When There’s More Than One Way Through

How conflict can open when we stop fighting over the “how” and start listening for what matters.

This blog post is a part of my What to Do When You’re Triggered series. Sign up for future reflections in your inbox and get free access to Beyond Blame — a workshop on transforming conflict into connection. 

Conflict often narrows us.

When we are hurt, frustrated, scared, overwhelmed, or longing for something to change, it can start to feel as though there is only one possible way forward. They need to say it like this. They need to understand this exact thing. They need to arrive on time. They need to stop doing that. They need to do it my way.

And sometimes, of course, there really are clear boundaries, limits, and non-negotiables. Not everything is up for discussion. Not every situation is safe or workable. Sometimes the way through is to protect ourselves, leave, say no, or stop trying to collaborate with someone who is not willing or able to meet us.

But very often, when we look more closely, we find that we are not only attached to what matters to us. We are attached to one particular way of getting there.

This is where conflict can become painfully stuck.

I was reminded of this today while offering a workshop to a team of mediators and Family Group Conference Coordinators at Buckinghamshire Council, where I now also offer mediation services and, more recently, family group conferencing.

Family Group Conferencing is a very special and empowering family decision-making process, with roots in Māori tradition, and I will share more about that in a future post.

I went into the workshop with a plan, because we only had three hours together. And mediation is a skill that has taken me years to learn, and one I know I will never stop learning.

But, just as in mediation itself, I also went in with an openness to let go of my own agenda and respond to what was alive and real in the room. This is something I hold as a core intention in mediation too. We make a plan for what we hope to discuss, and at the same time, we stay open to what feels most important in the moment, without losing focus or the quality of our intention.

After gathering everyone’s challenges and wishes for the session, as I might do in private conversations before people come together in mediation, it became clear that what was most needed was not an advanced technique or a complicated framework. What felt most useful and alive was a return to the fundamentals.

How do we understand conflict at the level of needs?

Even in a group with very mixed levels of experience, from people who had never mediated before to people who mediate regularly, going back to this basic foundation felt powerful.

I have Marshall Rosenberg, the founder of Nonviolent Communication, and my main teacher, Yoram Mosenzon, to thank for teaching me the power of this most fundamental understanding: that beneath every action, inaction, word, silence, behaviour or reaction, there is usually a need trying to be met.

This does not mean every behaviour is okay. It does not mean we excuse harm, ignore impact, or abandon our boundaries. But it does mean we begin to look beneath the surface of what someone is doing or not doing, and ask: what might be important here?

What might this person be trying to protect, express, restore, or reach for?

And when we can begin to understand conflict at the level of needs, a huge amount of freedom, creativity, and choice becomes available.

Because when we know what we need, and when we can begin to understand what someone else might need too, we suddenly have access to more options. We are no longer trapped in one rigid idea of how things have to happen.

Conflict often escalates when we confuse the need with the strategy.

A need might be respect, care, honesty, flexibility, understanding, reliability,

autonomy, safety, or consideration. A strategy is the particular way we are trying to meet that need. And when we become attached to only one strategy, it can start to feel as though the other person either does it our way, or they do not care about us at all.

For example, imagine someone is late for a meeting.

One person might have a need for respect, consideration, or reliability. The other person might have a need for flexibility, understanding, or ease.

Very quickly, the conflict can become stuck in the strategies.

“If you are not on time, you do not respect me.”

“If you expect me to be on time no matter what, then I have no flexibility.”

And suddenly respect and flexibility seem like enemies.

But are they?

Is it really true that there is only one way to show respect? Is it really true that flexibility can only exist if time agreements do not matter? Or is there another way to experience flexibility and respect outside of these 2 options?

This is where the conflict can begin to open.

If we can pause long enough to ask, “How else might we meet these needs together?” more possibilities become available.

Maybe the person who is running late sends a text or makes a quick phone call. Maybe there is a pre-agreement that lateness sometimes happens, and the other person can call to check in if they have not heard anything. Maybe there is a window of time for arriving, rather than a fixed minute. Maybe both people agree to leave the house at the same time. Maybe something else entirely....

Of course, every agreement depends on the unique circumstances of the people involved. What works for one couple, family, team, or friendship will not necessarily work for another.

But the possibilities are often much wider than we can see when we are inside the conflict.

When we are stuck in “my way or not at all,” we lose access to all those creative and potentially connecting possibilities. We stop being able to imagine that the other person’s need could matter too, without our own need being abandoned.

This, for me, is one of the hidden freedoms inside conflict.

Not the freedom to ignore what matters to us. Not the freedom to collapse, people-please, or pretend something is okay when it is not. But the freedom that comes when we can stay connected to what we are standing for, while also becoming less rigid about the exact form it must take.

And of course, I am still learning this too,

This week, I had a huge argument with my partner. The kind that shook us.

I say this because I never want to imply that understanding conflict means we never get caught in it. I still react. I still defend. I still get attached to my one way. I still lose access to curiosity and choice sometimes. I am human, and I am constantly learning and i do not expect myself or another human to ever reach a place where conflict does not happen in their lives.

But I also deeply believe that conflict can become a way towards connection, if we are willing to reflect, listen, take responsibility, and stay curious about what is really happening underneath.

So this week, I am inviting myself, and you if you would like, to ask a simple question when conflict arises:

Is there another way through?

What is important to me here?

What am I standing for?

What might be important to them?

Am I attached to only one way this need can be met?

What else might we be able to say, ask for, offer, or agree to that could work for both of us?

And if you get stuck, of course you will. It is conflict. The “only one way” mindset can sneakily find its way back in, even when we think we are being open. We can simply choose a new position and become just as attached to that one.

So come back to the basics.

What matters here?

What needs care?

What am I longing for?

What might they be longing for?

And from there, what else might be possible?

Not every conflict can be solved neatly. Not every person will be willing to meet us. Not every situation has enough safety, care, or capacity for collaboration.

But where there is enough willingness, curiosity, and care, this question can open something:

Is there more than one way through?