April 28, 2021 • 56 mins
How do you approach conflict? Do you seek to change minds or do you seek common ground? As it turns out, our views may be closer than we think, and finding that out is the key to successfully negotiating resolution.
This week's episode features Dr. Joshua N. Weiss, the co-founder, with William Ury, of the Global Negotiation Initiative at Harvard University and a Senior Fellow at the Harvard Negotiation Project. He is also the Director and creator of the Master of Science degree in Leadership and Negotiation at Bay Path University. He received his Ph.D. from the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University in 2002.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
We are experiencing a paradigm shift, a fundamental
change in the way we usually dothings.
We are intentionally choosing tosee the silver lining
opportunity arises.
We can shine a light on thethings that weren't working well
(00:25):
on those things that weren'treally working at all, we can
regroup reevaluate andre-engineer it's time to explore
new patterns and paradigms thosethat inspire us to rise above
the chaos and explore how theconditions of today and take us
(00:47):
to a better tomorrow
Speaker 2 (00:50):
Patterns and paradigms the pattern podcast
from Hudson Valley pattern forprogress.
You're listening to season twoepisode 17 conflict and
resolution with your hostpattern, president and CEO,
Jonathan Dropkin.
Hi everyone, and welcome topatterns and paradigms who knew
(01:10):
water could be so interesting.
I hope you had a chance andenjoy the conversation with Adam
Bosch from New York citydepartment of environmental
protection.
Please remember to subscribe toour podcasts at Apple or
anywhere where you find yourfavorite podcasts and take a
moment to share an episode witha friend this week's bubble or
(01:34):
trend back to work.
So the economy is picking up,but can you think of a sector
that is not trying to hirepeople what's going on?
There are millions of peopleunemployed, and there are
millions of jobs to be filled,but it's just not that simple
(01:57):
remote work is here to stay.
And that changed the equation.
Before we get to receiving textsfrom everybody about what did it
mean to extend unemploymentbenefits?
I will grant you that in somecircumstances, people did a
calculus of should they returnto work?
(02:19):
Should they collect unemploymentuntil it runs out?
And it is certainly the casethat some people chose to do it,
but is it enough to explainmillions of vacant jobs?
No.
The further integration oftechnology has changed the
nature of some jobs.
People are burnt out and we'renearing retirement.
(02:41):
And so they packed it in.
People were not near retirement,but the trauma of the past 14
months has created a form ofPTSD and people are not ready or
comfortable returning to workfrom, to not-for-profits to
(03:02):
retail and restaurants.
The workforce equation iscomplicated.
This bubble or trend is simplynot decided yet.
I'm here with my partner atpattern Joe Chakka Hey Joe, the
census numbers started dribblingout this week.
What happened?
(03:24):
Well,
Speaker 3 (03:26):
We lost a seat, a congressional seat by 89 people.
Unbelievable.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
89 eight.
Wait, wait a second.
You're saying that let's just beclear for our listeners.
Had we counted 89 or 90 morepeople we would have held on to
the current number ofcongressional.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
That's exactly right.
We, we lost the seat.
Seven States lost the seat,including Pennsylvania, New
Jersey, Ohio, West, Virginia,Illinois, Michigan, and
California.
Very, very important.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
So leaving California at for a second, those are
basically Northeast States.
Speaker 3 (04:11):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
So, so we've kind of seen that trend, but California.
Speaker 3 (04:18):
Yeah, immigration perhaps.
Um, but different reasons, youknow, just, just as important
Texas grabbed two seats, theygained two seats.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
Texas is, is fascinating because it continues
to have four cities that aregrowing.
So you have, um, Euston, Austin,Dallas and San Antonio among
four of the largest.
I think they're in the top 10largest cities in the United
(04:51):
States already.
And there's continued growth.
So taxes is also, you know,looking at some of the recent
votes, you know, it's, it'salways been considered a red
state, but it's kind of movingmore blue in eventually, you
know?
So although they got, you know,someone might say a red state
(05:17):
gained two congressional seats,the question is who moved
Speaker 3 (05:21):
That's exactly right.
And if, if they were from someof these States who, who lost
population or didn't gain asmuch, um, that state could go
bloke, we don't, we just don'tknow.
But, but it's, it's veryinteresting overall.
So to see the census numbersreleased at the national level,
(05:42):
you know, we had the secondlowest growth rate in history at
7.4% S the slowest growth ratewas back in the 1930s, right
after the, uh, after the greatrecession.
Um, and so I'm sorry, after thegreat depression.
And, and so, you know, you've,you've got to take a look at
(06:02):
that and say, what is going on?
Well, immigration is down deathrates, higher birth rates,
lower.
Um, and so where, where are wegrowing?
Sunbelt States?
62% of the nation's populationgrowth is in the Sunbelt States.
So New York, we gained just over823,000 people.
(06:25):
Is it, is it good?
Is it bad?
Well, it's 4.2%.
It's not too awful bad if youconsider all the other States
that are losing and gaining.
Um, but losing thatcongressional seat, that that is
an important thing.
Now, can the state fight it?
They can, will it be successful?
Probably not.
It's awfully difficult to getthat overturned.
(06:48):
Um, but you know, the, the otherimportant thing I think to
understand is there are 10States now that have more than
10 million people, NorthCarolina, Georgia, and Michigan
now crossed over that 10 millionthreshold.
Um, and four States now,including New York have more
than 20 million people.
(07:10):
So it's in New York, Florida,Texas, and California.
So it, growth patterns are veryinteresting.
Very, very interesting.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
So, Joe, you know, I think it's very important to,
you know, for our listeners tounderstand, yes, New York grew
in total population, but becausethe number of congressional
seats is a fixed number.
It's a portion by population.
(07:38):
And so when we lose a seat, it'sbecause other States are growing
faster than we are.
Speaker 3 (07:45):
That's right.
That's right.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
All right, Joe, what's the next thing to look
for from the census?
What comes out next?
Any idea
Speaker 3 (07:54):
There's a little bit more granular data that will
come out at the state level, butit's all actually a big unknown
because there was some delays ingetting the information from,
from people to the census.
So it's a little bit moredelayed than in past years or
past the decennial.
So we'll know more probablytowards the end of the year in
(08:16):
terms of County and municipaldata.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Well, all I know is on our staff, the census, but
like, it's like Christmas, it'slike, you know, nothing gets us
more excited than, you know,demographic data so that we can
look at what's happening intrends.
And, you know, you alwayscaution me that in-between the
census from 2010 to 2020.
(08:45):
We're often looking at, uh, whatthe, the ACS, the American
Speaker 3 (08:51):
American community survey, and those are, those are
done in five-year increments andthey do tell a good story and
that it is, and it's good,important data to have, but the
decennial it's definitely moreaccurate.
Speaker 4 (09:05):
Well, thanks, Joe.
And, and we look forward from,to you and the staff had pattern
for more information.
You got it.
Our guest today is Dr.
Joshua Weiss.
Josh is the co-founder withWilliam Murie of the global
negotiation initiative atHarvard university and a senior
(09:26):
fellow at the Harvardnegotiation project.
He is also the director andcreator of the master of science
degree in leadership andnegotiation at Bay path
university.
He received his PhD from theInstitute for conflict analysis
and resolution at George Masonuniversity.
In 2002, Dr.
(09:48):
Weiss has spoken and publishedon leadership negotiation,
mediation, and systemicapproaches to dealing with
conflict in his currentcapacity.
He conducts research consultswith many different types of
organizations, including pattern, um, delivers negotiation and
mediation trainings and courses,and engages in negotiation and
(10:12):
mediation at the organizationalcorporate government and
international levels.
Just not a personal note, I'vegotten to know Josh well, I
consider him a friend and amentor for how to resolve some
of the most difficult problemsthat we face in the Hudson
Valley.
He is my go-to guy to say, thisseems intractable.
(10:37):
It seems like there is no way.
And one of the wonderfulqualities about Josh is there is
always a way it may not be asfast as you want, but there is
always a way.
So we look forward to ourdiscussion with Dr.
Joshua Weiss.
Hi, Josh, and welcome topatterns and paradigms.
(10:57):
How are you managing and how didthe paradigm disrupt your life?
Speaker 5 (11:04):
Um, so I'm managing well, thanks, Jonathan.
Uh, it's very nice to be withyou, uh, in terms of the endemic
, uh, how did it, um, how did itimpact my life?
I mean, I think it impactedeveryone and obviously in very
different ways.
Um, you know, honestly we werequite lucky.
I mean, I do a lot of workvirtually and I've been doing
that for a long time.
(11:25):
And so, uh, for example, themaster's program that I direct
was developed to be entirelyonline.
And so not a lot changed therefor me.
I mean, it certainly did for mystudents in terms of the impact
and things like that.
Um, you know, I have, uh, I havethree daughters who are 2017 and
14, and so on some level, youknow, uh, we were able to spend
(11:48):
a lot of time together, a lot ofquality family time.
But when I think for them too,it was a, it's a difficult time
to sort of, you know, keep theirdistance and be responsible and
do all the things that we'veasked of them.
But, but they've really done apretty good job.
And, um, so, you know, we'vebeen very lucky, uh, and, and I
don't take that lightly at all.
I know, um, it's not been, um,nearly that for many, many
(12:12):
people.
Uh, and so, but thankfully, um,you know, I've been able to do
my work and continue to do that.
And my wife was home working aswell.
So we've been fortunate in thatregard.
Speaker 4 (12:24):
Um, so as you say, you know, comparatively, that's
great news that you've been ableto persist then and just have to
do them the modest adjustments,which are still, you know, when
you're doing it day by day it's,it's it it's, um, it's not that
easy.
So what let's, let's, you know,we're here to talk about Josh
(12:48):
Weiss, his per fashion, what hedoes, and I'll let you explain
it in your words since you and Ihave worked together for a
couple of years now.
Um, but, um, it's an interestingprofession and, and it's not
everybody that gets to build thebody of work that you have
(13:13):
written a number of books thatyou have no one for the work
that you do.
And it's, it's, you know, in mymind, it's quite impressive, but
, um, it's not beauty ofpodcasts are sad for me to talk
about Josh.
So why don't you explain whatyou did?
How did you get into it also?
I'm curious.
Speaker 5 (13:33):
Sure.
Well, uh, so, um, for thosefolks listening, so I work in
the world of leadershipnegotiation and dealing with
conflict and, uh, and it's a, itis a realm that's fascinating.
You know, I remember, uh,growing up and wondering what it
was that I was going to do and,and this, this kind of field
never really crossed my mind.
(13:53):
Um, it wasn't something, infact, you know, when I was
younger, this, this field, it'shard to say that there was
actually a field at that point.
I think there's no questionthere is now.
Um, but it was definitelygrowing and burgeoning and, and,
um, and has, has, um, certainlyshown, I think to the broader
public and different levels ofsociety, the value, because the
(14:16):
reality is that conflict iseverywhere.
Um, and conflict is the kind ofthing that we have to address.
And, you know, I take a view ofconflict that, you know, um,
conflict to me is kind ofneutral.
It's something that happensbecause you and I see different
worlds, we have very differentbackgrounds, experiences, things
along those lines, and, um, howyou handle it, makes it positive
(14:40):
or negative.
