Section audio
Wisdom is action-oriented. Taking action may lead to resistance, if not outright conflict, from groups affected by your actions. Though conflict may refer to the use of violence, as we often observe in social systems experiencing severe unrest, in the context of this textbook, conflict refers to nonviolent antagonism between two or more groups. This may manifest as groups’ use of all the tactics of power available to them to actively undermine and eliminate the “threat” posed by others.
These conflicts may arise due to incompatible values, differing rationalities, or both.[1] Let’s explore each of those reasons in turn, as well as ways to manage this resistance.
Disagreements Between Values
Groups may resist you if they perceive your actions as a threat to the values they pursue. These value conflicts may lie across three dimensions: conflicting terminal values, conflicting instrumental values, or the time scales when actions have their impact.[2]
Conflicting Terminal Values
Terminal values are the ends we find worth achieving. Conflicts arising out of conflicting terminal values may be difficult to solve because each party is, fundamentally, trying to achieve different things.
You may recall from Chapter IV that organizations use several means to negotiate these conflicts, including the following.[3][4][5]
- Firewalls: The organization tasks different departments with the pursuit of different values.
- Cycling: One set of values dominate. Over time, resistance grows until a new set of values become dominant.
- Casuistry: Individuals rely on experience with similar conflicts to resolve current ones.
- Bias: One set of values falls out of favour.
- Hybridization: Individuals attempt to reconcile competing values.
- Incrementalism: Individuals slowly favour one value over time.
- Compromise: Competing values each sacrifice some of their aims to accommodate the other value.
Conflicting Instrumental Values
Instrumental values describe the means we find appropriate to achieve an end. Chapter IV presented several examples of situations where groups shared terminal values but had different instrumental values. Even though they each sought the same outcome, their focus on different ways of achieving that outcome led to tension between the groups.
In addition to the tactics described in the preceding section to resolve such conflicts, defining rationality to focus on the terminal values you share might reduce the resistance between groups pursuing different instrumental values.
Conflicting Time Dimensions of Values
Chapter IV discussed how the time scales over which different groups achieve their values might lead to resistance. One group’s actions to reach a value in the long term may compromise another group’s ability to achieve that value in the short term.
Again, using the methods described above to focus on those values that overlap might reduce the resistance you face.
Disagreements Between Rationalities
Sometimes, different types of r