July 23, 2024 • 42 mins
Bridging Divides: Conflict Resolution with Rob Fersh and Mariah Levison
In this episode of the Conflict Tipping Podcast from Mediate.com, host Laura May interviews Rob Fersh and Mariah Levison about their work and their co-authored book, 'From Conflict to Convergence: Coming Together to Solve Tough Problems.' Rob, founder and senior advisor at Convergence, and Mariah, the president and CEO, discuss their extensive experience in conflict resolution, spanning policy differences and community mediation. They share powerful case studies from their book, including successful collaborations on healthcare and police-community relations. The episode includes the methodologies they use to foster trust, build relationships, and achieve consensus, as well as the challenges in convening people and implementing solutions. The conversation highlights the importance of collaborative leadership and offers practical advice for listeners dealing with conflicts in their own lives.
"From Conflict to Convergence" comes out on 30 July 2024, and you can order and pre-order it wherever you buy good books.
- Convergence website: https://convergencepolicy.org/
- Buy the book: https://convergencepolicy.org/from-conflict-to-convergence/
- Rob's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-fersh-8b752314/
- Mariah's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariah-levison-130b2716/
Chapters
- 00:00 Meet the Authors: Rob Fersh and Mariah Levison
- 01:33 Inspiration Behind 'From Conflict to Convergence'
- 05:01 The Emotional and Relational Approach to Conflict Resolution
- 08:06 Higher Ground Solutions: A New Mindset
- 10:19 Real-Life Stories of Conflict Resolution
- 17:24 Methodologies and Strategies for Conflict Resolution
- 24:59 Challenges and Future of Collaborative Problem Solving
About the guests
MARIAH LEVISON serves as the President and CEO at Convergence. Mariah uses a deep understanding of human relations to build trust and relationships across differences which lead to consensus-based solutions to complex and contentious issues. Prior to joining Convergence, Mariah led the Minnesota State Office of Collaboration and Dispute Resolution and has worked for several nonprofit dispute resolution centers. Additionally, Mariah has been teaching collaborative problem-solving for twenty years in settings ranging from community trainings to law schools to trainings for foreign governments.
ROBERT FERSH is the Founder and Senior Advisor of Convergence Center for Policy Resolution, which he started in 2009 to promote consensus solutions to issues of domestic importance. Convergence has successfully addressed a wide array of national and state level concerns including health care, K-12 education, incarceration, economic mobility, nutrition and wellness, and more. Previously, Rob served on the staffs of three Congressional committees, directed a national anti-hunger organization, and served as the U.S. country director for Search for Common Ground, an international conflict transformation organization.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Laura May (00:10):
Hello and welcome to the Conflict Tipping Podcast from Mediate.com,
the podcast that explores socialconflict and what we can do about it.
I'm your host, Laura May.
And today I have with me two incrediblepractitioners who work to bring people
together to solve tough problems,Rob Fersh, and Mariah Levison.
Rob is the founder and a senior advisorat Convergence, and Mariah is the
(00:34):
president and CEO, and they have cometogether to co-author a new book titled
From Conflict to Convergence, comingtogether to Solve Tough Problems.
Rob has over 45 years of experience.
Which is actually so many yearsof experience in bridging policy
differences in Washington, DC and beyond.
While Mariah also has decades ofexpertise, not to be undersold there,
(00:58):
in consensus building mediationand collaborative processes.
So today we'll be digging intotheir work and their new book.
So welcome Rob and Mariah.
Rob Fersh (01:08):
Thanks very much, Laura.
I
Mariah Levison (01:09):
so much for having us.
We're excited to be here today.
Laura May (01:12):
Now I am so glad to have you here as well.
And it's worth saying that Rob wasactually one of the very first guests.
He was on the first episode ofthe Conflict Tipping podcast
along with your colleague, Monika.
So it's great to have him back andMariah, fantastic to have you here.
So I'm going to start off withhopefully an easy question.
(01:33):
And that is what inspired you towrite From Conflict to Convergence?
And maybe I'll throw that to Mariah.
Mariah Levison (01:43):
Well, I feel really lucky that my whole background has been in
conflict resolution and problem solvingreally at all levels from family to
policy, but I've spent most of my careerworking on policy conflicts for a long
time at the state of Minnesota, workingon state level issues, local government.
Mostly state, also tribal government aswell, before joining Convergence about two
(02:05):
years ago to work on national conflicts.
And I just feel so lucky to everyday get to bring people who feel
really divided into the same room.
And help them figure out that theyhave more in common than they think,
that they have more to learn from eachother than they think, and that they
often together find solutions thatare wiser and more durable than they
(02:26):
would have come up with on their own.
And if I didn't get to do that,and I were just watching the
news, I think I would feel, verydiscouraged about how divided we seem.
And of course going on that'stroubling, but I am so lucky to get to
see the other side of that, of folkscoming together and solving problems.
And I, I wanted to write the bookbecause I wanted to share that
(02:48):
hope with others that, you know,it's not just a theory for us.
It's the work that we do every daythat we see that bringing people
together and having them solveproblems together really does work.
So I wanted to share that message of hopeand also some tools, hopefully for how
others can do some of the things thathave worked really well for Rob and I
on, on, tough public types of issues.
(03:09):
How about for you,
Rob Fersh (03:10):
Well, thanks, Mariah.
And I echo much of what you had to say.
I have been doing this particular kindof work for a quarter of a century
and you and I both have experiencedsuccess in bringing people together
across divides my own background.
includes having been an advocate fora particular point of view for many
years, working for Congress in theUnited States for a number of years.
(03:33):
But with the successes we've had tobridge divides amongst people who
didn't even think they could talkto each other on important issues.
It seemed to, I think, both of usimportant to share what we've learned
and what we've done with others becausea lot more people can do this work.
It's not rocket science.
It requires some study andknowledge and some skill development.
(03:53):
But I think both of us share a passionto help make the world a little more
friendly, a little more collaborative, alittle more effective by getting people
to work together across their differences.
And the book is the vehicle by which wethought we could put together our ideas
in a way that a lot of people could absorbthem and potentially put them to use, no
(04:14):
matter where they work, whether it's inpolicy, whether they work in business or
nonprofits, or whether they're on academiccampuses, we think the problem solving
methodology that we've been using can bewidely applied to a lot of circumstances,
a lot of people throughout the world
Laura May (04:31):
And I mean, it sounds like a book that's great for everybody,
so we could all go buy it now.
But I'm also really struck bysome of the language you used.
Rob, you mentioned that it wasabout bringing people who thought
they couldn't talk together.
They felt they couldn't talktogether, ultimately to the table.
And Mariah, you mentioned as well,this idea of people who felt like
(04:52):
they couldn't get along, or they feltlike they couldn't reach convergence.