Um, and I don't know if mostpeople see it that way, but I've
certainly seen that when youwork through a conflict, a
difficult one, if you thinkabout it with a spouse or your
children or your colleagues, um,you come out the other side and
there's a, uh, another level oftrust and, uh, a renewed sort of
sense of some kind of arelationship that exists.
So I believe conflict is, is akind of a natural part of the
(15:05):
decision making process.
And we don't have that manytools to deal with it.
One of which, from my point ofview is negotiation.
And, you know, a lot of people,when they think of negotiation,
they think of business deals orprocurement or things along
those lines.
But for me, you know,negotiation is used for three
things.
One is to, is those deals, ifyou will.
The other is to, is to build andsolidify relationships.
(15:27):
Um, we negotiate with each otherso that we can do work going
forward on a consistent basis.
Um, and then the third is tohandle disagreements, conflicts,
challenges that come up.
So, you know, I really seenegotiation as a process that's
vital for our everyday workinglives.
And, you know, the students inmy master's degree program, uh,
(15:49):
you know, they come out of thatand they have a completely
different view of the worldsaying now I see everything as a
negotiation and it it's adifferent orientation
altogether, so that whensomething comes up, I don't feel
like, Oh my God, what am I goingto do?
I feel, um, more like, okay,what skill do I use that I've
learned?
Or what knowledge can I bring tobear?
(16:09):
Um, and I think that's part ofthe problem is that most people
never got any skills, knowledgeunderstanding of this, and it's
not their fault.
It's just that we didn't really,you know, put an emphasis on it
as a society.
And I think that's changing to adegree.
Um, you know, I think this needsto be our first response to a
lot of things, not the second orthird or fourth, um, which
(16:31):
sometimes it feels like it is.
Um, I mean, I honestly got intothis in a very roundabout kind
of way.
Um, I had graduated fromSyracuse university up the road
from all of you, uh, in, in NewYork.
And, uh, and I was a historymajor.
And actually my mother grew upin Canada and, uh, my family had
a land management company andthey were looking for somebody
(16:53):
from my background, uh, or frommy generation really to get
involved.
So I thought, well, I'm not surewhat I'm going to do.
I'll go try that out.
And it was very interesting.
Um, I learned a lot, but I couldtell it wasn't quite for me.
And I ended up speaking to afriend of mine toward the end of
the year that I had been thereand I spoke and he said, what
(17:14):
are you up to?
And I said, well, you know,doing this work and I said, what
are you doing?
He said, Oh, I just boughtaround the world ticket.
I'm going to go backpacking fora year.
And I thought you are, that'sfascinating.
And he said, yeah, why do youwant to go?
And I thought in sort of in asplit second, I said, yes.
And so I pretty much soldeverything I owned and I had 15
or so around the world ticketsat that time were about$1,500.
(17:37):
And I had about$15,000 to myname.
So I used it all.
And, you know, in backpacking isa very different endeavor, uh,
than traveling in thetraditional sense.
You know, you're staying atyouth hostels for a couple
dollars a night when I was inAsia and traveling around India
and places like that, it was adollar or two.
Uh, and so, but what happenedwhen I was doing all, that was
(17:59):
that conflict was this themethat just kept coming up over
and over again.
Um, about what you about whatyear are we talking?
This was 1991, 92.
Uh, so right after the fall ofthe, you know, sort of communism
and things like that.
So it was also an interestingtime, but, you know, I was in
India, um, and sort of foundmyself in the middle of a, uh, a
(18:21):
mini Hindu Muslim riot.
And then I was in Nepal andthere was a, a lorry or truck
drivers strike.
And I was stuck on the one roadbetween a place called pakora
and Katmandu.
And we had to sit there for 24hours, why these guys pulled out
a card table and we'renegotiating a new labor
agreement.
Um, and you know, and then, andthen I got to Europe and, um,
(18:45):
the former Yugoslavia was comingapart.
And, and the, the other bigpiece to this when I was growing
up, my, my grandmother, uh, hadleft Poland, a small village in
Poland in 1939.
She left with her brother andher parents and other four
siblings all died in theHolocaust.
And she never knew what happenedto them or what or where they
died.
(19:06):
Um, and so that was a very bigpart of the narrative of me
growing up was, you know, thatthis was, um, a tragedy and you
need to know who you are and youneed to understand your
background.
And, and so I spent a betterpart of about a month going from
camp to camp, trying to findanything I could about her
family.
So all that taken together, um,you know, essentially was when I
(19:29):
got back, I thought to myself,you know, I'm, I'm seeing all
these things and all theseproblems, and I got to do
something.
I, you know, I know I'm oneperson, but I feel I'm feeling
compelled to, to try to makesome kind of a difference in the
world.
So I came back and I applied tointernational relations
programs, and hadn't been thegreatest student, um, in
college, it took me a littlewhile to get going.
(19:49):
And, um, anyways, I gotwait-listed at American
university and then I got in and, and I was quite excited, uh,
down in DC.
And they said, well, you know,within international relations,
you've got to pick aconcentration.
And I said, okay.
So I looked at the, the bookletand, and peace and conflict
resolution flew off the page atme, uh, and really sort of hit
(20:11):
me in the forehead.
And I was like, that's it,that's what I want to do.
And when I went to grad schoolthere and then started working
at Harvard and then went, uh, todo my PhD at, down at George
Mason university, um, ever sincethen, it's been a passion.
Um, and it's a fascinatingrealm.
It's not easy at all.
It's very difficult, but it'salso, uh, it's, it's, you know,
(20:35):
I, I don't think it's, um, crazyto say that in part, as human
beings, our survival hinges onhow we all deal with these
things.
Um, and we now have a capabilityto blow up the world many times
over, you know, we need theseskills and this knowledge, and
we need people with it more thanever.
Speaker 4 (20:52):
So I, you know, I know a bit about your
background, but for ourlisteners, um, it's not just
conflict resolution in the sensethat as you've said, you know,
we needed between spouses, weneeded in our families.
We need it even internationally.
You began to recognize it.
But, um, you've been in themiddle of some, if, is, I
(21:16):
remember there's, if there was amajor conflict that I've
mentioned to you, you'veprobably had some exposure to
it, you know, whether it was theformer Yugoslavia is, you know,
the Serbs and the Croatians, Ithink you've said Northern
Ireland.
And then of course the middleEast, um, is there one that
(21:37):
maybe you could share a bit moreabout your experience in, so
that we understand, um, betterthe kind of work that it is that
you would do?
Speaker 5 (21:50):
Sure.
Uh, yeah.
And, and as you say to, todifferent degrees, you know, um,
I mean, in the former Yugoslaviain Bosnia, it was actually my
first international overseasexperience.
I started out as an electionmonitor actually in the first
elections after the war.
And then did some work with aorganization called the OSC, the
organization for cooperation inEurope, um, working with the
(22:12):
communities to try to begin tostitch back what have existed
for many years.
Um, I mean, I think in general,th the one that I've had the
most experience with, um, was,is the middle East and the
Israeli Palestinian conflict, uh, in particular.
And that's taken a few differentforms.
Um, when I was back, many yearsago, I was working and we did,
(22:37):
we do something called theproblem solving workshop.
So problem solving workshops arewhere you bring unofficial
parties from each side to say auniversity or something like
that to a place for three orfour days.
And now these people are what wewould call influentials.
There are people who have theear of a prime minister, they're
(22:59):
a prominent journalist orsomething like that, but they
don't need hold any capacity,any sort of official capacity.
So I was involved in a handfulof processes where we did that
in the idea was to try to, um,generate ideas and concepts that
could be fed into the public PRand into the public process.
(23:19):
So we often talk about track oneand track two processes.
So track one processes are theofficial channels, the state
department, or whatever.
It might be government togovernment relations, track to
it's kind of unofficial workthat happens that tries to
support the, create the solutionand ultimate solution.
Um, and, and that would takeplace, for example, at the NGO
(23:43):
level, uh, there are a lot ofNGOs that are working that bring
parties together sort of moreinformally.
So there's not as much pressure.
Um, non-governmental sorry,non-governmental organization.
Speaker 4 (23:54):
Yeah, no, no, no, no.
That's okay.
Just, I realized that I speakand most of my guests speak in
letters, but okay.
Speaker 5 (24:01):
Yeah.
So, you know, working at thecivil society level, uh,
bringing people together, um,and, and, you know, to me, when
you're dealing with some largerconflicts, you know, you have to
work at multiple levels.
And I think a very good exampleof that was South Africa, where,
you know, the official processhappens between Mandela and
Declerk and things along thoselines, but, but they had
(24:22):
national peace commissions thatwere set up that ran the gamut
down through society so thatpeople were, you know, the
average person was part of theprocess.
There were all kinds ofdifferent things happening to
support that effort.
Um, so the, the problem solvingprocess is one that, you know,
again, like I said, we, we wouldbring parties together and then
those folks would go back.
(24:43):
They would spend three or fourdays talking about the core
issues and the conflict and whatcreative solutions might there
be to those situations.
Uh, and, and then, you know,when, when folks would go home,
you know, they would, part ofthe deal was they would meet
with government officials orothers and infuse those ideas
into the track one process.
And part of the reason for thatis because a lot of times, you
(25:05):
know, um, governmentalapproaches tend to have, are a
little less creative, you know,they don't always, um, enable
that kind of thinking.
And so when you, you know, getpeople out of the conflict,
bring them somewhere else.
And, and, you know, and peopleare not in an official capacity.
They can think differently.
They can think about how toapproach something in a slightly
(25:26):
different manner.
Um, so there's that, you know,that was, that was certainly a
process that we, that I was partof for a number of different
years.
And in fact, some of mycolleagues had worked with, um,
uh, some of the people who wereinvolved in the Oslo process in
1993, um, to infuse those ideas.
And, and, you know, some ofthose folks were actually in
(25:48):
those problem solving processesthat, that ultimately became,
you know, part of that andreached a deal.
Um,
Speaker 4 (25:55):
I have, let me just stop you for a second of the
many lessons that you've taughtme about conflict resolution.
One that always stands out to meis this notion of ripeness.
Um, and I think we've, uh, I'veoften asked you about some of
the work you've done in thePalestinian Israeli.
(26:17):
And, you know, I always think,you know, you get the parties to
the table, they're negotiatingand you make progress.
And you've said, eh, not alwaysquite like that.
There are simply some times thatyou have to let things rest
because they're not your, thelikelihood of success is not
(26:38):
great.
There may have been a recentincident let's say, and in that
section of the world, andthey're just not going to be in
the spirit of gee, let's mediateit.
Do I have that right?
That there are, there are sometimes it's just hard to do this
work.
Well, I think timing,
Speaker 5 (26:59):
It is an essential part of all of this.
You know, you have to look atthe situation and you also have
to analyze, you know, for theparties that are there, is this
a time that makes sense for themto be negotiating, you know, or
are they not there?
You know, I think over the lastfew years when you're looking at
the Israeli Palestinianconflict, I think it's fair to
say that, uh, on the Israeliside, in particular, they didn't
(27:23):
feel like there was a need tonegotiate.
