a referrer, a listening ear, an arbitration arranger, a communicator between rank and file and leadership, a systems analyzer, a trainer of conflict competence, a listener, a provider of hope, an occasional source of humor, and an informal investigator.\u00a0 These duties may go beyond the standard ones prescribed to an organizational ombuds, but due to funding restraints it is a practical job description, and doesn\u2019t transgress the standards of practice as outlined by the International Ombudsman Association.
\nThe ombuds in ISKCONResolve is the glue that keeps the program together.\u00a0 I originally compared the organizational ombuds to a basketball point guard who calls the plays for the team.\u00a0 I mentioned this to Mary Rowe and Craig Mousin from DePaul University.\u00a0 They both commented how I should be careful not to consider the ombuds more than he or she is.\u00a0 Rowe wrote: \u201cIs this a \u2018normal\u2019 OO like me or is it a superhero?\u00a0 The issue of Helping People to Help Themselves (HPHT) is a big one: give a fish?\u00a0 Or teach how to fish?\u00a0 We should probably not so much be giving a fish but always if possible supporting others to learn how to fish.\u201d\u00a0 I have since adjusted my metaphor.\u00a0 The ISKCONResolve ombuds is more like a pathfinder.\u00a0 He or she offers visitors a map by which they can decide what direction they wish to go.\u00a0 And, at the visitor\u2019s request, the ombuds may also suggest options.<\/p>\n

Need Religion?
\nI had wondered if ISKCON should set up a conflict management system that basically leaves religion and theology at the door.\u00a0 ISKCON\u2019s members\u2019 lives are steeped in spiritual practice and philosophical thought, so what need is there to include such considerations in a conflict management system?\u00a0 I\u2019m wary of conflict transformation becoming the latest fad that might distract from ISKCON\u2019s core practices, and thus out of respect for the theology, I have often thought to leave it out of ISKCONResolve.
\nOn the other hand, I have also wondered, \u201cWhat\u2019s the use of the theology if it doesn\u2019t guide or make an impact on our daily lives?\u201d\u00a0 While considering this subject I read Halverstadt\u2019s Managing Church Conflict.\u00a0 He suggests that conflicts should be dealt with ultimately in a Christian manner, which is encapsulated in the concept of shalom: \u201cShalom is a particular state of social existence.\u00a0 It is a state of existence where the claims and needs of all that is are satisfied; where there is a relationship of communion between God and humans and nature, where there is fulfillment for all creation.\u201d\u00a0 He says that this shalom is what ultimately makes a Christian fight \u201cChristian.\u201d
\nHalverstadt goes on to say that he uses \u201cManaging\u201d in his book\u2019s title instead of \u201cResolving\u201d because peacemakers can\u2019t \u201cforce unwilling parties to make peace. If an Almighty God stands at the doors of human hearts knocking (Rev. 3:20), how should Christians presume to do otherwise?\u201d\u00a0 This relationship between the disputant, the peacemaker, and God is also at the heart of a spiritual approach to conflict resolution in ISKCON.\u00a0 Perhaps the most well-known verse in the Bhagavad-gita says, \u201cDo your duty, but do not be attached to the results of your activities.\u201d
\nFaced with the choice of whether or not to bring spirituality into ISKCONResolve\u2019s work I recalled a conversation I had had with Mary Rowe about mediation styles.\u00a0 I had suggested to her that Bush and Fogler\u2019s Transformational Mediation was best suited for ISKCON mediations.\u00a0 She countered: \u201cWhat if the disputants want an evaluative mediation?\u00a0 What if they don\u2019t want their relationship transformed?\u00a0 Could this happen?\u00a0 And if it does: who should decide, you or them?\u201d\u00a0\u00a0 I ended up applying Rowe\u2019s same logic to this question of including theology in ISKCONResolve.\u00a0 I chose in the end to flavor ISKCONResolve trainings with a \u201cKrishna\u201d perspective.\u00a0 Presentations are sprinkled with scripture and a devotional worldview, but not at the expense of standard training and discussing best practices.\u00a0 Trainees are instructed to be sensitive not to transgress ISKCON\u2019s spiritual principles in their ISKCONResolve work, but they are also trained not to force a spiritual angle on disputants who prefer not to go in that direction.<\/p>\n