And then ultimately for you,there's again, this feeling of, of
hope when you see that it happens.
I'm hearing a lot about emotional divide.
Is that the key divide that you'reredressing with your methods or
is there more to it than that?
Mariah Levison (05:10):
Well, I think one of the things you're touching on there
is that we take a very relationshipcentric approach to the work.
So we spend time, weintentionally go slow.
We spend more time than I think peoplesometimes do to let folks get to know each
other, to find the things that they havein common on an interpersonal level, but
(05:31):
also to go through some processes thathelp them figure out that they do, in
fact, have more shared goals and valuesthan they thought, and that kind of thing
creates a foundation of a relationshipthat enables them to then do the hard
work of figuring out solutions together.
And so I think that that relationalapproach that we take and we spend time
(05:52):
doing, sort of traditional conflictresolution, things like making sure
that folks have time to have mealstogether, just have time and space are
in the same physical place together,which has become more and more rare.
And that does, I think, change the wayfolks are feeling about each other,
feeling about the potential to come upwith solutions and move forward together
Laura May (06:13):
And so it's about addressing that relational components and the
emotions and values attached to itbefore people can really start to
intellectualize in a way and start to getto the, whether it's the policy issues
of the specific conflict or what haveyou, if I'm understanding correctly.
Rob Fersh (06:29):
I would just jump in to say yes, that's so.
I don't think I normally would leadwith the word emotional about what we're
trying to do, even though you're ontosomething there Laura May, you know a
lot of the book And the early parts ofthe book focus on what we call mindsets.
So it may be emotions run high ordon't run high amongst these people.
(06:50):
In many cases, they justdon't know each other.
And from a distance, they assume becausethey disagree, they can't work together.
And so we work really hard to explainhow a collaborative mindset can not
only make you more willing to come to atable, and most people come to our tables
aren't necessarily in a collaborativemindset when they start, but also, but
(07:10):
end up there and up at a point wherethey understand that conflict is healthy
and the mindset about conflict changes.
They understand that if they get curious,they might learn something new, as
opposed to simply preparing to answerand respond or debate with other people.
And they also learn, and we see this overand over again, that other people do share
(07:31):
their values, they may disagree on howto implement them, but underneath it all,
people really want the same things, andto the extent we can begin to have people
see each other more accurately, and thengive each other the benefit of the doubt,
that's another mindset that we aim for.
So.
We're trying to create a culture, ifyou will, of relationship that allows
people's hearts and minds to open toeach other's points of view without
(07:54):
having to compromise their principles.
And the hope is that over time,they'll find enough areas of common
ground that they can work togetherto solve tough problems where their
divisions stand in the way of progress.
Laura May (08:06):
And so this mindset, I mean, is that what you refer to as higher ground?
Cause I know that that is a conceptthat comes up in the book, right?
Is that about mindset?
Mariah Levison (08:15):
We talk about higher ground throughout the book, and what
we're referring to most is the ideathat I think increasingly in our world
folks are worried about having tocompromise their principles and their
values, and I think one of the mostimportant messages of the book is that
in our experience, folks really don'thave to compromise their principles and
(08:36):
their values to solve tough problems.
That doesn't mean that they haveto compromise on some of the
ways that they, decide to achievethese high level goals and values.
It's not that compromise doesn'tplay any part, and certainly we're
fans of compromise, but we agreethat we don't want folks compromising
really important values like freedomand security and kindness and
(08:59):
other shared values that we have.
And so a big piece of ourmethodology is about helping folks
find this kind of higher ground.
where we unpack what's going on inthe conflict when folks think it
can only be this or that and whatthe other guys say they want as a
thing that compromises my values.
But really underneath that, when weunpack what are these shared goals,
(09:22):
what are these shared values, what areall the needs and concerns that are
coming from both sides, then we havereally fertile ground to come up with
solutions that integrate meeting theneeds, kind of maximizing, meeting as
many needs of as many people as we can.
And so that's the conceptof higher ground solutions.
We talk about it both as a process thatgets there a type of solution, but we also
(09:45):
talk about it in our section on mindsets.
And that's to have the mindset thatthis type of higher ground solution
is in fact possible because I thinktoo many folks think it's not.
It's a win lose sort of situation.
It's a zero sum sort of situation.
And so to be more willing to gointo things, recognizing that, hey,
there's a way forward here througha higher ground type solution.
Laura May (10:07):
All right.
And so I understand then thatthe book is filled with real life
stories and examples that perhapshelp illustrate your methodology
and the power of your methodology.
So I'd actually like each of you tomaybe share with me your favorite
story from the book, or a little sneakpeek of your favorite story and why
(10:27):
it means so much to you personally,
Rob Fersh (10:31):
Well, I have a number of favorite stories in the book, but
probably the one that stands out for meis really from my very first experience
trying to bridge the divides on ahuge national issue, which was health
care coverage in the United States.
And back in 2003 some people approachedme about the fact that nearly 50
million Americans did not have healthcare coverage in the United States,
(10:54):
and this is even just before foundingConvergence, I, I pilot tested the idea
that maybe we could bring together peoplewhose disagreements stood in the way of
progress on, on the issue of health care.
And in the United States, there wasa terrible debate during the Clinton
administration where people went towar with each other and the Clinton
plan never got off the ground.
(11:15):
We assembled many of the same peoplewho had been at war during the Clinton
debate to try to work on how to coveras many people as quickly as possible
. So one of my favorite stories is there was a person at the table,
who represented the American MedicalAssociation, and she was very nice.
So she was an economist,very knowledgeable.
In the beginning of theprocess, she was very outspoken.
(11:37):
And AMA had done a lot of homeworkand had some interesting ideas
about how to cover the uninsured.
But as the process unfolded,she got quieter and quieter.
And finally, at the meeting wherewe actually reached an agreement
on how to cover nearly 50 millionAmericans with health care
coverage, with health insurance.
She came up to me at a lunch break andsaid, Rob, you have ruined my life.
(12:01):
of course I responded somethinglike, I hear that all the time.
I've got four kids after all, you know,what is your particular reason for
the fact that I've ruined your life?
And she simply looked at meand said, I just can't see the
world the way I used to see it.
So many bright people in this roomhave said things I never thought of.
And while I still believe a lotof what I started with, I just
(12:24):
can't see the world the same way.
And that's what our processesare about, is creating at least a
window to broaden your horizons.
It's not about compromisingyour deep values or your deep
beliefs, but to see that everyoneonly has a piece of the puzzle.
And so that maiden voyage for me, thatwas the first time I ever worked on a
big national issue on a bridge buildingway that was using this methodology.
(12:47):
It was a hugely important proofpoint that people could move at least
partway toward understanding otherpeople and find areas where they
could work together more effectivelyon issues of great concern to them.