Uh, and so, you know, therereally wasn't a tremendous
amount of efforts going on.
Um, there were unilateral movesat other kinds of things that
were were transpiring.
And I think for thePalestinians, you know, they,
um, I think they would have beeninterested in negotiating, but
(27:44):
not just on any terms as yousaw.
And, and I think you saw, forexample, with the, the Trump
peace plan and other kinds ofthings, I mean, the Palestinians
didn't really play a role inthat.
So it really didn't have much ofa chance of going anywhere.
But I think in terms of thisnotion of ripeness, you know,
it's easy for us as analysts andpeople on the ed side looking at
and saying, well, that doesn'tlook like it's ripe.
(28:04):
So let's just wait.
Um, you know, people are dyingand people don't want to wait.
So, you know, one thing that weoften talk about just, if you
think about it, it's a crudeanalogy, but, but one that I
think would help people who arelistening to this, you know, if
you buy bananas that are green,one way to ripen them is to put
them in the sun.
Right.
And so we often will askourselves, is there a way to try
(28:25):
to ripe in the conflict so thatpeople are more ready?
Are there, are there, you know,and this is where things like
sanctions come in or other toolsthat can, you know, encourage
people to get back to the tableand to solve this.
I mean, look, the reality isthat virtually every conflict,
uh, and with some kind ofnegotiated settlement, that's
(28:47):
how it works.
If you look at, you know,history, that's, that's how
things go.
The question is always for me,you know, can the parties get
there, um, without having to doall this fighting and killing
and, you know, the sort ofdisastrous consequences, because
in the end, we kind of know in alot of places where they're
(29:07):
going to end up, you know,usually the solutions are not a
mystery.
It really requires political,will, it requires the leaders to
say, this is a chance that I'mwilling to take.
I believe it's the right way togo.
Like you talk Rabine did, uh,and Yasser Arafat did eventually
at a certain point, right.
And, you know, and Ruby and paidwith his life.
(29:29):
Uh, and so, but those are a lotof the times those are political
calculations that people have tomake.
Um, I mean, it's unfortunate inone sense that we're so reliant
on, on you select leaders to, tomake peace, um, or to deal with
conflicts because, um, you know,there's a lot of other
calculations that go into that.
(29:50):
Uh, you know, I think ingeneral, over the years,
there've been a lot of verycreative solutions to the
Israeli Palestinian conflict,but they've never really made it
to pass because there wasn't thewill, um, people had different
agendas and there wasn't a wayto sort of force them down that
road.
Um, so, so that's the idea ofripeness.
And I think we're always asking,you know, is it ripe?
(30:10):
And, and, um, I mean, you're,you're still trying when it's
not, you're still keepingchannels open and trying to work
some of that, um, those angles,but you also recognize that it's
going to be difficult and, andyou probably want to hold off,
um, you know, on a, on a seriouspush until circumstances on the
ground change.
Speaker 4 (30:31):
So, so with all of this international experience,
you recently released the book,the book of real world
negotiations.
So was it all of theseexperiences that you said
collectively, there's a, a, um,an opportunity to give, um,
(30:51):
lessons learned as to how tosolve conflicts?
What was the, what was the ahamoment for you to say?
I think there's enough materialthat I want to create a book
that could help people insolving conflict resolution.
And this isn't your first book,but it's just your most recent.
(31:14):
Yeah,
Speaker 5 (31:14):
Well, you know, this actually, and actually, so this
is a case study book of a realworld negotiations.
There's 25 cases in there.
Um, they're not, I purposelywrote it.
I wrote it for people who teachand train, um, and students that
are learning about negotiation.
But I also wrote it for theaverage person, because I feel
(31:34):
like there are a lot ofmisnomers about negotiation and
what effective negotiation lookslike.
People are always rushing tocompromise.
Uh, and what do I have to giveup to get there?
And they're not focused on howdo we, is there a creative
solution here that maybe doesn'trequire as much compromise or
things along those lines?
And in fact, the vast majorityof the cases, um, we're about
(31:56):
that now, um, most of the casesin the book are not mine.
There are colleagues, um, thatwere willing to share, um, some
of them, one of their namesattributed to the cases others
didn't, um, for sensitivereasons.
But the idea came about, I mean,when I first started working at
a place called the program onnegotiation at Harvard law
(32:16):
school, back in 1995, I was, Ihad the real privilege of going
to dinners and other kinds ofevents where the faculty there
were talking about thenegotiations they were involved
in, um, and either as a party oras a consultant, that advisor.
And it was fascinating.
I mean, the, you know, the kindof examples that came up and the
solutions that people talkedabout were just really, really,
(32:39):
and so, but the, here was theissue.
The issue was there were 25 ofus in a room.
And I thought, you know, ifpeople are going to really
understand how important this isand how valuable it can be, like
this has to get out to thebroader world.
And so I thought to myself, youknow, um, if I get a chance to
write a book, I'd really like todo something that's rooted in
(33:01):
the real world so that, you know, people can't say to me, well,
that's not how it works becauseit is how it worked in practice.
And so, um, instead of, youknow, sort of trying to persuade
people and have a long, a lot ofconversations, I thought, you
know, let me show people whatthis looks like through these
real cases.
And, um, and, and that's, youknow, and so that's where the
(33:24):
book really came from.
And, you know, I've had a lot ofpeople comment to me that it's,
you know, it's a very persuasiveapproach because it's hard to
argue with reality.
Um, but it's also, I've had alot of people say to me, this is
not what I thought negotiationwas.
I didn't realize that if youwere able to really think
differently and to slow theprocess down and get creative,
(33:44):
that lot of times you can solvethese things without, you know,
these major concessions thatpeople often take, talk about
taking.
Um, so that was the idea.
And I, and like I said, I hopethat people come away, um,
having read this with, uh, a newsense of how valuable, um,
negotiation is across the board,whether it's at work, um, in the
(34:08):
world, around you at home,whatever it might be.
Speaker 4 (34:12):
So, um, let's, if we can, and we're only in the
beginning stages, there's aproject that brought you and I
together, which is the desire ofsome in the orange County
legislature here in the HudsonValley to address the growth of
(34:32):
the ultra Orthodox or her Eddypopulation in the orange County
area.
It's actually much broader inthe Hudson Valley.
And the let's for lack of abetter phrase.
The secular community one groupis expanding.
One group is really not growing.
(34:52):
It is led to a series of issues.
And, um, many of them hadreached the newspaper over
issues of growth.
The village of curious, Joelbecame the town of Palm tree,
the very dense population versusa more rural population.
How w any sense, and I w I know,and I'm going to be very careful
(35:17):
about this, that we're at thevery beginning of what our
process is.
We've actually been hired by theorange County legislature to, to
work on this, but at the 10,000foot level, any initial thoughts
on how do you take thatreal-world experience and apply
to a local issue?
Speaker 5 (35:39):
Sure.
I mean, I think that, you know,conflicts do follow certain
patterns, and I think whatyou're seeing, um, you know, in
this particular case is, uh, issort of a values based conflict.
It's a very different way ofviewing the world and, and, and
living, um, those things don'tnecessarily need to be in
contradiction to each other, butat the moment they certainly
(36:01):
seem to be.
And so the question is, you know, how do you go about trying to
modify that or adjust it?
Um, you know, uh, my experiencewhen you're dealing with a
broader kind of conflict is thatyou either come up with, uh, uh,
you know, sort of a grandbargain, if you will, that tries
to address that kind of anissue, or you start in a
(36:23):
slightly different place, andyou start in a place where, um,
you know, right now, I don'tthink the communities really
believe that they can worktogether.
They have a negative view of theother.
And so, you know, startingsmall, starting with very
practical, um, challenges andissues is really where I've seen
a lot of progress.
It's not going to solve thebigger issue that, that
(36:46):
confronts the County and theregion.
But I think what it will do isit will help people to start
slowly working together ondifferent issues and seeing the
other, perhaps a little bitdifferently, which then would
enable a different kind ofconversation.
Um, and so I think there'sdifferent ways into a, uh, kind
of challenge like this.
(37:07):
And that's the one that I'veseen that, um, you know, has had
the most success because it'sdealing, you know, you deal with
very practical issues, thingsthat are impacting people's
lives.
And, and, you know, I'm a bigfan, again, back to the case
study book, I'm a big fan ofwhat, what I often called proof
of concept, where, you know, youshow people, you know, words are
(37:28):
cheap and people don't oftenbelieve them at times,
especially when they'reskepticism.
So instead better to sort ofsay, look, you know, we just did
this small little pilot examplehere, and folks were able to
reach an agreement aroundsomething, and that's great.
And that's probably surprisingto some folks because you didn't
(37:51):
think you could reach anagreement.
What's next, what do we do afterthat?
And, and you build some positivemomentum around that.
And, and like I said, andeventually that may ultimately
enable, uh, a largerconversation about, you know,
how can folks live withdifferent values and different
approaches to life live neareach other.
(38:15):
Side-by-side whatever it mightlook like it, you know, in a
different kind of way.
Speaker 4 (38:20):
So I, I know better than to want to talk in detail
about a project that, that isit's in its infancy.
So let, let me take your skillsand apply it to a couple of
other things that are definitely, um, uh, almost they're part of
almost every branch of work thatI, um, have to do at pattern.
(38:46):
And that is the extremepolarization in this country.
So the ability to drive peopleto a practical solution, often
when I peel the onion, I find,Oh, wait a minute.
This is really not what I thinkit is.
It's part of this, there's 50%on one side and there's 50% on
(39:10):
another, and they're just notgoing to see the world the same
way.
Any thoughts about polarizationin America right now?
And, and how do we pull peopletogether?
Speaker 5 (39:24):
I mean, it's certainly the$64,000 question
that everybody's asking, youknow,
Speaker 4 (39:30):
Thing, you too, like, you know, have the magic pill
here, the magic beans, but yeah.
Any thoughts on, on, you know,if someone said to you, Josh,
you know, that there seems to bethis problem of polarization in
America, you know, w w we'd likeyou to take this on?
Speaker 5 (39:48):
Yeah, well, I mean, you know, one of the things that
I can say, you know, I worked ona project, uh, I still am
working on it, um, in, in themiddle East, um, called the
Abraham path.
And the idea was to create sortof a long distance walking and
traveling route, um, across theregion.
Um, so that people from aroundthe world could come and
actually see the region andengage with people very
(40:12):
differently.
You know?
Uh, I, it's interesting.
Cause when I had gone topreviously before this project,
um, I, when I had gone toIsrael, like I realized, I
didn't really know anybody.
I didn't really meet anybody,you know, I would do the
touristy thing, um, or I wouldbe in meetings and I never
really met folks.
And so the reason I bring thisup is because the project was
(40:36):
all about was started actuallyafter, um, United States went
into Iraq.
And the idea was that the world,you know, there was an
increasing Gulf between the Westand the middle East in
particularly the Muslim world.
And, um, you know, was there away that people could bridge
that chasm and, and we thought,you know, if people went and
(41:01):
actually walked and stayed withfamilies and shared meals
together, um, what kind of adifference would that have?
What kind of, you know, whatwould that do to people's views
of things and what we ultimatelyfound, because now the Abraham
Abraham path spans manydifferent countries.
