To Manage Conflict Effectively, Watch Your “Punctuation”

Conflict is an inherent part of human interaction, particularly when navigating power, influence, and persuasion. It’s no surprise that many of the posts on this page address the complexities of conflict resolution, whether it’s protecting yourself from hardball tactics, knowing when to disengage from an argument, or resolving disputes constructively. Conflict, after all, is a natural byproduct of differing viewpoints and competing interests. However, it’s important to remember that conflict, in itself, is not inherently negative. It need not always manifest in the form of loud arguments or hostile confrontations. A simple disagreement can escalate, but it can also be managed in ways that prevent it from spiraling out of control.

Effective conflict management is a nuanced skill—there is no one-size-fits-all solution. It requires a toolkit of strategies, each adaptable to the personalities involved, the context of the situation, and the dynamics at play. This is why I return to this topic often, as understanding conflict requires ongoing exploration and refinement of various approaches. While different situations may demand different tactics, there are certain fundamental principles that can guide us through any conflict, which we’ll explore today.

Perception and Perspective: The Dual Forces of Conflict

In The Art of Conflict Management, Michael Dues identifies three core concepts that underpin every conflict: perspective, perception, and punctuation. To begin, let’s focus on the first two, which are inseparable.

Perception refers to how we interpret an event or occurrence—it’s the lens through which we process our experiences. For example, when listening to music, we might perceive it as pleasant or unpleasant based on our individual tastes.

What many fail to recognize is that our perceptions are shaped by our perspective. These two terms, while often used interchangeably, are distinct. Perspective is the vantage point from which we view something—both literally and figuratively. Consider the example of looking at the number "6" on a piece of paper. From one angle, it may appear to be a 6, but from another, it could look like a 9. This is not a case of right or wrong, but a matter of perspective: the context and position from which the number is observed.

While there are certainly situations in which one interpretation is unequivocally correct (for instance, the numeral "5" is always "5"), there are other instances where multiple interpretations can coexist, depending on where you stand. This highlights the importance of recognizing that our perceptions are often a reflection of our perspectives. In conflicts, we may find ourselves clashing not because one side is “wrong,” but because our perspectives—shaped by our backgrounds, experiences, and positions—differ.

Seeking to influence or persuade others in today’s divisive climate can be extremely frustrating. It’s easy to dismiss those who hold different views as flawed or misguided. However, if you’re interested in doing what’s actually effective versus simply doing whatever you feel like, you must first acknowledge that perception is always intertwined with perspective. Understanding this can lead to more effective communication and resolution.

The Problem With "Punctuation" in Conflict

Another key concept introduced by Dues is punctuation—a term that refers to the way we mentally assign timing to the different stages of a conflict. Just as punctuation marks in written language help to clarify meaning, the way we interpret the flow of a conflict can significantly impact its outcome.

In everyday disputes, we often hear statements like, "You started this when you did X," followed by a counterclaim: "No, you started it when you did Y." The cycle continues, with each party trying to assign blame to different points in the conflict’s timeline. This pattern of punctuation can derail productive dialogue, leading to endless back-and-forth without resolution.

This tendency to assign blame and focus on "who started it" is counterproductive and rarely leads to a positive outcome. Recognizing this dynamic is crucial for anyone looking to manage conflict effectively. Instead of focusing on the escalation or origins of the disagreement, it is more productive to examine the issue in its entirety, considering all perspectives involved.

Persuasion Essential Reads

3 Words to Win Any Argument

How to Talk So That People Want to Listen

Practicing Person-Centered Communication

One of the most powerful tools in managing conflict is overcoming the fundamental attribution error, the cognitive bias that leads us to attribute our own mistakes to external factors while blaming others' mistakes on their character or attitudes. This bias exacerbates conflict and hinders productive resolution. To counteract this, Dues recommends person-centered communication, a method that focuses on understanding the individual behind the position they hold, rather than rigidly adhering to rules or defending a personal stance.

Rule-centered communication tends to be inflexible, relying on strict adherence to policies or procedures, often without considering the nuances of a particular situation. For example, a store clerk might insist that a customer cannot return an item after 30 days, even if the customer has a valid complaint. The result is a breakdown in communication, with both parties feeling frustrated and unheard.

Similarly, position-centered communication involves steadfastly defending a particular viewpoint without trying to understand the other side. This type of communication often leads to entrenched positions and risks escalating conflicts, as seen in many public debates today.

In contrast, person-centered communication recognizes that both your own and the other person’s perspective are influenced by a variety of factors, including context, experience, and perception. This approach doesn’t mean abandoning your stance or disregarding the rules, but rather seeking to understand the other person’s viewpoint. It encourages empathy and allows for a more open, collaborative approach to resolving differences. In other words, this is yet another instance in which it helps to remember the S.O.S. acronym (self, other person, situation).

To be truly effective at managing conflict, it’s important to temporarily adopt the other person’s perspective—not perfectly, but sufficiently to understand their point of view. This does not require you to change your position, but it does help in finding common ground and facilitating more productive conversations.

Moving Beyond the Blame Game

By practicing person-centered communication and keeping the S.O.S. (self, other, situation) principle in mind, you will be less likely to engage in a cycle of blame or fall into the trap of "punctuation" that derails many conflicts. Instead of endlessly assigning blame, you can focus on the specifics of a situation, the perspectives at play, and the shared goal of resolution.

If you find yourself still in disagreement, perhaps you now recognize that you may be in a conflict after all—but remember, in the spirit of productive discourse, it’s not about who "started it" but about how we can move forward with greater understanding and collaboration.