Challenges
\nGeographic Spread
\nISKCON\u2019s demographics have created one of the greatest challenges to establishing ISKCONResolve.\u00a0 Core members are dispersed in 103 countries and conflicts are often inter-continental.\u00a0 Bringing parties together is time-consuming and costly.<\/p>\n

Resources
\nResources are also problematic.\u00a0 Religious organizations that are congregationally-based often find it difficult to raise funds for national, not to mention of international, value-added projects such as a CMS.<\/p>\n

Succession Planning
\nThis also points to the challenge of succession planning.\u00a0 CMS\u2019s don\u2019t only need champions\u2014they need a succession of champions.<\/p>\n

Unemployed Mediators
\nWell over 500 members took the basic mediation training course.\u00a0 Fewer than 100 of them have formally mediated.<\/p>\n

Cultural Diversity
\nISKCON is a global organization.\u00a0 In many places in the West it caters to a large Indian diaspora that pray and serve side by side with members from the host culture.\u00a0 While there has been considerable success in mediating across cultural differences, it remains a challenge especially suited for the experienced mediators and ombudsmen.<\/p>\n

Inability To Reach All ISKCON Members
\nPresently ISKCONResolve advertises its services mainly through word-of-mouth.\u00a0 I have made a number of presentations at major international festivals, but I find most visitors to the ombuds office find out about us through others.<\/p>\n

Insufficient Data
\nOne of my own personal weaknesses has been not putting enough time into documenting the work ISKCONResolve has done to date.\u00a0 I have information on the vast majority of ombuds cases, but this information is just starting to be systematically compiled.\u00a0 (The data are, of course, devoid of names and specifics that would point to any particular individuals.)<\/p>\n

The Future
\nIn considering ISKCONResolve\u2019s future, some of Bingham\u2019s six points, under \u201cLessons Learned\u201d in her REDRESS report, come to mind.\u00a0\u00a0 She says, \u201cDesign the dispute resolution system to maximize participation,\u201d and then \u201ctrain, train, train.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0 These two go well together.\u00a0 I want to train ombuds on every continent and in a number of major communities.\u00a0 Also, I want to send neophyte mediators to co-mediate with the more experienced so that we can gradually expand the number of qualified mediators.\u00a0 With more mediators and ombuds in place, I plan to advertise ISKCONResolve\u2019s services widely.\u00a0 This is another of Bingham\u2019s points: \u201cGet the word out.\u201d<\/p>\n

Part Two\u2014Looking at Conflicts and their Causes in FBOs
\nA Sampling of Cases
\nISKCONResolve\u2019s ombuds have heard a full spectrum of disputes since the office\u2019s inception in 2002.\u00a0 An extensive study of the data from these visitors is in progress.\u00a0 Below is a sampling of the kinds of concerns the ombuds office deals with:<\/p>\n

\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A leader pokes fun at an outreach program considered sacrosanct by other elders.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Two teachers in a school argue over the amount and nature of the religious coursework offered in a school.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Egalitarians and complementarians\u00a0 enter into an Internet battle, complete with on-line petitions, regarding the role of women in leadership.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Department heads differ over the allocations of funds\u2014and use theology to explain why their particular project deserves funding over the other project.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A congregation member questions whether a leader is teaching the theology properly.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A young woman questions whether one of the renunciants (sannyasis) is observing his vows properly.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Numerous members of a particular country get involved in a conflict over the scriptural translation of one word into their native language.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A member wishes to see ISKCON build bridges with one of the prominent splinter groups.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A group questions the architectural design of a temple and wishes to see if an adjustment can be considered.
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Some members want to emphasize mercy and God\u2019s forgiveness, while others say the organization needs to emphasize transparency and accountability by firmly sanctioning those who perform misdeeds.<\/p>\n

Causes of Conflicts
\nIn his book, The Mediation Process, Christopher Moore outlines the main causes of conflict :
\n(1)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Value conflicts: caused by parties having different criteria to evaluate ideas, or by different lifestyles, ideologies, or religions.
\n(2)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Relationship conflicts: caused by strong emotions, misperceptions, miscommunications, and regular, negative interactions.
\n(3)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Data conflicts: caused by a lack of information, different interpretations of data, and different views on what is relevant.
\n(4)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Interest conflicts: caused by competition over substantive interests, procedural interests, or psychological interests.
\n(5)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Structural conflicts: caused by destructive patterns of behaviour, unequal control and ownership of resources, unequal power and authority, time constraints, and geographical\/environmental factors that hinder cooperation.<\/p>\n