There's a thousand miles of paththat's been way marked.
(41:21):
And, and there's been a lot ofpeople over 50,000 people have,
have used this path in some way,shape or form, whether it's
walking for weeks on end or aday, you know, trip out of
Jerusalem or something likethat.
But, uh, what I'm really struckby is, is that anybody that's
gone on this path, um, and spentany time, their view of things
(41:45):
has changed dramatically.
They went thinking this and theycame away thinking, Hmm, that
didn't fit into what I thoughtat all.
And, you know, so I, the analogyhere is that, you know, first of
all, we're, you know, we arepolarized.
We have very different views.
A lot of that is generated andpersists the resourceful media
(42:07):
and a lack of contact, you know,and I think COVID has added a
layer to this cause people werehome.
They couldn't go anywhere.
I spent a lot of time onlineand, and they ended up, most
people end up in echo chambersand hear what they want to hear,
hear what they think and whatthe Abraham path did.
(42:28):
Was it put people in touch withthose who are very different
than them who have verydifferent views.
Um, and yet somehow people wereable to take that in and see
things differently, begin tothink maybe the world's not
quite what I imagined it was.
So I think part of the answer isthat we need to find ways of
(42:48):
getting people to engage witheach other, um, in, you know,
who typically don't.
So, you know, if I'm a littlemore on the liberal side, I need
to put myself into positions insituations where, you know,
people are more conservative.
But the other thing that'sreally important is that we
can't go into theseconversations trying to change
(43:09):
each other's minds.
That's not how this works.
And in fact, that's, that'sactually where we get into a
problem.
What we have to do is go intothe conversation, try and
understand how it is that theysee what they see, because we
see something very different andpeople change their own minds.
They don't change their mindbecause I might say something
that is incredibly persuasive.
(43:30):
They have to do, you know, andchanging your mind is a
challenging thing because itgoes to your identity, right?
If I see myself as, as Xsupporter and I listened to you
and it makes a lot of sense,what you're saying, um, and I
begin to think, Hmm, maybe Ishould change my view.
And then I started havingconversations with my friends
(43:51):
who were in my bubble.
Um, they start to say, what'swrong with you?
You're you, you sound likeyou've drunk the Kool-Aid of the
other side.
We actually call that there-entry problem in conflict.
So when we had member, if yourecall, I talked about the
problem solving workshops whenpeople would leave and go back
to their communities indifferent countries or, um, and
(44:11):
they would tell people of theirexperience, you know, they would
often be, um, be a lot ofpushback, um, about what they
were saying.
And so we, that, that, that ideais called the re-entry problem.
And so when people have theseexperiences that break down
these barriers, um, and you takeit back to your community,
you're confronted withchallenge, which is, are you
(44:33):
siding with the enemy and thingsalong those lines, but, but I
think the reality is that that'sreally what we need.
We need to find ways of, ofgetting people to engage in a,
in a manner where we're not, uh,telling people, you know, you
have to agree, you have to dothis, you have to, you just have
to have a conversation and, andsee where that goes.
(44:53):
And, you know, again, it'sinteresting because I believe
that, you know, a lot of thethings that that are happening
now, I mean, these are not newphenomenon.
You know, the conversation forexample, around abortion.
And what people believe relatedto abortion is, has been around
for a very, very long time.
(45:14):
It's just that they'reheightened.
And, um, and people have gottenmore entrenched in their beliefs
, um, you know, and not lookedaround for.
Are there things that we agreeon?
Um, and just as an example, Iremember years ago there was an
organization called the publicconversations project that took
on this question of, you know,the abortion debate and what
(45:37):
they found actually,interestingly enough, was that
neither side thought abortionwas a, you know, an ideal thing.
It was.
And so there was actually commonground, like neither wanted
that.
Um, but it was more of aquestion of, you know, one side
was talking about the sanctityof life and the other was
(45:57):
talking about the rights of thewoman to choose, right.
But it was a bit of a, a prettysignificant aha when both of
them said, actually neither ofus, you know, see this as, as,
as an ideal, like none of usreally wants that, but it's a
question of choice.
And, and so there are, I thinkwhen we get into these polarized
discussions and debates, um, wedon't probe for those nuances
(46:21):
and, and we don't look at whatare the things that we actually
agree on.
Um, and in fact, there was arecent study that I just saw
that Americans actually, um,their views are actually closer
than we think it was actuallyquite a hopeful report.
I wish I could remember exactlywhere it was.
Maybe I can get you the detailsof it, but it talked about the
fact that, that actually a lotof Americans share many similar
(46:45):
values.
The problem is that theconversation when they're put
into the public sphere are, arepresented in a, in a either or
kind of way.
Uh, and that's what kind ofpushes us further and further.
Speaker 4 (46:57):
Um, there was a poll released yesterday.
And so this is, um, I think itwas on Biden's presidency, you
know, where as we're bounded ahundred days or so.
So, um, I think it was, um, thatwhen asked, how was he doing on
(47:21):
handling the pandemic very highscores, 62% said the president's
doing a really good job, butwhen asked, how are you doing
and bringing us together, whichwas one of his, you know,
platform, uh, you know, talkingpoints during the election, 82%
(47:42):
of the country said, he's notbringing us together.
And so I guess, while I have youand what you do, I want to take
another shot at this to say, sohow do we do, I mean, this seems
to get in the way of so much ofwhat we wanted.
(48:05):
It doesn't matter by the way,for, for an organization like
pattern that works oninfrastructure, land, use
housing, there are always peopleon different sides and conflict
resolution.
Um, you know, we don't want themliving in our neighborhood is
actually what underlies buildingaffordable housing, um, land
(48:30):
use.
You know, I'm just trying tomake it very practical for
people listening in the HudsonValley here.
Um, land use issues are alsoabout, well, what do you want
the character of our communityto look like?
Which underlies that, um, weknow, we know that conflict in
America can get much worse.
(48:52):
We just can go back to the 1860sto understand how bad it could
get.
Right.
But right now there are peoplethat feel like it's nearing
something like that.
And they've used the term civilwar, and I don't want it.
I don't want to go there.
I'd rather have someone who isskilled at negotiation, say we
(49:12):
don't have to get there.
Here's some other practical waysin which we can start to break
this down.
Speaker 5 (49:20):
Yeah.
Well, first of all, I mean, theone thing that I would say is
that we look far too much topolitical leaders for this kind
of thing.
Um, I don't think Joe Biden, uh,I, I look, I certainly believe
in the message, you know, Imean, we're all Americans, like,
we have to recognize thesimilarities that we have, but,
(49:44):
but right now in this climate,there are too many things
pushing us away from that.
There's too many reasons whypeople want to stay entrenched.
It's a little bit like theripeness question.
Right.
Which is that right now, thereare more reasons to say no than,
yes.
Um, so how do you change that?
Well, I think part of it is, andI, and I really do believe this.
(50:07):
Like I, you know, I have afriend who's a state Senator and
he, and I had a conversation,something like this on for my
university.
And I said, you know, I kind offeel like national politics are
broken.
Like there's no conversation.
Um, if you're forward, I'magainst it.
If it's a Democrat, you're awhatever, like there's just no
(50:28):
conversation.
And he said, I don't disagreewith it.
And I thought, that'sinteresting, you said, but I
don't think local politics arebroken.
And he said, in fact, I believethat that the, the real work
that happens in this countryhappens at the local level
happens in the States.
It happens as close to theground as possible.
(50:49):
So what I would, you know, forme, what I would say is we have
to stop looking to the nationallevel for solutions.
What we need is actually theaverage person to reach out, to
engage with others, to do thekinds of things that used to
sort of be talked about as civicengagement and civic pride, and,
um, stop looking out there tothe politicians.
(51:12):
There's too many reasons forthem to do, to have other
agendas and other kinds ofthings.
And start looking to yourself,start looking to your own
community.
You don't have to change theworld, just change what you're
doing in your world.
Um, that's, you know, from whereI sit, you know, if you hear
somebody or you meet somebodynew that you didn't know, um,
(51:35):
and you know, you have a goodinteraction.
Well, now all of a sudden yousay, well, wait a minute.
Maybe not everybody thinks thatway.
Um, and, and so I think that wehave to own this all of us, and
we have to take actions that,that put ourselves into
situations where we can dothings differently, change and
(51:55):
get back to, you know, some ofthose feelings that existed.
Um, I remember as a kid, whenyou, you know, you lived in a
community, there were communityevents and there were different
things that people did.
What do we do that stuff nearlyas much today as we did then no,
we've lost a lot of that.
And I think we need to go backto that.
And I think local communities,you know, they know their place
(52:17):
best.
And, and so they ought to spendthe time organizing, bringing
people together.
Um, you know, I I've become abig fan after having worked on
the Abraham path of walking and,you know, I, I had in my head
this idea of sort of a purplepath, so bringing blue and red
together and, you know, usepaths like the Appalachian trail
(52:41):
and say, Hey, go walk and havesome places along the route
where people could sit down andhave a burger together and, and
talk about their view of theworld in a much less
controversial kind of way.
But just as a, when we walk awayfrom here, there's, there's no
major consequences except thatyou and I engaged and we shared
(53:02):
some different views on what'shappening here.
Um, you know, there's a lot ofopportunities for those things
if we look for them and if we,you know, reach out to folks
that I think, you know,hopefully as, as COVID slowly,
uh, you know, dissipates, and wecan get back to some semblance
of normalcy, you know, forpeople to look to do those kinds
(53:24):
of things, to organize kinds ofthings.
Don't,
Speaker 4 (53:26):
You know, the problem is we have a tendency in this
country to look to others andsay, you fix it.
That's not how this works.
It, it, cause that's passing thebuck.
You know, when people have aconflict more often than not,
they call the first thing to dois pick up the phone and call a
lawyer.
You don't go to your neighborand say, Hey, can we just talk
about this?
Cause we've got a problem,right?
(53:46):
And then we have to go back tothat.
This is not to just give toeverybody else to do.
We all have to own it and getoff of our sort of, uh, our
Duffs and, and, and takeresponsibility.
So, you know, it's funny you saythat because I've often I've
done a lot of teaching in thepublic administration field.
And I've often said that thecapstone, which is your last
(54:11):
project that you need to do,what if all the masters in
public administration programsfor their capstone required you
to, instead of, you know,whatever your project is in your
own community, if the, if thepublic administration program
was located in a blue state, youhad to do your capstone and
(54:35):
you're at state and you had tospend six months learning about
the way, um, other people lookat it.
And I think, um, we're going toend the conversation where, you
know, you've given us so manygood thoughts about, you know,
maybe it's not the nationallevel.
It's remembering that, you know,we have neighbors, there's ways
(54:59):
to talk to each other.
And, um, Josh wise, it's alwaysa pleasure.
I, I, you know, during thisconversation, I've taken two
pages of notes because it's, it,there's just so much that I've
learned from someone who is inyour position.
Um, your recent book is the bookof real world negotiations.
(55:22):
Um, please find it on Amazon orwherever out, where else can
they find it?
Is that the best way?
Uh, it's pretty much out therewherever.
So if they just Google that,they'll get more, that more
information than they cared tohave on it.
All right.