Laura May (12:59):
And how about you, Mariah, what's your favorite story for the book?
Mariah Levison (13:04):
Well, one of the things that I loved working on in my career and
felt so honored to be a part of was a citycouncil and a community coming together
following the police shooting of PhilandoCastile in a small city on the outskirts
of our capital called Falcon Heights, andI love this story because of the outcomes
(13:24):
that occurred at different levels, butalso because it illustrates that this
methodology works even on some of themost contentious issues of our time.
So after Philando was killed, manypeople came to the city council really
upset and angry and folks were yellingand the council shut down the meetings
a couple of times, not sure what to do.
(13:44):
And so they reachedout and asked for help.
And I was fortunate enough to getto help them design a process that
would help them decide how to moveforward as a city and as a community.
And it had many parts.
And one of the pieces was that weheld a lot of conversations with the
community that would inform a taskforce that was working on changing
policy, but also the goals of the citycouncil members themselves, they really
(14:07):
wanted to also focus on relationshipsand healing for the community,
and the city and the police force.
And so something that has always stoodout in my mind is that on the first
night of this community conversation,there were maybe 150 people there.
One of the people in the room was PhilandoCastile's best friend, John Thompson,
who I later became friends with and whowas not planning to come that night, but
(14:30):
Philando's mom encouraged him to come.
And so I have always been touched by that.
And we were holding the meeting in theevening in a church in the community.
And at the end of the night,I was finishing cleaning up
and getting ready to leave.
And I saw that by the front door, thepastor was standing off to the side.
It was a small church.
And so they, they were didn't have otherstaff there to close up the church.
(14:51):
So the pastor was standing there.
It was quite late in the evening,but on the other side of the church
there were talking John Thompsonand the chief of the police
force, whose name was also John.
And they were deep in conversation andthey just kept talking and talking.
And I just was touched by thisopportunity for them to be able
to talk face to face and buildmore understanding of each other.
And I learned later how much thatconversation influenced both of
(15:15):
their thinking to move out oftheir kind of defensive postures
and oppositional corners andreally talk about each of their
experiences and learn from each other.
And I remember feeling so torn aboutthis woman, this poor pastor who
was up so late and letting us useher space and wanting to tell them,
they needed to wrap it up, but alsothinking what a unique conversation.
And I sure don't want to interrupt it andtell them to, you know, to wrap it up.
(15:39):
But I've just always loved the storybecause I think in a public policy
context, there's so rarely theopportunity for folks to just have
a conversation like that, a realheart to heart across a really deep
divide where people are feeling.
so divided, so scared, so angry,and that really it took very little.
(16:03):
I mean, we, we structured the nightin a very thoughtful way and all of
that, but they just needed some spaceto come together and to have a moment
that then was very impactful for bothof them and went on to, you know,
change the trajectory of many things.
I think it's an especially powerfulstory because I think a place where our
country feels particularly stuck is aroundissues around police community relations.
(16:27):
Safety.
We're in an election year.
We're hearing a lot about safetyand safety, of course, is a really
fundamental human value, youknow, irrespective of politics.
We all want to feel safe.
We all want to live in safe communities.
And just seeing, you know, people acrossthe full range of thinking on these issues
come together and make their communitysafer and better and more equitable
(16:49):
and all of those things is a story.
I love and.
Not to belabor the point, butI, myself, got to develop really
touching relationships withpeople who participated in that.
And in fact, I wrote to Philando'smom to let her know that the
story would be included in the bookbecause you know, it's her story.
And I wanted her to know that.
And she wrote back such a lovelymessage telling me how honored she was.
(17:12):
And I felt like, Oh my gosh,I'm the one who's honored.
Like I'm the mom of two sons andI can't imagine losing my son.
And so some of the personal experiencesthat I had I still carry with me.
Laura May (17:22):
Incredible.
Okay.
So then coming a bit to the methodology,I mean, I'm assuming step one is
make sure you pack extra coffee andsnacks in case it goes late at night.
But I mean, beyond that, what are someof the tried and tested strategies
from your book that listeners canstart using immediately to help
navigate conflicts in their own lives?
Rob Fersh (17:44):
You know, basically, the whole process is about building
relationships of trust amongst people.
So before you do that, you have tofigure out, okay what's the issue
at hand, whether you're in a familydispute, a community dispute,
divisions of a business disagreeingon where the expansion should be.
So you need to identify what's the issue.
(18:04):
You need to identify who needs to talkto whom in order to make progress,
who's got the knowledge, experience andinfluence to make a difference on that
issue, whether it's an internal issueor a public policy issue, and then you
need to be able to engage people andmany of them are scared to come, or
they come in a defensive posture and forthem to see the possibility of coming
(18:26):
to a table on an issue that's stuckor very difficult would work for them.
So a lot is done to prepare, to dohomework in advance, understand what the
issues are and who needs to talk to whom.
And then the other, major steps areto convene people in a way that's
skillful with what I call ground rules.
So people don't attack motives.
(18:48):
They learn to listen and share time.
And then there's a skillful processof facilitating conversation where
the group often develops some basicprinciples to even guide whatever
solutions they come up with.
And that's a great starting pointbecause most people will agree again
on goals, on basic principles, evenif they disagree on how to get there.
So, for instance, in a project wedid on economic mobility, there
(19:10):
were people from business groups andpeople from liberal advocacy groups.
The liberal advocacy groups wanted a muchhigher minimum wage, and the business
community resisted a uniform high minimumwage, citing all the information they
had about how it might affect smallbusinesses or different geographic areas.
But basically, they agreed ona fundamental principle, which
is, if you work full time,you shouldn't live in poverty.
(19:33):
Okay.
Well, that gives yousomething to talk about.
So, is it higher minimum wages?
Is it better government supports?
Is it more training?
Whatever it is, but at least peoplewere aligned on values and, and
understood there was compassion onboth sides for people who are working
and not making enough money to get by.
So, that's the beginnings of the process.
Eventually the goal of the process isto reach agreement on ideas and then
(19:56):
figure out who's going to implement them.
It's possible who's ever conveningit has the power to implement.
But otherwise, we often haveto organize the stakeholders.
Or the leaders and experts inthat particular field to then
work together to put theirideas into practice in the world.
Mariah Levison (20:11):
I think you did a great summary there, Rob.
Maybe one, not super exciting thingI would add is just to emphasize that
all of that takes some time, and thatit's a really good investment of time.
It takes time to slow down, get to knoweach other, to have meals together to come
to understand each other and the issuesin a more nuanced and thoughtful way, to
(20:34):
develop these more, you know, creativeand thoughtful and integrative solutions.
It all takes some time and peoplewill sometimes ask about that.