Naturally, most of ISKCONResolve\u2019s cases fall into the above categories.\u00a0 In Managing Church Conflict, Hugh F. Halverstadt adds color and depth to Moore\u2019s list by citing causes of conflict particular to church settings.\u00a0\u00a0 Halverstadt\u2019s first point: church conflicts are intense because we have attached our commitment and faith to them.\u00a0 He writes: \u201cFor one thing, parties\u2019 core identities are at risk in church conflicts.\u00a0 Spiritual commitments and faith understandings are highly inflammable because they are central to one\u2019s psychological identity.\u00a0 When Christians differ over beliefs or commitments, they may question or even condemn one another\u2019s spirituality or character.\u00a0 Their self-esteem is on the line.\u201d
\nI\u2019ve had similar experiences working with ISKCON members.\u00a0 Perhaps more than the average churchgoer, ISKCON members make sacrifices and major lifestyle changes\u00a0 when taking to Krishna consciousness.\u00a0 All members, but especially Western converts, change how they eat, sleep, dress, and speak; they develop new friendships and frequently relinquish the old; and they develop a new set of life aspirations.\u00a0 To become devotees they often adopt a drastically different outlook on life from the one with which they were raised.\u00a0 They invest a lot of themselves in becoming Krishna\u2019s devotee, and thus if aspects of their core identity are brought into question by someone with a different point of view\u2014especially someone in their own ranks\u2014conflict often results.
\nThere are a number of factors that influence a devotee\u2019s \u2018take\u2019 on Krishna consciousness.\u00a0 The first is cultural diversity.\u00a0 While there are ISKCON centers around the world that afford a basic uniformity of theology and practices, the host cultures each bring in much variety.\u00a0 Other significant differences in \u201ctakes\u201d are caused by initial training in Krishna consciousness, an individual\u2019s level of adherence, his or her socio-economic status, choice of friends, habits, and more.\u00a0 Thus although all are members of ISKCON, there is variety in how members perceive, experience, teach, and practice Krishna consciousness.
\nUnderstanding how that variety manifests in any FBO is an essential tool in analyzing conflicts and coping with the confusion those conflicts create.\u00a0 There is a popular Sanskrit saying, atmavan manyate jagat, \u201cI think like this, so the whole world must also think in the same way.\u201d\u00a0 Ross and Ward of Stanford University give a detailed outline of a similar concept.\u00a0\u00a0 They describe the concept of \u201cna\u00efve realism\u201d as follows:
\n(1)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cThat I see entities and events as they are in objective reality, and that my social attitudes, beliefs, preferences, priorities, and the like follow from a relatively dispassionate, unbiased and essentially \u2018unmediated\u2019 apprehension of the information or evidence at hand;\u201d
\n(2)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cThat other rational social perceivers generally will share my reactions, behaviour and opinions\u2014provided they have had access to the same information that gave rise to my views, and provided that they too have processed that information in a reasonably thoughtful, and open-minded fashion;\u201d
\n(3)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u201cThat the failure of a given individual or group to share my views arises from one of three possible sources:
\n(a)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The individual or group in question may have been exposed to a different sample of information than I was (in which case, provided that the other party is reasonable and open-minded, the sharing or pooling of information should lead us to reach an agreement);
\n(b)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The individual or group in question may be lazy, irrational, or otherwise unable or unwilling to proceed in a normative fashion from objective evidence to reasonable conclusions; or
\n(c)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The individual or group in question may be biased (either in interpreting the evidence or in proceeding from evidence to conclusions) by ideology, self-interest, or some other distorting personal influence.\u201d
\nIf we look at Moore\u2019s five causes of conflict it\u2019s reasonable to say that naive realism can play a part in nearly all of them.\u00a0 We see the world differently from others, and we are often willing to enter into a dispute because of that. Members of faith-based organizations are no exception.
\nHalverstadt offers unclear job descriptions as a second factor that stimulates conflict in a church setting: \u201c\u2026church conflicts occur in voluntary institutions whose structures and processes permit and even entice unaccountable uses of power.\u201d\u00a0 Not only is there power that is not accountable to anyone, but power-based decisions have a weaker status in FBOs that are comprised primarily of volunteers.\u00a0 Especially in FBOs that don\u2019t hold membership in the particular organization as a requirement for salvation, volunteers can easily join another church or denomination if they feel mistreated, ignored, or they disagree with a power-based decision.\u00a0 This reality makes interest-based approaches all the more attractive to the FBO\u2019s leadership who are able to recognize this dynamic.<\/p>\n