Thank you Josh, for your time asalways.
Speaker 1 (55:37):
You're welcome.
My pleasure.
Thank you for tuning in topatterns and paradigms the
pattern podcast.
For more information about thisepisode, visit our website
pattern for progress.org Fordslash podcast.
We are experiencing a paradigm shift, a fundamental
change in the way we usually dothings.
We are intentionally choosing tosee the silver lining
opportunity arises.
We can shine a light on thethings that weren't working well
(00:25):
on those things that weren'treally working at all, we can
regroup reevaluate andre-engineer it's time to explore
new patterns and paradigms thosethat inspire us to rise above
the chaos and explore how theconditions of today and take us
(00:47):
to a better tomorrow
Speaker 2 (00:50):
Patterns and paradigms the pattern podcast
from Hudson Valley pattern forprogress.
You're listening to season twoepisode 17 conflict and
resolution with your hostpattern, president and CEO,
Jonathan Dropkin.
Hi everyone, and welcome topatterns and paradigms who knew
(01:10):
water could be so interesting.
I hope you had a chance andenjoy the conversation with Adam
Bosch from New York citydepartment of environmental
protection.
Please remember to subscribe toour podcasts at Apple or
anywhere where you find yourfavorite podcasts and take a
moment to share an episode witha friend this week's bubble or
(01:34):
trend back to work.
So the economy is picking up,but can you think of a sector
that is not trying to hirepeople what's going on?
There are millions of peopleunemployed, and there are
millions of jobs to be filled,but it's just not that simple
(01:57):
remote work is here to stay.
And that changed the equation.
Before we get to receiving textsfrom everybody about what did it
mean to extend unemploymentbenefits?
I will grant you that in somecircumstances, people did a
calculus of should they returnto work?
(02:19):
Should they collect unemploymentuntil it runs out?
And it is certainly the casethat some people chose to do it,
but is it enough to explainmillions of vacant jobs?
No.
The further integration oftechnology has changed the
nature of some jobs.
People are burnt out and we'renearing retirement.
(02:41):
And so they packed it in.
People were not near retirement,but the trauma of the past 14
months has created a form ofPTSD and people are not ready or
comfortable returning to workfrom, to not-for-profits to
(03:02):
retail and restaurants.
The workforce equation iscomplicated.
This bubble or trend is simplynot decided yet.
I'm here with my partner atpattern Joe Chakka Hey Joe, the
census numbers started dribblingout this week.
What happened?
(03:24):
Well,
Speaker 3 (03:26):
We lost a seat, a congressional seat by 89 people.
Unbelievable.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
89 eight.
Wait, wait a second.
You're saying that let's just beclear for our listeners.
Had we counted 89 or 90 morepeople we would have held on to
the current number ofcongressional.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
That's exactly right.
We, we lost the seat.
Seven States lost the seat,including Pennsylvania, New
Jersey, Ohio, West, Virginia,Illinois, Michigan, and
California.
Very, very important.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
So leaving California at for a second, those are
basically Northeast States.
Speaker 3 (04:11):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
So, so we've kind of seen that trend, but California.
Speaker 3 (04:18):
Yeah, immigration perhaps.
Um, but different reasons, youknow, just, just as important
Texas grabbed two seats, theygained two seats.
Speaker 2 (04:30):
Texas is, is fascinating because it continues
to have four cities that aregrowing.
So you have, um, Euston, Austin,Dallas and San Antonio among
four of the largest.
I think they're in the top 10largest cities in the United
(04:51):
States already.
And there's continued growth.
So taxes is also, you know,looking at some of the recent
votes, you know, it's, it'salways been considered a red
state, but it's kind of movingmore blue in eventually, you
know?
So although they got, you know,someone might say a red state
(05:17):
gained two congressional seats,the question is who moved
Speaker 3 (05:21):
That's exactly right.
And if, if they were from someof these States who, who lost
population or didn't gain asmuch, um, that state could go
bloke, we don't, we just don'tknow.
But, but it's, it's veryinteresting overall.
So to see the census numbersreleased at the national level,
(05:42):
you know, we had the secondlowest growth rate in history at
7.4% S the slowest growth ratewas back in the 1930s, right
after the, uh, after the greatrecession.
Um, and so I'm sorry, after thegreat depression.
And, and so, you know, you've,you've got to take a look at
(06:02):
that and say, what is going on?
Well, immigration is down deathrates, higher birth rates,
lower.
Um, and so where, where are wegrowing?
Sunbelt States?
62% of the nation's populationgrowth is in the Sunbelt States.
So New York, we gained just over823,000 people.
(06:25):
Is it, is it good?
Is it bad?
Well, it's 4.2%.
It's not too awful bad if youconsider all the other States
that are losing and gaining.
Um, but losing thatcongressional seat, that that is
an important thing.
Now, can the state fight it?
They can, will it be successful?
Probably not.
It's awfully difficult to getthat overturned.
(06:48):
Um, but you know, the, the otherimportant thing I think to
understand is there are 10States now that have more than
10 million people, NorthCarolina, Georgia, and Michigan
now crossed over that 10 millionthreshold.
Um, and four States now,including New York have more
than 20 million people.
(07:10):
So it's in New York, Florida,Texas, and California.
So it, growth patterns are veryinteresting.
Very, very interesting.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
So, Joe, you know, I think it's very important to,
you know, for our listeners tounderstand, yes, New York grew
in total population, but becausethe number of congressional
seats is a fixed number.
It's a portion by population.
(07:38):
And so when we lose a seat, it'sbecause other States are growing
faster than we are.
Speaker 3 (07:45):
That's right.
That's right.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
All right, Joe, what's the next thing to look
for from the census?
What comes out next?
Any idea
Speaker 3 (07:54):
There's a little bit more granular data that will
come out at the state level, butit's all actually a big unknown
because there was some delays ingetting the information from,
from people to the census.
So it's a little bit moredelayed than in past years or
past the decennial.
So we'll know more probablytowards the end of the year in
(08:16):
terms of County and municipaldata.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Well, all I know is on our staff, the census, but
like, it's like Christmas, it'slike, you know, nothing gets us
more excited than, you know,demographic data so that we can
look at what's happening intrends.
And, you know, you alwayscaution me that in-between the
census from 2010 to 2020.
(08:45):
We're often looking at, uh, whatthe, the ACS, the American
Speaker 3 (08:51):
American community survey, and those are, those are
done in five-year increments andthey do tell a good story and
that it is, and it's good,important data to have, but the
decennial it's definitely moreaccurate.
Speaker 4 (09:05):
Well, thanks, Joe.
And, and we look forward from,to you and the staff had pattern
for more information.
You got it.
Our guest today is Dr.
Joshua Weiss.
Josh is the co-founder withWilliam Murie of the global
negotiation initiative atHarvard university and a senior
(09:26):
fellow at the Harvardnegotiation project.
He is also the director andcreator of the master of science
degree in leadership andnegotiation at Bay path
university.
He received his PhD from theInstitute for conflict analysis
and resolution at George Masonuniversity.
In 2002, Dr.
(09:48):
Weiss has spoken and publishedon leadership negotiation,
mediation, and systemicapproaches to dealing with
conflict in his currentcapacity.
He conducts research consultswith many different types of
organizations, including pattern, um, delivers negotiation and
mediation trainings and courses,and engages in negotiation and
(10:12):
mediation at the organizationalcorporate government and
international levels.
Just not a personal note, I'vegotten to know Josh well, I
consider him a friend and amentor for how to resolve some
of the most difficult problemsthat we face in the Hudson
Valley.
He is my go-to guy to say, thisseems intractable.
(10:37):
It seems like there is no way.
And one of the wonderfulqualities about Josh is there is
always a way it may not be asfast as you want, but there is
always a way.
So we look forward to ourdiscussion with Dr.
Joshua Weiss.
Hi, Josh, and welcome topatterns and paradigms.
(10:57):
How are you managing and how didthe paradigm disrupt your life?
Speaker 5 (11:04):
Um, so I'm managing well, thanks, Jonathan.
Uh, it's very nice to be withyou, uh, in terms of the endemic
, uh, how did it, um, how did itimpact my life?
I mean, I think it impactedeveryone and obviously in very
different ways.
Um, you know, honestly we werequite lucky.
I mean, I do a lot of workvirtually and I've been doing
that for a long time.
(11:25):
And so, uh, for example, themaster's program that I direct
was developed to be entirelyonline.
And so not a lot changed therefor me.
I mean, it certainly did for mystudents in terms of the impact
and things like that.
Um, you know, I have, uh, I havethree daughters who are 2017 and
14, and so on some level, youknow, uh, we were able to spend
(11:48):
a lot of time together, a lot ofquality family time.
But when I think for them too,it was a, it's a difficult time
to sort of, you know, keep theirdistance and be responsible and
do all the things that we'veasked of them.
But, but they've really done apretty good job.
And, um, so, you know, we'vebeen very lucky, uh, and, and I
don't take that lightly at all.
I know, um, it's not been, um,nearly that for many, many
(12:12):
people.
Uh, and so, but thankfully, um,you know, I've been able to do
my work and continue to do that.
And my wife was home working aswell.
So we've been fortunate in thatregard.
Speaker 4 (12:24):
Um, so as you say, you know, comparatively, that's
great news that you've been ableto persist then and just have to
do them the modest adjustments,which are still, you know, when
you're doing it day by day it's,it's it it's, um, it's not that
easy.
So what let's, let's, you know,we're here to talk about Josh
(12:48):
Weiss, his per fashion, what hedoes, and I'll let you explain
it in your words since you and Ihave worked together for a
couple of years now.
Um, but, um, it's an interestingprofession and, and it's not
everybody that gets to build thebody of work that you have
(13:13):
written a number of books thatyou have no one for the work
that you do.
And it's, it's, you know, in mymind, it's quite impressive, but
, um, it's not beauty ofpodcasts are sad for me to talk
about Josh.
So why don't you explain whatyou did?
How did you get into it also?
I'm curious.
Speaker 5 (13:33):
Sure.
Well, uh, so, um, for thosefolks listening, so I work in
the world of leadershipnegotiation and dealing with
conflict and, uh, and it's a, itis a realm that's fascinating.
You know, I remember, uh,growing up and wondering what it
was that I was going to do and,and this, this kind of field
never really crossed my mind.
(13:53):
Um, it wasn't something, infact, you know, when I was
younger, this, this field, it'shard to say that there was
actually a field at that point.
I think there's no questionthere is now.
Um, but it was definitelygrowing and burgeoning and, and,
um, and has, has, um, certainlyshown, I think to the broader
public and different levels ofsociety, the value, because the
(14:16):
reality is that conflict iseverywhere.
Um, and conflict is the kind ofthing that we have to address.
And, you know, I take a view ofconflict that, you know, um,
conflict to me is kind ofneutral.
It's something that happensbecause you and I see different
worlds, we have very differentbackgrounds, experiences, things
along those lines, and, um, howyou handle it, makes it positive
(14:40):
or negative.
Um, and I don't know if mostpeople see it that way, but I've
certainly seen that when youwork through a conflict, a
difficult one, if you thinkabout it with a spouse or your
children or your colleagues, um,you come out the other side and
there's a, uh, another level oftrust and, uh, a renewed sort of
sense of some kind of arelationship that exists.