And I'll say it does.
And you should be prepared for that.
And you should resource that andinvest in that, and it still takes a
lot less time than intractable conflictfighting core you know, the alternative
(20:55):
to getting it resolved . You know, ifit could be solved quickly, go for it.
Definitely do that.
But presumably, if you're thinking aboutthis approach, it's feeling kind of stuck.
And so that investment of time,I think, is really worth making.
Rob Fersh (21:07):
Let me, if I can just jump in with a quick story about
that, that reinforces Mariah's point.
Convergence is now 15 years old,but when we turned 10, we had
a celebration that we survived.
You know, we were started in 2009 atthe height of the greatest recession
at that point, the United States hadsince the 1930s and somehow we got by.
(21:28):
But we had a terrific panel that dayof people who had been in various
of our projects who'd been socalled stakeholders at our projects.
And these are high level people atthe national level, very busy and
don't have a lot of time and normallyrun from one meeting to the next.
And we had this panel and thena woman who'd been on our board.
(21:49):
Raise your hand and askthe question to this group.
There's a couple hundred people inthe room saying, okay, it took you
a year and a half or so to get thesolutions in each of your projects.
Couldn't this have been done ifwe just locked you in a room for
10 days and just went at it andtalked about it and got it done?
And to a person, and it was evensurprising to me, they said,
(22:10):
no, it took time to build trust.
To have meals, to absorb what wasgoing on, to think about things in
between, to ask questions and tolearn and to grow with each other.
And that none of them suggestedthat the process was too slow.
To a person, they said, no, take the time.
It was well worth it.
(22:30):
It was a great use of our time.
Mariah Levison (22:32):
Rob made me think of something that I think
is really interesting about ourprocess that does take time.
Is that one of the things that happensis that folks do have an identity
shift, and I think that is particularlyinteresting in this moment where we
think a lot about identities, and they'vebecome so central to how we think about
divided issues, is that generally,not always, but generally folks come
(22:54):
in, wearing some sort of identity hat.
I'm union, I'm labor, I'm prothis, I'm against this, I come from
this demographic or the other one.
And often they're, you know, wearingthat hat really prominently because
they're there to be a representative.
I mean, to some degree,that's intentional.
We want this full array ofperspectives represented in these
processes in order to achieve thesewiser and more durable solutions.
(23:16):
But over time, I watch people evolvethis new identity of a problem solver.
And they feel really bonded to thepeople in the room, and they feel really
committed to not only achieving theconsensus solutions, but getting them
adopted and implemented in the world.
And I just see this new identityemerge it's like, I can almost see
them taking off the identity hat thatthey came into the room with and putting
(23:37):
on this other one, like, this otheridentity becoming so strong, maybe not
for the rest of their life forever,but at least when they're in the room
and we do see, I think, as Rob was alsoalluding to, that for many people, that
identity sticks to some degree, thatit's been a formative experience to come
into a room with people who you didn'tthink you had anything in common with,
(23:58):
you didn't think you could agree toanything with, you didn't think really
had anything to add to the conversation.
Maybe had suspected themof negative motives.
To see that, whether youagree with them fully or not.
These are people who have,you know, important needs and
concerns and who I can work with.
We see that perspective shift lastfor folks and see them approaching
their work in a different way, fora long time to come in many cases.
Laura May (24:22):
I mean, that really chimes with my experience as well
in sort of the mediation world andthe facilitation world, because
I do a bunch of facilitationswithin companies across companies.
And, you know, at the startof things, people are always
like, why are we in this room?
And by the end, like without fail,every single group is like, I can't
believe how much we have in common.
I just can't believe it.
(24:44):
And it's always really striking.
So it's an incredibly interesting andpowerful experience that it sounds
like these people are going through.
So huge kudos on that process.
Anyway, so then turningfrom your successes.
What are some of the challenges you facein implementing these methodologies?
Rob Fersh (25:04):
So it depends on what you mean by implementing the methodology.
I mean, there is achallenge to begin with.
To get people in the door, andthat alone is an achievement.
In fact in the book, you'll seethe story about health care.
I mentioned before, and one of thepeople on our board who was a participant
in that early health care projectwith me before Convergence, Stuart
Butler, who at the time was with thevery conservative Heritage Foundation.
(25:29):
His comment in the book was, after the socalled fiasco of the Clinton healthcare
plan in the 1990s, where people wereat each other's throats, it was just
remarkable we even got people in theroom to talk to each other to begin with.
So, especially in this day and age whereso much partisan politics and really
a lot of so much bad blood and nowassumptions about each other run so deep
(25:51):
in the United States it's not easy toget people to come to a common table.
So that's, that's a big challenge.
There can be other challenges gettingpeople to find common ground, but
I think for the most part virtuallyevery project Mariah and I've done has
been successful in getting that done.
Then the other huge issue isimplementation of the ideas.
And this can range, If it's a familydispute and the participants are there
(26:15):
and they have a good conversationand they know what they need to
do, it might happen right away.
Or if you're a business leader or anon profit leader and you've convened
people and you've got decision makingauthority and you've brought everyone's
points of view into play, the wholeidea of this process is to be inclusive
of all the people whose voices matter.
Can push thinking to a higherlevel and whose voices can
(26:36):
help get better solutions.
Or a governor might have convened andmight have the power to implement ideas.
That's, easier and more likelyto bring immediate results.
A lot of the work we've both done hasbeen more open ended public policy kinds
of work and in some cases, companiesmight leave our process with ideas.
They go ahead and implement in theirown companies, Walmart and McDonald's
(26:59):
went ahead and took the ideas andimplemented them in their own companies.
But when it comes to having to havea legislature, a city council, or
somebody actually pass legislation orother public policy, it may take some
time to organize that and get it done.
So, none of our projects are selfimplementing, and then sometimes
politics can override what people arewilling to do in a particular moment.
(27:22):
But the fact that we got people togetherand the ideas are there and ready to go at
any time when the moment is opportune isreally important, and we think it's really
important for the stakeholders who comeup with these ideas, these shared ideas,
to get invested and for them to carry theball forward in moving these ideas out.
Convergence, for instance, isneutral, never takes positions, even
(27:44):
in favor of whatever our groups comeup with, because it's always of the
moment, whatever they came up with.
And so we try to make sure that we staysomewhat pristine, that people know they
don't have to fight us about any policy.
Our job is to get people to come togetherand find common ground and then to
help them, convene them as necessary.
Facilitate them as necessary.
Help them move their ideas forward.
Mariah Levison (28:07):
Something that's surprising for most people is I wouldn't
say it's easy to build this trust andthese higher ground solutions, but it
works really reliably as Rob said, andalmost all the processes here I have been
a part of for what's getting to be quite along time now, we develop those outcomes.