An Example: The Issue Surrounding the Role of Women
\nWhat is the role of women in ISKCON?\u00a0 Can women take leadership positions?\u00a0 Can they be gurus?\u00a0 Or should they play a complementary role to men as pious wives and mothers protected by their fathers in youth, their husbands in marriage, and their grown sons in old age as was practiced for centuries in traditional Indian culture?\u00a0 Much of the contention in this conflict centers on hermeneutics: how ISKCON should interpret both the scriptures and Prabhupada\u2019s comments on them.\u00a0 What constitutes an unchangeable spiritual principle?\u00a0 What constitutes a detail, a time-and-place attempt to apply a principle that can be changed when time and place differ?\u00a0 Are the cultural varnashrama\u00a0 considerations a principle or a detail?\u00a0 What is to be done when two parties emphasize different and apparently opposing principles?
\nEgalitarians emphasize the oneness of all souls and believe that bodily differences are of secondary importance.\u00a0 Bhakti, loving devotion to God, or Krishna, is a function of the soul; it has nothing to do with the external body one happens to inhabit.\u00a0 Men aren\u2019t men eternally, nor are women eternally women.\u00a0 Egalitarians believe we should be evolved enough to \u201cget off the bodily concept of life\u201d and respect each other as souls, as eternal servants of Krishna.\u00a0 We should be careful not to allow mundane concepts to enter a spiritual society.\u00a0 Egalitarians quote passages from Prabhupada\u2019s letters and writings like these:<\/p>\n

Regarding lecturing by women devotees: I have informed you that in the service of the Lord there is no distinction of caste, or creed, color or sex\u2026<\/p>\n

Sometimes jealous persons [from India] criticize the Krishna Consciousness movement because it engages equally both men and women in distribution of love of Godhead. Not knowing that men and women in countries like Europe and America mix very freely, these fools and rascals criticize the boys and girls in Krishna Consciousness for intermingling. But these rascals should consider that one cannot suddenly change a community\u2019s social customs. However, since both men and women are being trained to become preachers those women are not ordinary women but are as good as their brothers who are preaching Krishna Consciousness. Therefore it is a principle that a preacher must strictly follow the rules and regulations laid down in the sastras yet at the same time devise a means by which the preaching work to reclaim the fallen may go with full force.<\/p>\n

+
\nThe complementarians protest the growing acceptance of a \u201cfeminist\u201d agenda in ISKCON.\u00a0 They fear the creeping in of a materialistic, left-wing mindset that runs contrary to ISKCON\u2019s stated goals.\u00a0 ISKCON, which is based on an ancient culture, is, they say, being influenced by modern, materialistic considerations that run contrary to the varnashrama ideal that ISKCON is meant to establish.\u00a0 While they certainly accept the philosophical point that \u201cwe are not these bodies,\u201d they maintain that the varnashrama social norms are an important vehicle for attaining the spiritual platform.\u00a0 They also feel that without the support of this social model, we will by default embrace the culture of Western hedonism, a culture that will not support our spiritual aspirations.\u00a0 They cite scripture and Prabhupada to support their points:
\nA chaste woman should not be greedy, but satisfied in all circumstances. She must be very expert in handling household affairs and should be fully conversant with religious principles. She should speak pleasingly and truthfully and should be very careful and always clean and pure. Thus a chaste woman should engage with affection in the service of a husband who is not fallen.<\/p>\n

Women need to be protected by men. A woman should be cared for by her father in her childhood, by her husband in her youth and by her grown sons in her old age.<\/p>\n