So I believe conflict is, is akind of a natural part of the
(15:05):
decision making process.
And we don't have that manytools to deal with it.
One of which, from my point ofview is negotiation.
And, you know, a lot of people,when they think of negotiation,
they think of business deals orprocurement or things along
those lines.
But for me, you know,negotiation is used for three
things.
One is to, is those deals, ifyou will.
The other is to, is to build andsolidify relationships.
(15:27):
Um, we negotiate with each otherso that we can do work going
forward on a consistent basis.
Um, and then the third is tohandle disagreements, conflicts,
challenges that come up.
So, you know, I really seenegotiation as a process that's
vital for our everyday workinglives.
And, you know, the students inmy master's degree program, uh,
(15:49):
you know, they come out of thatand they have a completely
different view of the worldsaying now I see everything as a
negotiation and it it's adifferent orientation
altogether, so that whensomething comes up, I don't feel
like, Oh my God, what am I goingto do?
I feel, um, more like, okay,what skill do I use that I've
learned?
Or what knowledge can I bring tobear?
(16:09):
Um, and I think that's part ofthe problem is that most people
never got any skills, knowledgeunderstanding of this, and it's
not their fault.
It's just that we didn't really,you know, put an emphasis on it
as a society.
And I think that's changing to adegree.
Um, you know, I think this needsto be our first response to a
lot of things, not the second orthird or fourth, um, which
(16:31):
sometimes it feels like it is.
Um, I mean, I honestly got intothis in a very roundabout kind
of way.
Um, I had graduated fromSyracuse university up the road
from all of you, uh, in, in NewYork.
And, uh, and I was a historymajor.
And actually my mother grew upin Canada and, uh, my family had
a land management company andthey were looking for somebody
(16:53):
from my background, uh, or frommy generation really to get
involved.
So I thought, well, I'm not surewhat I'm going to do.
I'll go try that out.
And it was very interesting.
Um, I learned a lot, but I couldtell it wasn't quite for me.
And I ended up speaking to afriend of mine toward the end of
the year that I had been thereand I spoke and he said, what
(17:14):
are you up to?
And I said, well, you know,doing this work and I said, what
are you doing?
He said, Oh, I just boughtaround the world ticket.
I'm going to go backpacking fora year.
And I thought you are, that'sfascinating.
And he said, yeah, why do youwant to go?
And I thought in sort of in asplit second, I said, yes.
And so I pretty much soldeverything I owned and I had 15
or so around the world ticketsat that time were about$1,500.
(17:37):
And I had about$15,000 to myname.
So I used it all.
And, you know, in backpacking isa very different endeavor, uh,
than traveling in thetraditional sense.
You know, you're staying atyouth hostels for a couple
dollars a night when I was inAsia and traveling around India
and places like that, it was adollar or two.
Uh, and so, but what happenedwhen I was doing all, that was
(17:59):
that conflict was this themethat just kept coming up over
and over again.
Um, about what you about whatyear are we talking?
This was 1991, 92.
Uh, so right after the fall ofthe, you know, sort of communism
and things like that.
So it was also an interestingtime, but, you know, I was in
India, um, and sort of foundmyself in the middle of a, uh, a
(18:21):
mini Hindu Muslim riot.
And then I was in Nepal andthere was a, a lorry or truck
drivers strike.
And I was stuck on the one roadbetween a place called pakora
and Katmandu.
And we had to sit there for 24hours, why these guys pulled out
a card table and we'renegotiating a new labor
agreement.
Um, and you know, and then, andthen I got to Europe and, um,
(18:45):
the former Yugoslavia was comingapart.
And, and the, the other bigpiece to this when I was growing
up, my, my grandmother, uh, hadleft Poland, a small village in
Poland in 1939.
She left with her brother andher parents and other four
siblings all died in theHolocaust.
And she never knew what happenedto them or what or where they
died.
(19:06):
Um, and so that was a very bigpart of the narrative of me
growing up was, you know, thatthis was, um, a tragedy and you
need to know who you are and youneed to understand your
background.
And, and so I spent a betterpart of about a month going from
camp to camp, trying to findanything I could about her
family.
So all that taken together, um,you know, essentially was when I
(19:29):
got back, I thought to myself,you know, I'm, I'm seeing all
these things and all theseproblems, and I got to do
something.
I, you know, I know I'm oneperson, but I feel I'm feeling
compelled to, to try to makesome kind of a difference in the
world.
So I came back and I applied tointernational relations
programs, and hadn't been thegreatest student, um, in
college, it took me a littlewhile to get going.
(19:49):
And, um, anyways, I gotwait-listed at American
university and then I got in and, and I was quite excited, uh,
down in DC.
And they said, well, you know,within international relations,
you've got to pick aconcentration.
And I said, okay.
So I looked at the, the bookletand, and peace and conflict
resolution flew off the page atme, uh, and really sort of hit
(20:11):
me in the forehead.
And I was like, that's it,that's what I want to do.
And when I went to grad schoolthere and then started working
at Harvard and then went, uh, todo my PhD at, down at George
Mason university, um, ever sincethen, it's been a passion.
Um, and it's a fascinatingrealm.
It's not easy at all.
It's very difficult, but it'salso, uh, it's, it's, you know,
(20:35):
I, I don't think it's, um, crazyto say that in part, as human
beings, our survival hinges onhow we all deal with these
things.
Um, and we now have a capabilityto blow up the world many times
over, you know, we need theseskills and this knowledge, and
we need people with it more thanever.
Speaker 4 (20:52):
So I, you know, I know a bit about your
background, but for ourlisteners, um, it's not just
conflict resolution in the sensethat as you've said, you know,
we needed between spouses, weneeded in our families.
We need it even internationally.
You began to recognize it.
But, um, you've been in themiddle of some, if, is, I
(21:16):
remember there's, if there was amajor conflict that I've
mentioned to you, you'veprobably had some exposure to
it, you know, whether it was theformer Yugoslavia is, you know,
the Serbs and the Croatians, Ithink you've said Northern
Ireland.
And then of course the middleEast, um, is there one that
(21:37):
maybe you could share a bit moreabout your experience in, so
that we understand, um, betterthe kind of work that it is that
you would do?
Speaker 5 (21:50):
Sure.
Uh, yeah.
And, and as you say to, todifferent degrees, you know, um,
I mean, in the former Yugoslaviain Bosnia, it was actually my
first international overseasexperience.
I started out as an electionmonitor actually in the first
elections after the war.
And then did some work with aorganization called the OSC, the
organization for cooperation inEurope, um, working with the
(22:12):
communities to try to begin tostitch back what have existed
for many years.
Um, I mean, I think in general,th the one that I've had the
most experience with, um, was,is the middle East and the
Israeli Palestinian conflict, uh, in particular.
And that's taken a few differentforms.
Um, when I was back, many yearsago, I was working and we did,
(22:37):
we do something called theproblem solving workshop.
So problem solving workshops arewhere you bring unofficial
parties from each side to say auniversity or something like
that to a place for three orfour days.
And now these people are what wewould call influentials.
There are people who have theear of a prime minister, they're
(22:59):
a prominent journalist orsomething like that, but they
don't need hold any capacity,any sort of official capacity.
So I was involved in a handfulof processes where we did that
in the idea was to try to, um,generate ideas and concepts that
could be fed into the public PRand into the public process.
(23:19):
So we often talk about track oneand track two processes.
So track one processes are theofficial channels, the state
department, or whatever.
It might be government togovernment relations, track to
it's kind of unofficial workthat happens that tries to
support the, create the solutionand ultimate solution.
Um, and, and that would takeplace, for example, at the NGO
(23:43):
level, uh, there are a lot ofNGOs that are working that bring
parties together sort of moreinformally.
So there's not as much pressure.
Um, non-governmental sorry,non-governmental organization.
Speaker 4 (23:54):
Yeah, no, no, no, no.
That's okay.
Just, I realized that I speakand most of my guests speak in
letters, but okay.
Speaker 5 (24:01):
Yeah.
So, you know, working at thecivil society level, uh,
bringing people together, um,and, and, you know, to me, when
you're dealing with some largerconflicts, you know, you have to
work at multiple levels.
And I think a very good exampleof that was South Africa, where,
you know, the official processhappens between Mandela and
Declerk and things along thoselines, but, but they had
(24:22):
national peace commissions thatwere set up that ran the gamut
down through society so thatpeople were, you know, the
average person was part of theprocess.
There were all kinds ofdifferent things happening to
support that effort.
Um, so the, the problem solvingprocess is one that, you know,
again, like I said, we, we wouldbring parties together and then
those folks would go back.
(24:43):
They would spend three or fourdays talking about the core
issues and the conflict and whatcreative solutions might there
be to those situations.
Uh, and, and then, you know,when, when folks would go home,
you know, they would, part ofthe deal was they would meet
with government officials orothers and infuse those ideas
into the track one process.
And part of the reason for thatis because a lot of times, you
(25:05):
know, um, governmentalapproaches tend to have, are a
little less creative, you know,they don't always, um, enable
that kind of thinking.
And so when you, you know, getpeople out of the conflict,
bring them somewhere else.
And, and, you know, and peopleare not in an official capacity.
They can think differently.
They can think about how toapproach something in a slightly
(25:26):
different manner.
Um, so there's that, you know,that was, that was certainly a
process that we, that I was partof for a number of different
years.
And in fact, some of mycolleagues had worked with, um,
uh, some of the people who wereinvolved in the Oslo process in
1993, um, to infuse those ideas.
And, and, you know, some ofthose folks were actually in
(25:48):
those problem solving processesthat, that ultimately became,
you know, part of that andreached a deal.
Um,
Speaker 4 (25:55):
I have, let me just stop you for a second of the
many lessons that you've taughtme about conflict resolution.
One that always stands out to meis this notion of ripeness.
Um, and I think we've, uh, I'veoften asked you about some of
the work you've done in thePalestinian Israeli.
(26:17):
And, you know, I always think,you know, you get the parties to
the table, they're negotiatingand you make progress.
And you've said, eh, not alwaysquite like that.
There are simply some times thatyou have to let things rest
because they're not your, thelikelihood of success is not
(26:38):
great.
There may have been a recentincident let's say, and in that
section of the world, andthey're just not going to be in
the spirit of gee, let's mediateit.
Do I have that right?
That there are, there are sometimes it's just hard to do this
work.
Well, I think timing,
Speaker 5 (26:59):
It is an essential part of all of this.
You know, you have to look atthe situation and you also have
to analyze, you know, for theparties that are there, is this
a time that makes sense for themto be negotiating, you know, or
are they not there?
You know, I think over the lastfew years when you're looking at
the Israeli Palestinianconflict, I think it's fair to
say that, uh, on the Israeliside, in particular, they didn't
(27:23):
feel like there was a need tonegotiate.
Uh, and so, you know, therereally wasn't a tremendous
amount of efforts going on.
Um, there were unilateral movesat other kinds of things that
were were transpiring.
And I think for thePalestinians, you know, they,
um, I think they would have beeninterested in negotiating, but
(27:44):
not just on any terms as yousaw.