But the other piece that he talkedabout, about getting people into the
room and getting solutions implemented.
(28:30):
Those are fairly uniqueConvergence challenges.
Convergence does a pretty rarething where we look at the world and
say, where is there some agreementthat uh this isn't working.
So we recently had a project calledsupports for working families.
We said, you know, there's agreementon the left and the right that it's
too hard to raise a family in Americatoday, maybe for different reasons.
(28:52):
But we haven't seen enough bigsolutions, policy movement on solutions.
So we brought a group togetherand they came up with some
very thoughtful solutions.
And we're in the implementationphase of that work now.
But that work of getting folks into theroom and then getting them implemented
when we're the ones who identify the issueand do all the convening is challenging.
And in my past job where I ran somethingcalled the Minnesota State Office for
(29:15):
collaboration and dispute resolution,I worked from within government
and the processes were called forby political leaders, legislators.
Executive branch leaders, governor,state agency leaders, tribal leaders.
And in those cases, both of thoseproblems were largely taken care of
when the relevant political leadercalls folks together and says, you
(29:36):
know, I'm willing to be within somebounds neutral on the outcome of this,
but I want all of the stakeholders tocome together and present the solution.
Then I'll do everything in mypower to see it be implemented.
People want to be at that table.
It's not very hard to get peopleto that table for the most part.
And it's also then not very hard toget the solutions implemented, not
easy, but not so challenging becausepolitical pieces are in place.
(30:00):
And so a spin that I would put on thechallenge that Rob named is and where
we end the book, I think, is in a callfor more collaborative leadership.
So I think one of the things thatwe want to do with this book is
call on more leaders in all sectors.
Political leaders, leaders of companies,of academic institutions, religious
institutions, schools, to play more ofthat convener role and to not, I think,
(30:25):
have the fear that the solution willnot be a good one, because inherently
when you bring together the fullrange of perspective and have them
build consensus, they're going to comeup with something that's thoughtful
and nuanced and meets lots of needs.
Otherwise everyone isn'tgoing to agree to it.
So to have kind of the couragethat bringing folks together.
Works and then we can have moreof these types of higher ground
(30:46):
solutions emerging and then gettingimplemented because the leaders who
can implement them are on board.
Laura May (30:54):
I mean, reflecting on some of the work that's been done here in
Europe as well, just to sort of makea bit of a, a jump across the pond,
because I mean, it's hugely in vogueat the moment for all the international
EU funded projects, to have thatstakeholder co creation and bring
people into the room, as you mentioned,as was the case in your past role.
And people love to be involved.
(31:15):
They absolutely want to talk about whethertheir street should be regreened or
whatever the case may be, or the roleof tourism in their economy and stuff.
And so, I mean, I think there often,the challenge is making sure the right
people are in the room because thatso strongly influences the outcome.
And so how do you cope with thatparticular challenge at Convergence,
of making sure that you're notaccidentally skewing the outcome by
(31:37):
having the wrong people in the room?
Can you talk a bit about thatprocess of person selection?
Rob's nodding.
So.
Mariah Levison (31:44):
so we do.
We uh, at Convergence, wecall it discovery and design
because it sounds cute and isreflective of what really happens.
But we, we invest, I think, more onthe front end again than sometimes some
groups do to learn and design the process.
So we're really thoughtfulabout doing a lot of homework.
And I think that the most distinctivething about that homework is that we're
(32:08):
really focused on interviewing people whorepresent the full range of perspective.
So we read documents and do other things,but we really want to hear that full range
of perspective because that really helpsgive us the clarity to design a process
that will meet the goals of the process.
And one piece of that design is makingsure we understand who are the range of
(32:30):
people and of influence who are neededto be in a room to get the job done.
As Rob said earlier, it's not rocketscience, but it's really making that
investment up front, not just opening itup to whoever, but being really thoughtful
about who's there and how we engage them.
And by listening to a lot of peoplefrom the beginning, it builds trust
(32:50):
in the process, which helps toget people who are more skeptical.
Into the eventual room, whatever thatroom looks like, sometimes that's,
30 people who meet once a month for ayear, sometimes it's hundreds of people
providing feedback, and five meetings.
I mean, it can look lots of differentways, but starting from the place
of really listening to that fullrange of perspective, builds that
(33:11):
trust to help bring people into theroom who are not so sure if it's,
you know, a good use of their time.
Rob Fersh (33:17):
Our goal at Convergence has never been just to get people
who are very close to agreementjust disagree a little bit.
They're in the middle.
It's always been to get the widestpossible swath of people who are at
least willing to come to a table to reachagreement, because the wider the legs
of the stool in terms of disagreement,the more durable the answers are,
if you get them to common ground.
(33:39):
So it depends.
Sometimes some projects arrivethat are pretty fully together.
And we know who's going to talk to whom
.But with these interviews, we always ask people, well, who are we missing?
What perspectives do we need to hear?
We're aware of who might be aspoiler, and we have to make a
choice whether they keep them close.
I mean, we always try tocommunicate with everybody.
(34:01):
There are some people who aren't thatgood in group settings and they may not
make it to the table and they may behappy not to be, but it's always important
to try to be as inclusive as possible.
We usually create a culture in the roomin which people who literally didn't
think they could talk to each other.
We had a project where an academic whohad written a book, very critical of
prisons in the United States, includingprivate prisons, told us about The
(34:27):
trepidation he had because we sat himnext to a private prison official at
the first dinner of the group, andhe texted, he texted his wife saying,
Oh, my God, you can't believe wherethey're going to sit me with a dinner.
And then they hit it off, and it turnedout they had a lot in common, and now
they actually are colleagues workingtogether and finding that they have
each bring value to each other's work.
(34:47):
So I think 1 last point I'd liketo sort of make, and on top of
everything else we just said is.
It's really important for people toknow this isn't soft and naive stuff.
This isn't, it's proven.
And it takes a lot ofguts to come to the table.
And it's hard nosed.
And many people are hard nosed.
It's not about just being polite and nice.
It's not just for nice people.
(35:08):
I mean, we do think we create aculture in the room where people
get respectful of each other.
And often develop tremendous personalrelationships despite political or policy
or other or business sense differences.
But this is, this is hard nosedstuff to get people in a room and
to have a conversation, to go deep.
(35:29):
Tempers can flare, but normally we'reable to draw people back to their
fundamental values, their wishes,and to a code of conduct that they've
agreed to about how they will treateach other in the midst of their
disagreement, we urge strong disagreement.
That's fine because disagreementpushes thinking to a higher level.
But I wanted to emphasize that this isnot just about being nice and only nice
(35:50):
people do it, or just being polite.
It's far from that.
Although often the result is people becomemore polite and more understanding and
more loving toward each other, but that'snot guaranteed, nor is it necessary.