The Woman\u2019s Issue and the CMS
\nThe topic \u201cThe Role of Women in ISKCON\u201d has been growing in importance over the last twenty-five years.\u00a0 This controversy has been fueled in part by key developments in ISKCON, including greater numbers of women in leadership positions on one hand and the exponential growth of Indian influence in the world of ISKCON on the other.\u00a0 ISKCON has grown greatly in India and the Indian diaspora have been becoming more involved in ISKCON temples around the globe.\u00a0 There are strong emotions on both sides of the issue.\u00a0 In 2000, ISKCON\u2019s Governing Body Commission (GBC) passed a resolution apologizing for devaluing women in the past, and stating that women must be granted equal opportunity in all ISKCON centers.\u00a0 At the time, members of ISKCON Indian Continental Committee (ICC) wrote a complaint to the GBC expressing that the resolution took into account neither India\u2019s traditional culture and the need to respect it, nor scriptural statements.
\nThe GBC executive committee preferred an interest-based approach to deal with this conflict.\u00a0 They foresaw the conflict continuing should a power-based decision (achieved either by accepting or rejecting the ICC\u2019s proposed legislation) be taken.\u00a0 ISKCONResolve was called on to facilitate a dialogue between six members of the ICC and six members chosen by the Women\u2019s Ministry. Topics included:
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Balancing tradition with changing times
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 What scripture has to say on this subject
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 How Prabhupada dealt with women\u2019s roles when he was present, including whether things changed while he was present or developed into a status quo, and what principles he based his actions on
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 How ISKCON\u2019s attitudes toward women have developed since 1977 (the year Prabhupada passed away)
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 East vs. West and how India is becoming more like the West every day
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Social considerations vs. spiritual truths and the relative importance of the two in ISKCON members\u2019 lives
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Areas of agreement and disagreement
\n\u2022\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u201cWhere do we go from here?\u201d<\/p>\n

After three days of dialogue, participants agreed on these points:<\/p>\n

1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Two members of the Women\u2019s Ministry were invited to make a presentation and hold a discussion at the next ICC meeting.
\n2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Ongoing written exchanges could start between the Women\u2019s Ministry and the ICC to discuss specific win\/win scenarios.
\n3.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A selected member from each group would write a paper about the deeper issue of reconciling the different moods and statements Prabhupada made about tradition and its modern application.
\n4.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A list of what both parties agree on would be made public.
\n5.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 To do all of this, a safe environment would be necessary.<\/p>\n

In some FBOs, the \u201crole of women\u201d issue was dealt with and decided on years ago.\u00a0 In Christian denominations like the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church, as well as with some Muslim, Jewish and other FBOs, it is still a pivotal topic today.\u00a0 The above dialogue did not bring closure to this issue in ISKCON.\u00a0 In fact, follow-up has been weak, and only now, several years later, is there talk about resuscitating the discussions.\u00a0 Yet despite their imperfections I feel such collaborative efforts have a cumulative effect.\u00a0 Participants experience the positive effects of both being able to air their views as well as to hear other viewpoints with clarity and respect.\u00a0 They in turn tell others, and when the need arises, more turn to the various components of the CMS (especially the interest-based ones) to deal with their conflicts.<\/p>\n

Conclusion
\nISKCONResolve is a work in progress.\u00a0 It requires much improvement and will certainly undergo further change as it adapts to the needs of its constituents.\u00a0 Still, I hope that its preliminary success will encourage other FBOs to consider applying the principles of Conflict Management Systems to their communities.\u00a0 Many FBOs already have the components of a CMS, and I feel organizing and systemizing those components by creating a CMS will multiply an FBO\u2019s ability to address conflict manifold.\u00a0 Equally, if not more importantly, a well-crafted CMS can impact the ethos of an organization.\u00a0 How an FBO treats its members, and particularly how it helps them in times of conflict, indicates to members the degree to which the organization is concerned about them.\u00a0 When people feel cared for in their FBO, they often consider that God cares for them\u2014an accomplishment many FBOs seek.
\nFinally, a CMS also helps members become \u201cconflict competent\u201d\u00a0 (Lynch, 2003, p. 104); that is, members learn the art of dealing with conflict both in their organization and in their personal lives.\u00a0 If FBOs apply effective systems when solving internal disputes, we can only imagine how that might spill over into the realm of interreligious disputes and beyond.<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Brian Bloch Download the full article (pdf) Every organization has to deal with conflicts. Many deal with them on an ad hoc basis without articulating a standard way to process conflicts.\u00a0 Few have gone to the extent of designing a conflict management system (CMS).\u00a0 Faith-based organizations (FBOs) are no exception.\u00a0 While many FBOs have well-developed programs for conciliation, mediation, and scripture-based peacemaking, very few religious communities have taken advantage of the CMS approach to their […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[23,38],"tags":[39],"class_list":["post-269","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-dispute-systems-design","category-hnlr-online-article","tag-hnlr-online-articles"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/peZSkE-4l","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/269","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=269"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/269\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=269"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=269"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/journals.law.harvard.edu\/hnlr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=269"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}