And, and I think you saw, forexample, with the, the Trump
peace plan and other kinds ofthings, I mean, the Palestinians
didn't really play a role inthat.
So it really didn't have much ofa chance of going anywhere.
But I think in terms of thisnotion of ripeness, you know,
it's easy for us as analysts andpeople on the ed side looking at
and saying, well, that doesn'tlook like it's ripe.
(28:04):
So let's just wait.
Um, you know, people are dyingand people don't want to wait.
So, you know, one thing that weoften talk about just, if you
think about it, it's a crudeanalogy, but, but one that I
think would help people who arelistening to this, you know, if
you buy bananas that are green,one way to ripen them is to put
them in the sun.
Right.
And so we often will askourselves, is there a way to try
(28:25):
to ripe in the conflict so thatpeople are more ready?
Are there, are there, you know,and this is where things like
sanctions come in or other toolsthat can, you know, encourage
people to get back to the tableand to solve this.
I mean, look, the reality isthat virtually every conflict,
uh, and with some kind ofnegotiated settlement, that's
(28:47):
how it works.
If you look at, you know,history, that's, that's how
things go.
The question is always for me,you know, can the parties get
there, um, without having to doall this fighting and killing
and, you know, the sort ofdisastrous consequences, because
in the end, we kind of know in alot of places where they're
(29:07):
going to end up, you know,usually the solutions are not a
mystery.
It really requires political,will, it requires the leaders to
say, this is a chance that I'mwilling to take.
I believe it's the right way togo.
Like you talk Rabine did, uh,and Yasser Arafat did eventually
at a certain point, right.
And, you know, and Ruby and paidwith his life.
(29:29):
Uh, and so, but those are a lotof the times those are political
calculations that people have tomake.
Um, I mean, it's unfortunate inone sense that we're so reliant
on, on you select leaders to, tomake peace, um, or to deal with
conflicts because, um, you know,there's a lot of other
calculations that go into that.
(29:50):
Uh, you know, I think ingeneral, over the years,
there've been a lot of verycreative solutions to the
Israeli Palestinian conflict,but they've never really made it
to pass because there wasn't thewill, um, people had different
agendas and there wasn't a wayto sort of force them down that
road.
Um, so, so that's the idea ofripeness.
And I think we're always asking,you know, is it ripe?
(30:10):
And, and, um, I mean, you're,you're still trying when it's
not, you're still keepingchannels open and trying to work
some of that, um, those angles,but you also recognize that it's
going to be difficult and, andyou probably want to hold off,
um, you know, on a, on a seriouspush until circumstances on the
ground change.
Speaker 4 (30:31):
So, so with all of this international experience,
you recently released the book,the book of real world
negotiations.
So was it all of theseexperiences that you said
collectively, there's a, a, um,an opportunity to give, um,
(30:51):
lessons learned as to how tosolve conflicts?
What was the, what was the ahamoment for you to say?
I think there's enough materialthat I want to create a book
that could help people insolving conflict resolution.
And this isn't your first book,but it's just your most recent.
(31:14):
Yeah,
Speaker 5 (31:14):
Well, you know, this actually, and actually, so this
is a case study book of a realworld negotiations.
There's 25 cases in there.
Um, they're not, I purposelywrote it.
I wrote it for people who teachand train, um, and students that
are learning about negotiation.
But I also wrote it for theaverage person, because I feel
(31:34):
like there are a lot ofmisnomers about negotiation and
what effective negotiation lookslike.
People are always rushing tocompromise.
Uh, and what do I have to giveup to get there?
And they're not focused on howdo we, is there a creative
solution here that maybe doesn'trequire as much compromise or
things along those lines?
And in fact, the vast majorityof the cases, um, we're about
(31:56):
that now, um, most of the casesin the book are not mine.
There are colleagues, um, thatwere willing to share, um, some
of them, one of their namesattributed to the cases others
didn't, um, for sensitivereasons.
But the idea came about, I mean,when I first started working at
a place called the program onnegotiation at Harvard law
(32:16):
school, back in 1995, I was, Ihad the real privilege of going
to dinners and other kinds ofevents where the faculty there
were talking about thenegotiations they were involved
in, um, and either as a party oras a consultant, that advisor.
And it was fascinating.
I mean, the, you know, the kindof examples that came up and the
solutions that people talkedabout were just really, really,
(32:39):
and so, but the, here was theissue.
The issue was there were 25 ofus in a room.
And I thought, you know, ifpeople are going to really
understand how important this isand how valuable it can be, like
this has to get out to thebroader world.
And so I thought to myself, youknow, um, if I get a chance to
write a book, I'd really like todo something that's rooted in
(33:01):
the real world so that, you know, people can't say to me, well,
that's not how it works becauseit is how it worked in practice.
And so, um, instead of, youknow, sort of trying to persuade
people and have a long, a lot ofconversations, I thought, you
know, let me show people whatthis looks like through these
real cases.
And, um, and, and that's, youknow, and so that's where the
(33:24):
book really came from.
And, you know, I've had a lot ofpeople comment to me that it's,
you know, it's a very persuasiveapproach because it's hard to
argue with reality.
Um, but it's also, I've had alot of people say to me, this is
not what I thought negotiationwas.
I didn't realize that if youwere able to really think
differently and to slow theprocess down and get creative,
(33:44):
that lot of times you can solvethese things without, you know,
these major concessions thatpeople often take, talk about
taking.
Um, so that was the idea.
And I, and like I said, I hopethat people come away, um,
having read this with, uh, a newsense of how valuable, um,
negotiation is across the board,whether it's at work, um, in the
(34:08):
world, around you at home,whatever it might be.
Speaker 4 (34:12):
So, um, let's, if we can, and we're only in the
beginning stages, there's aproject that brought you and I
together, which is the desire ofsome in the orange County
legislature here in the HudsonValley to address the growth of
(34:32):
the ultra Orthodox or her Eddypopulation in the orange County
area.
It's actually much broader inthe Hudson Valley.
And the let's for lack of abetter phrase.
The secular community one groupis expanding.
One group is really not growing.
(34:52):
It is led to a series of issues.
And, um, many of them hadreached the newspaper over
issues of growth.
The village of curious, Joelbecame the town of Palm tree,
the very dense population versusa more rural population.
How w any sense, and I w I know,and I'm going to be very careful
(35:17):
about this, that we're at thevery beginning of what our
process is.
We've actually been hired by theorange County legislature to, to
work on this, but at the 10,000foot level, any initial thoughts
on how do you take thatreal-world experience and apply
to a local issue?
Speaker 5 (35:39):
Sure.
I mean, I think that, you know,conflicts do follow certain
patterns, and I think whatyou're seeing, um, you know, in
this particular case is, uh, issort of a values based conflict.
It's a very different way ofviewing the world and, and, and
living, um, those things don'tnecessarily need to be in
contradiction to each other, butat the moment they certainly
(36:01):
seem to be.
And so the question is, you know, how do you go about trying to
modify that or adjust it?
Um, you know, uh, my experiencewhen you're dealing with a
broader kind of conflict is thatyou either come up with, uh, uh,
you know, sort of a grandbargain, if you will, that tries
to address that kind of anissue, or you start in a
(36:23):
slightly different place, andyou start in a place where, um,
you know, right now, I don'tthink the communities really
believe that they can worktogether.
They have a negative view of theother.
And so, you know, startingsmall, starting with very
practical, um, challenges andissues is really where I've seen
a lot of progress.
It's not going to solve thebigger issue that, that
(36:46):
confronts the County and theregion.
But I think what it will do isit will help people to start
slowly working together ondifferent issues and seeing the
other, perhaps a little bitdifferently, which then would
enable a different kind ofconversation.
Um, and so I think there'sdifferent ways into a, uh, kind
of challenge like this.
(37:07):
And that's the one that I'veseen that, um, you know, has had
the most success because it'sdealing, you know, you deal with
very practical issues, thingsthat are impacting people's
lives.
And, and, you know, I'm a bigfan, again, back to the case
study book, I'm a big fan ofwhat, what I often called proof
of concept, where, you know, youshow people, you know, words are
(37:28):
cheap and people don't oftenbelieve them at times,
especially when they'reskepticism.
So instead better to sort ofsay, look, you know, we just did
this small little pilot examplehere, and folks were able to
reach an agreement aroundsomething, and that's great.
And that's probably surprisingto some folks because you didn't
(37:51):
think you could reach anagreement.
What's next, what do we do afterthat?
And, and you build some positivemomentum around that.
And, and like I said, andeventually that may ultimately
enable, uh, a largerconversation about, you know,
how can folks live withdifferent values and different
approaches to life live neareach other.
(38:15):
Side-by-side whatever it mightlook like it, you know, in a
different kind of way.
Speaker 4 (38:20):
So I, I know better than to want to talk in detail
about a project that, that isit's in its infancy.
So let, let me take your skillsand apply it to a couple of
other things that are definitely, um, uh, almost they're part of
almost every branch of work thatI, um, have to do at pattern.
(38:46):
And that is the extremepolarization in this country.
So the ability to drive peopleto a practical solution, often
when I peel the onion, I find,Oh, wait a minute.
This is really not what I thinkit is.
It's part of this, there's 50%on one side and there's 50% on
(39:10):
another, and they're just notgoing to see the world the same
way.
Any thoughts about polarizationin America right now?
And, and how do we pull peopletogether?
Speaker 5 (39:24):
I mean, it's certainly the$64,000 question
that everybody's asking, youknow,
Speaker 4 (39:30):
Thing, you too, like, you know, have the magic pill
here, the magic beans, but yeah.
Any thoughts on, on, you know,if someone said to you, Josh,
you know, that there seems to bethis problem of polarization in
America, you know, w w we'd likeyou to take this on?
Speaker 5 (39:48):
Yeah, well, I mean, you know, one of the things that
I can say, you know, I worked ona project, uh, I still am
working on it, um, in, in themiddle East, um, called the
Abraham path.
And the idea was to create sortof a long distance walking and
traveling route, um, across theregion.
Um, so that people from aroundthe world could come and
actually see the region andengage with people very
(40:12):
differently.
You know?
Uh, I, it's interesting.
Cause when I had gone topreviously before this project,
um, I, when I had gone toIsrael, like I realized, I
didn't really know anybody.
I didn't really meet anybody,you know, I would do the
touristy thing, um, or I wouldbe in meetings and I never
really met folks.
And so the reason I bring thisup is because the project was
(40:36):
all about was started actuallyafter, um, United States went
into Iraq.
And the idea was that the world,you know, there was an
increasing Gulf between the Westand the middle East in
particularly the Muslim world.
And, um, you know, was there away that people could bridge
that chasm and, and we thought,you know, if people went and
(41:01):
actually walked and stayed withfamilies and shared meals
together, um, what kind of adifference would that have?
What kind of, you know, whatwould that do to people's views
of things and what we ultimatelyfound, because now the Abraham
Abraham path spans manydifferent countries.
There's a thousand miles of paththat's been way marked.
(41:21):
And, and there's been a lot ofpeople over 50,000 people have,
have used this path in some way,shape or form, whether it's
walking for weeks on end or aday, you know, trip out of
Jerusalem or something likethat.