Laura May (36:03):
And so I guess in a related question, what would you
say to listeners who are currentlystruggling with seemingly intractable
conflicts in their own lives?
What are some tips or some, evensome hope as you put it earlier,
Mariah, you could give them?
Mariah Levison (36:19):
You know, I've been blessed to do this, all day, every
day for most of my career across, themost divided issues that we have in
our country and see that, again,if not easily, but reliably, folks
can come together Build trust, buildrelationships and find wiser and more
durable solutions in terms of tips.
(36:40):
One of my favorites, a thing thatI say all the time is is giving
people the benefit of the doubt.
It's one of our mindsets in today'sworld I think that's getting increasingly
hard with all of these things comingat us about how, how, you know, bad and
untrustworthy and what bad motives theother side, whoever the other side is
(37:00):
ideological or or other divides uh, butI, often say, you know, most people do
not wake up in the morning thinking, howcan I make the world a worse place today?
Most people are doing whatthey think is the right thing.
It doesn't mean that it's always,the best or the most effective or
the most efficient or backed by dataor always kind, but people are doing
(37:21):
what they think is the right thing.
And if we can start from giving themthe benefit of the doubt that even
though it doesn't make sense to me,they probably have a story for what
they're doing that makes as muchsense to them as my story makes to me.
So starting there from the benefitof the doubt, another one of our
mindsets is about curiosity, tryingto figure out why are they doing this
(37:42):
thing that doesn't make sense to me?
Let me try to understand alittle bit better and then form
some relationship with folks.
I also really encourage folks to practice.
vulnerability really sharing from theheart ourselves about what's important to
us, what shapes our views, our values whatare the personal experiences that have
shaped our views that really encouragesother people to do the same thing.
(38:06):
And that really creates a strongfoundation for relationships.
And once folks have those things inplace, not being afraid to engage,
giving each other the benefit of thedoubt, getting curious, having some
relationships, then they're able toforge those higher ground solutions.
And that's, that's really whatall of our mindsets are about.
And so cultivating those kinds of mindsetsis I think the best tip I can give folks.
(38:29):
I think those mindsets are reallyfoundational to everything else.
Rob Fersh (38:33):
do, Mariah did a really good job.
I really like, and, uh, is thenotion that you yourself, if
you're facing a situation, needto attend to your own needs.
And your own pressures and stresses.
And you know, William Ury's new book,Possible, is quite brilliant about this.
He has a concept about going tothe balcony, a way of looking
(38:53):
at things distance, a bit.
And when you go to the balcony, calmdown, you're not in a fray, you're not
going into a conversation where you'reready just to debate and answer and react.
But you develop a capacityto go to another gear.
And that when you go to that othergear, you can get curious, you're
not as, you know, triggered.
You have a chance to askquestions and learn more.
(39:14):
And when you learn more and hear moreabout people underlying experiences
and their values and why they believewhat believe, chances are, together
is the first step to know that justthe fray to debate or challenger or
retaliate against people who you feelhave said things you disagree with.
It's not a good place to be if you wantto be a collaborative problem solver.
(39:37):
you can't get angry fromtime to time lose it.
We all do.
Uh, But taking care of yourself tobegin with is a really important first
step to be able to have a constructiveconversation where so called high higher
ground kinds of solutions can emerge,whether spouse or with your children
or with or whoever it is you're talking
to.
Laura May (39:56):
Absolutely.
And I mean, speaking of Ury Imean, I think his other book.
Getting to yes with yourself is thebook that really goes into that as well.
Right?
So it's about making sure that youare yourself, I guess, psychologically
safe and whole you're, that's the, uh,you're taking your best self to the
table of facilitation or mediation or
Okay.
And so the book comes out on the 30th ofJuly, which is the day after my birthday.
(40:20):
So I would, yes, I wouldlike a signed copy.
And where will people be able to buythis book From Conflict to Convergence?
Where can they find it?
Mariah Levison (40:28):
You can buy it at all the places that you can buy books at,
Amazon, Barnes and Noble, bookshop.orgthat supports independent booksellers.
And we will be sending you asigned copy for your birthday.
Laura May, we so appreciate you havingus on today and wish you a happy
Laura May (40:45):
Thank you.
Totally fishing for presentss here.
Okay.
No, that's wonderful.
And for those who want to learn moreabout Convergence and your work, what's
the best way they should do that?
I
Mariah Levison (40:56):
You can visit our website, which is convergencepolicy.
org where you can learn moreabout all of these stories that
we've told, these processes.
You can learn more about the books andother ways that you can get involved.
We hope that one of the outcomes aboutthe book is that more people get involved
with Convergence, where there's lotsof ways for folks to work with us to
help bring people together and solvetough problems in their communities and
(41:18):
organizations that they're a part of.
So we hope folks will reachout and connect with us.
Laura May (41:23):
I hope they do too.
Rob Fersh (41:24):
I would just add to that, Laura May, that the book is part of
a new major initiative at Convergencecalled the Learning Lab, which is
intended to inspire and equip peopleto be collaborative problem solvers.
There'll be an e learning platform.
There's the book, there's goingto be consulting and so on.
So we want to make a concertedeffort to help others be able to
do this work more effectively.
Laura May (41:46):
Well, look, thank you so much, Rob, again.
And thank you so much, Mariah, forthe first, but hopefully not the last
time, for joining me here today onthe Conflict Tipping podcast, it has
been a pleasure speaking with you andfor everyone else, until next time,
this is Laura May with the ConflictTipping podcast from Mediate.Com.
Hello and welcome to the Conflict Tipping Podcast from Mediate.com,
the podcast that explores socialconflict and what we can do about it.
I'm your host, Laura May.
And today I have with me two incrediblepractitioners who work to bring people
together to solve tough problems,Rob Fersh, and Mariah Levison.
Rob is the founder and a senior advisorat Convergence, and Mariah is the
(00:34):
president and CEO, and they have cometogether to co-author a new book titled
From Conflict to Convergence, comingtogether to Solve Tough Problems.
Rob has over 45 years of experience.
Which is actually so many yearsof experience in bridging policy
differences in Washington, DC and beyond.
While Mariah also has decades ofexpertise, not to be undersold there,
(00:58):
in consensus building mediationand collaborative processes.
So today we'll be digging intotheir work and their new book.
So welcome Rob and Mariah.
Rob Fersh (01:08):
Thanks very much, Laura.
I
Mariah Levison (01:09):
so much for having us.
We're excited to be here today.
Laura May (01:12):
Now I am so glad to have you here as well.
And it's worth saying that Rob wasactually one of the very first guests.
He was on the first episode ofthe Conflict Tipping podcast
along with your colleague, Monika.