But, uh, what I'm really struckby is, is that anybody that's
gone on this path, um, and spentany time, their view of things
(41:45):
has changed dramatically.
They went thinking this and theycame away thinking, Hmm, that
didn't fit into what I thoughtat all.
And, you know, so I, the analogyhere is that, you know, first of
all, we're, you know, we arepolarized.
We have very different views.
A lot of that is generated andpersists the resourceful media
(42:07):
and a lack of contact, you know,and I think COVID has added a
layer to this cause people werehome.
They couldn't go anywhere.
I spent a lot of time onlineand, and they ended up, most
people end up in echo chambersand hear what they want to hear,
hear what they think and whatthe Abraham path did.
(42:28):
Was it put people in touch withthose who are very different
than them who have verydifferent views.
Um, and yet somehow people wereable to take that in and see
things differently, begin tothink maybe the world's not
quite what I imagined it was.
So I think part of the answer isthat we need to find ways of
(42:48):
getting people to engage witheach other, um, in, you know,
who typically don't.
So, you know, if I'm a littlemore on the liberal side, I need
to put myself into positions insituations where, you know,
people are more conservative.
But the other thing that'sreally important is that we
can't go into theseconversations trying to change
(43:09):
each other's minds.
That's not how this works.
And in fact, that's, that'sactually where we get into a
problem.
What we have to do is go intothe conversation, try and
understand how it is that theysee what they see, because we
see something very different andpeople change their own minds.
They don't change their mindbecause I might say something
that is incredibly persuasive.
(43:30):
They have to do, you know, andchanging your mind is a
challenging thing because itgoes to your identity, right?
If I see myself as, as Xsupporter and I listened to you
and it makes a lot of sense,what you're saying, um, and I
begin to think, Hmm, maybe Ishould change my view.
And then I started havingconversations with my friends
(43:51):
who were in my bubble.
Um, they start to say, what'swrong with you?
You're you, you sound likeyou've drunk the Kool-Aid of the
other side.
We actually call that there-entry problem in conflict.
So when we had member, if yourecall, I talked about the
problem solving workshops whenpeople would leave and go back
to their communities indifferent countries or, um, and
(44:11):
they would tell people of theirexperience, you know, they would
often be, um, be a lot ofpushback, um, about what they
were saying.
And so we, that, that, that ideais called the re-entry problem.
And so when people have theseexperiences that break down
these barriers, um, and you takeit back to your community,
you're confronted withchallenge, which is, are you
(44:33):
siding with the enemy and thingsalong those lines, but, but I
think the reality is that that'sreally what we need.
We need to find ways of, ofgetting people to engage in a,
in a manner where we're not, uh,telling people, you know, you
have to agree, you have to dothis, you have to, you just have
to have a conversation and, andsee where that goes.
(44:53):
And, you know, again, it'sinteresting because I believe
that, you know, a lot of thethings that that are happening
now, I mean, these are not newphenomenon.
You know, the conversation forexample, around abortion.
And what people believe relatedto abortion is, has been around
for a very, very long time.
(45:14):
It's just that they'reheightened.
And, um, and people have gottenmore entrenched in their beliefs
, um, you know, and not lookedaround for.
Are there things that we agreeon?
Um, and just as an example, Iremember years ago there was an
organization called the publicconversations project that took
on this question of, you know,the abortion debate and what
(45:37):
they found actually,interestingly enough, was that
neither side thought abortionwas a, you know, an ideal thing.
It was.
And so there was actually commonground, like neither wanted
that.
Um, but it was more of aquestion of, you know, one side
was talking about the sanctityof life and the other was
(45:57):
talking about the rights of thewoman to choose, right.
But it was a bit of a, a prettysignificant aha when both of
them said, actually neither ofus, you know, see this as, as,
as an ideal, like none of usreally wants that, but it's a
question of choice.
And, and so there are, I thinkwhen we get into these polarized
discussions and debates, um, wedon't probe for those nuances
(46:21):
and, and we don't look at whatare the things that we actually
agree on.
Um, and in fact, there was arecent study that I just saw
that Americans actually, um,their views are actually closer
than we think it was actuallyquite a hopeful report.
I wish I could remember exactlywhere it was.
Maybe I can get you the detailsof it, but it talked about the
fact that, that actually a lotof Americans share many similar
(46:45):
values.
The problem is that theconversation when they're put
into the public sphere are, arepresented in a, in a either or
kind of way.
Uh, and that's what kind ofpushes us further and further.
Speaker 4 (46:57):
Um, there was a poll released yesterday.
And so this is, um, I think itwas on Biden's presidency, you
know, where as we're bounded ahundred days or so.
So, um, I think it was, um, thatwhen asked, how was he doing on
(47:21):
handling the pandemic very highscores, 62% said the president's
doing a really good job, butwhen asked, how are you doing
and bringing us together, whichwas one of his, you know,
platform, uh, you know, talkingpoints during the election, 82%
(47:42):
of the country said, he's notbringing us together.
And so I guess, while I have youand what you do, I want to take
another shot at this to say, sohow do we do, I mean, this seems
to get in the way of so much ofwhat we wanted.
(48:05):
It doesn't matter by the way,for, for an organization like
pattern that works oninfrastructure, land, use
housing, there are always peopleon different sides and conflict
resolution.
Um, you know, we don't want themliving in our neighborhood is
actually what underlies buildingaffordable housing, um, land
(48:30):
use.
You know, I'm just trying tomake it very practical for
people listening in the HudsonValley here.
Um, land use issues are alsoabout, well, what do you want
the character of our communityto look like?
Which underlies that, um, weknow, we know that conflict in
America can get much worse.
(48:52):
We just can go back to the 1860sto understand how bad it could
get.
Right.
But right now there are peoplethat feel like it's nearing
something like that.
And they've used the term civilwar, and I don't want it.
I don't want to go there.
I'd rather have someone who isskilled at negotiation, say we
(49:12):
don't have to get there.
Here's some other practical waysin which we can start to break
this down.
Speaker 5 (49:20):
Yeah.
Well, first of all, I mean, theone thing that I would say is
that we look far too much topolitical leaders for this kind
of thing.
Um, I don't think Joe Biden, uh,I, I look, I certainly believe
in the message, you know, Imean, we're all Americans, like,
we have to recognize thesimilarities that we have, but,
(49:44):
but right now in this climate,there are too many things
pushing us away from that.
There's too many reasons whypeople want to stay entrenched.
It's a little bit like theripeness question.
Right.
Which is that right now, thereare more reasons to say no than,
yes.
Um, so how do you change that?
Well, I think part of it is, andI, and I really do believe this.
(50:07):
Like I, you know, I have afriend who's a state Senator and
he, and I had a conversation,something like this on for my
university.
And I said, you know, I kind offeel like national politics are
broken.
Like there's no conversation.
Um, if you're forward, I'magainst it.
If it's a Democrat, you're awhatever, like there's just no
(50:28):
conversation.
And he said, I don't disagreewith it.
And I thought, that'sinteresting, you said, but I
don't think local politics arebroken.
And he said, in fact, I believethat that the, the real work
that happens in this countryhappens at the local level
happens in the States.
It happens as close to theground as possible.
(50:49):
So what I would, you know, forme, what I would say is we have
to stop looking to the nationallevel for solutions.
What we need is actually theaverage person to reach out, to
engage with others, to do thekinds of things that used to
sort of be talked about as civicengagement and civic pride, and,
um, stop looking out there tothe politicians.
(51:12):
There's too many reasons forthem to do, to have other
agendas and other kinds ofthings.
And start looking to yourself,start looking to your own
community.
You don't have to change theworld, just change what you're
doing in your world.
Um, that's, you know, from whereI sit, you know, if you hear
somebody or you meet somebodynew that you didn't know, um,
(51:35):
and you know, you have a goodinteraction.
Well, now all of a sudden yousay, well, wait a minute.
Maybe not everybody thinks thatway.
Um, and, and so I think that wehave to own this all of us, and
we have to take actions that,that put ourselves into
situations where we can dothings differently, change and
(51:55):
get back to, you know, some ofthose feelings that existed.
Um, I remember as a kid, whenyou, you know, you lived in a
community, there were communityevents and there were different
things that people did.
What do we do that stuff nearlyas much today as we did then no,
we've lost a lot of that.
And I think we need to go backto that.
And I think local communities,you know, they know their place
(52:17):
best.
And, and so they ought to spendthe time organizing, bringing
people together.
Um, you know, I I've become abig fan after having worked on
the Abraham path of walking and,you know, I, I had in my head
this idea of sort of a purplepath, so bringing blue and red
together and, you know, usepaths like the Appalachian trail
(52:41):
and say, Hey, go walk and havesome places along the route
where people could sit down andhave a burger together and, and
talk about their view of theworld in a much less
controversial kind of way.
But just as a, when we walk awayfrom here, there's, there's no
major consequences except thatyou and I engaged and we shared
(53:02):
some different views on what'shappening here.
Um, you know, there's a lot ofopportunities for those things
if we look for them and if we,you know, reach out to folks
that I think, you know,hopefully as, as COVID slowly,
uh, you know, dissipates, and wecan get back to some semblance
of normalcy, you know, forpeople to look to do those kinds
(53:24):
of things, to organize kinds ofthings.
Don't,
Speaker 4 (53:26):
You know, the problem is we have a tendency in this
country to look to others andsay, you fix it.
That's not how this works.
It, it, cause that's passing thebuck.
You know, when people have aconflict more often than not,
they call the first thing to dois pick up the phone and call a
lawyer.
You don't go to your neighborand say, Hey, can we just talk
about this?
Cause we've got a problem,right?
(53:46):
And then we have to go back tothat.
This is not to just give toeverybody else to do.
We all have to own it and getoff of our sort of, uh, our
Duffs and, and, and takeresponsibility.
So, you know, it's funny you saythat because I've often I've
done a lot of teaching in thepublic administration field.
And I've often said that thecapstone, which is your last
(54:11):
project that you need to do,what if all the masters in
public administration programsfor their capstone required you
to, instead of, you know,whatever your project is in your
own community, if the, if thepublic administration program
was located in a blue state, youhad to do your capstone and
(54:35):
you're at state and you had tospend six months learning about
the way, um, other people lookat it.
And I think, um, we're going toend the conversation where, you
know, you've given us so manygood thoughts about, you know,
maybe it's not the nationallevel.
It's remembering that, you know,we have neighbors, there's ways
(54:59):
to talk to each other.
And, um, Josh wise, it's alwaysa pleasure.
I, I, you know, during thisconversation, I've taken two
pages of notes because it's, it,there's just so much that I've
learned from someone who is inyour position.
Um, your recent book is the bookof real world negotiations.
(55:22):
Um, please find it on Amazon orwherever out, where else can
they find it?
Is that the best way?
Uh, it's pretty much out therewherever.
So if they just Google that,they'll get more, that more
information than they cared tohave on it.
All right.
Thank you Josh, for your time asalways.
Speaker 1 (55:37):
You're welcome.
My pleasure.
Thank you for tuning in topatterns and paradigms the
pattern podcast.
For more information about thisepisode, visit our website
pattern for progress.org Fordslash podcast.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.