So it's great to have him back andMariah, fantastic to have you here.
So I'm going to start off withhopefully an easy question.
(01:33):
And that is what inspired you towrite From Conflict to Convergence?
And maybe I'll throw that to Mariah.
Mariah Levison (01:43):
Well, I feel really lucky that my whole background has been in
conflict resolution and problem solvingreally at all levels from family to
policy, but I've spent most of my careerworking on policy conflicts for a long
time at the state of Minnesota, workingon state level issues, local government.
Mostly state, also tribal government aswell, before joining Convergence about two
(02:05):
years ago to work on national conflicts.
And I just feel so lucky to everyday get to bring people who feel
really divided into the same room.
And help them figure out that theyhave more in common than they think,
that they have more to learn from eachother than they think, and that they
often together find solutions thatare wiser and more durable than they
(02:26):
would have come up with on their own.
And if I didn't get to do that,and I were just watching the
news, I think I would feel, verydiscouraged about how divided we seem.
And of course going on that'stroubling, but I am so lucky to get to
see the other side of that, of folkscoming together and solving problems.
And I, I wanted to write the bookbecause I wanted to share that
(02:48):
hope with others that, you know,it's not just a theory for us.
It's the work that we do every daythat we see that bringing people
together and having them solveproblems together really does work.
So I wanted to share that message of hopeand also some tools, hopefully for how
others can do some of the things thathave worked really well for Rob and I
on, on, tough public types of issues.
(03:09):
How about for you,
Rob Fersh (03:10):
Well, thanks, Mariah.
And I echo much of what you had to say.
I have been doing this particular kindof work for a quarter of a century
and you and I both have experiencedsuccess in bringing people together
across divides my own background.
includes having been an advocate fora particular point of view for many
years, working for Congress in theUnited States for a number of years.
(03:33):
But with the successes we've had tobridge divides amongst people who
didn't even think they could talkto each other on important issues.
It seemed to, I think, both of usimportant to share what we've learned
and what we've done with others becausea lot more people can do this work.
It's not rocket science.
It requires some study andknowledge and some skill development.
(03:53):
But I think both of us share a passionto help make the world a little more
friendly, a little more collaborative, alittle more effective by getting people
to work together across their differences.
And the book is the vehicle by which wethought we could put together our ideas
in a way that a lot of people could absorbthem and potentially put them to use, no
(04:14):
matter where they work, whether it's inpolicy, whether they work in business or
nonprofits, or whether they're on academiccampuses, we think the problem solving
methodology that we've been using can bewidely applied to a lot of circumstances,
a lot of people throughout the world
Laura May (04:31):
And I mean, it sounds like a book that's great for everybody,
so we could all go buy it now.
But I'm also really struck bysome of the language you used.
Rob, you mentioned that it wasabout bringing people who thought
they couldn't talk together.
They felt they couldn't talktogether, ultimately to the table.
And Mariah, you mentioned as well,this idea of people who felt like
(04:52):
they couldn't get along, or they feltlike they couldn't reach convergence.
And then ultimately for you,there's again, this feeling of, of
hope when you see that it happens.
I'm hearing a lot about emotional divide.
Is that the key divide that you'reredressing with your methods or
is there more to it than that?
Mariah Levison (05:10):
Well, I think one of the things you're touching on there
is that we take a very relationshipcentric approach to the work.
So we spend time, weintentionally go slow.
We spend more time than I think peoplesometimes do to let folks get to know each
other, to find the things that they havein common on an interpersonal level, but
(05:31):
also to go through some processes thathelp them figure out that they do, in
fact, have more shared goals and valuesthan they thought, and that kind of thing
creates a foundation of a relationshipthat enables them to then do the hard
work of figuring out solutions together.
And so I think that that relationalapproach that we take and we spend time
(05:52):
doing, sort of traditional conflictresolution, things like making sure
that folks have time to have mealstogether, just have time and space are
in the same physical place together,which has become more and more rare.
And that does, I think, change the wayfolks are feeling about each other,
feeling about the potential to come upwith solutions and move forward together
Laura May (06:13):
And so it's about addressing that relational components and the
emotions and values attached to itbefore people can really start to
intellectualize in a way and start to getto the, whether it's the policy issues
of the specific conflict or what haveyou, if I'm understanding correctly.
Rob Fersh (06:29):
I would just jump in to say yes, that's so.
I don't think I normally would leadwith the word emotional about what we're
trying to do, even though you're ontosomething there Laura May, you know a
lot of the book And the early parts ofthe book focus on what we call mindsets.
So it may be emotions run high ordon't run high amongst these people.
(06:50):
In many cases, they justdon't know each other.
And from a distance, they assume becausethey disagree, they can't work together.
And so we work really hard to explainhow a collaborative mindset can not
only make you more willing to come to atable, and most people come to our tables
aren't necessarily in a collaborativemindset when they start, but also, but
(07:10):
end up there and up at a point wherethey understand that conflict is healthy
and the mindset about conflict changes.
They understand that if they get curious,they might learn something new, as
opposed to simply preparing to answerand respond or debate with other people.
And they also learn, and we see this overand over again, that other people do share
(07:31):
their values, they may disagree on howto implement them, but underneath it all,
people really want the same things, andto the extent we can begin to have people
see each other more accurately, and thengive each other the benefit of the doubt,
that's another mindset that we aim for.
So.
We're trying to create a culture, ifyou will, of relationship that allows
people's hearts and minds to open toeach other's points of view without
(07:54):
having to compromise their principles.
And the hope is that over time,they'll find enough areas of common
ground that they can work togetherto solve tough problems where their
divisions stand in the way of progress.
Laura May (08:06):
And so this mindset, I mean, is that what you refer to as higher ground?
Cause I know that that is a conceptthat comes up in the book, right?
Is that about mindset?
Mariah Levison (08:15):
We talk about higher ground throughout the book, and what
we're referring to most is the ideathat I think increasingly in our world
folks are worried about having tocompromise their principles and their
values, and I think one of the mostimportant messages of the book is that
in our experience, folks really don'thave to compromise their principles and
(08:36):
their values to solve tough problems.
That doesn't mean that they haveto compromise on some of the
ways that they, decide to achievethese high level goals and values.
It's not that compromise doesn'tplay any part, and certainly we're
fans of compromise, but we agreethat we don't want folks compromising
really important values like freedomand security and kindness and
(08:59):
other shared values that we have.
And so a big piece of ourmethodology is about helping folks
find this kind of higher ground.
where we unpack what's going on inthe conflict when folks think it
can only be this or that and whatthe other guys say they want as a
thing that compromises my values.
But really underneath that, when weunpack what are these shared goals,
(09:22):
what are these shared values, what areall the needs and concerns that are
coming from both sides, then we havereally fertile ground to come up with
solutions that integrate meeting theneeds, kind of maximizing, meeting as
many needs of as many people as we can.
And so that's the conceptof higher ground solutions.
We talk about it both as a process thatgets there a type of solution, but we also
(09:45):
talk about it in our section on mindsets.
And that's to have the mindset thatthis type of higher ground solution
is in fact possible because I thinktoo many folks think it's not.
It's a win lose sort of situation.
It's a zero sum sort of situation.
And so to be more willing to gointo things, recognizing that, hey,
there's a way forward here througha higher ground type solution.
Laura May (10:07):
All right.
And so I understand then thatthe book is filled with real life
stories and examples that perhapshelp illustrate your methodology
and the power of your methodology.
So I'd actually like each of you tomaybe share with me your favorite
story from the book, or a little sneakpeek of your favorite story and why
(10:27):
it means so much to you personally,
Rob Fersh (10:31):
Well, I have a number of favorite stories in the book, but
probably the one that stands out for meis really from my very first experience
trying to bridge the divides on ahuge national issue, which was health
care coverage in the United States.
And back in 2003 some people approachedme about the fact that nearly 50
million Americans did not have healthcare coverage in the United States,
(10:54):
and this is even just before foundingConvergence, I, I pilot tested the idea
that maybe we could bring together peoplewhose disagreements stood in the way of
progress on, on the issue of health care.
And in the United States, there wasa terrible debate during the Clinton
administration where people went towar with each other and the Clinton
plan never got off the ground.
(11:15):
We assembled many of the same peoplewho had been at war during the Clinton
debate to try to work on how to coveras many people as quickly as possible
. So one of my favorite stories is there was a person at the table,
who represented the American MedicalAssociation, and she was very nice.
So she was an economist,very knowledgeable.
In the beginning of theprocess, she was very outspoken.
(11:37):
And AMA had done a lot of homeworkand had some interesting ideas
about how to cover the uninsured.
But as the process unfolded,she got quieter and quieter.
And finally, at the meeting wherewe actually reached an agreement
on how to cover nearly 50 millionAmericans with health care
coverage, with health insurance.
She came up to me at a lunch break andsaid, Rob, you have ruined my life.
(12:01):
of course I responded somethinglike, I hear that all the time.
I've got four kids after all, you know,what is your particular reason for
the fact that I've ruined your life?
And she simply looked at meand said, I just can't see the
world the way I used to see it.
So many bright people in this roomhave said things I never thought of.
And while I still believe a lotof what I started with, I just
(12:24):
can't see the world the same way.
And that's what our processesare about, is creating at least a
window to broaden your horizons.
It's not about compromisingyour deep values or your deep
beliefs, but to see that everyoneonly has a piece of the puzzle.
And so that maiden voyage for me, thatwas the first time I ever worked on a
big national issue on a bridge buildingway that was using this methodology.
(12:47):
It was a hugely important proofpoint that people could move at least
partway toward understanding otherpeople and find areas where they
could work together more effectivelyon issues of great concern to them.
Laura May (12:59):
And how about you, Mariah, what's your favorite story for the book?
Mariah Levison (13:04):
Well, one of the things that I loved working on in my career and
felt so honored to be a part of was a citycouncil and a community coming together
following the police shooting of PhilandoCastile in a small city on the outskirts
of our capital called Falcon Heights, andI love this story because of the outcomes
(13:24):
that occurred at different levels, butalso because it illustrates that this
methodology works even on some of themost contentious issues of our time.
So after Philando was killed, manypeople came to the city council really
upset and angry and folks were yellingand the council shut down the meetings
a couple of times, not sure what to do.
(13:44):
And so they reachedout and asked for help.
And I was fortunate enough to getto help them design a process that
would help them decide how to moveforward as a city and as a community.
And it had many parts.
And one of the pieces was that weheld a lot of conversations with the
community that would inform a taskforce that was working on changing
policy, but also the goals of the citycouncil members themselves, they really
(14:07):
wanted to also focus on relationshipsand healing for the community,
and the city and the police force.
And so something that has always stoodout in my mind is that on the first
night of this community conversation,there were maybe 150 people there.
One of the people in the room was PhilandoCastile's best friend, John Thompson,
who I later became friends with and whowas not planning to come that night, but
(14:30):
Philando's mom encouraged him to come.
And so I have always been touched by that.
And we were holding the meeting in theevening in a church in the community.
And at the end of the night,I was finishing cleaning up
and getting ready to leave.
And I saw that by the front door, thepastor was standing off to the side.
It was a small church.
And so they, they were didn't have otherstaff there to close up the church.
(14:51):
So the pastor was standing there.
It was quite late in the evening,but on the other side of the church
there were talking John Thompsonand the chief of the police
force, whose name was also John.
And they were deep in conversation andthey just kept talking and talking.
And I just was touched by thisopportunity for them to be able
to talk face to face and buildmore understanding of each other.
And I learned later how much thatconversation influenced both of
(15:15):
their thinking to move out oftheir kind of defensive postures
and oppositional corners andreally talk about each of their
experiences and learn from each other.
And I remember feeling so torn aboutthis woman, this poor pastor who
was up so late and letting us useher space and wanting to tell them,
they needed to wrap it up, but alsothinking what a unique conversation.
And I sure don't want to interrupt it andtell them to, you know, to wrap it up.
(15:39):
But I've just always loved the storybecause I think in a public policy
context, there's so rarely theopportunity for folks to just have
a conversation like that, a realheart to heart across a really deep
divide where people are feeling.
so divided, so scared, so angry,and that really it took very little.
(16:03):
I mean, we, we structured the nightin a very thoughtful way and all of
that, but they just needed some spaceto come together and to have a moment
that then was very impactful for bothof them and went on to, you know,
change the trajectory of many things.
I think it's an especially powerfulstory because I think a place where our
country feels particularly stuck is aroundissues around police community relations.
(16:27):
Safety.
We're in an election year.
We're hearing a lot about safetyand safety, of course, is a really
fundamental human value, youknow, irrespective of politics.
We all want to feel safe.
We all want to live in safe communities.
And just seeing, you know, people acrossthe full range of thinking on these issues
come together and make their communitysafer and better and more equitable
(16:49):
and all of those things is a story.
I love and.
Not to belabor the point, butI, myself, got to develop really
touching relationships withpeople who participated in that.
And in fact, I wrote to Philando'smom to let her know that the
story would be included in the bookbecause you know, it's her story.
And I wanted her to know that.
And she wrote back such a lovelymessage telling me how honored she was.
(17:12):
And I felt like, Oh my gosh,I'm the one who's honored.
Like I'm the mom of two sons andI can't imagine losing my son.
And so some of the personal experiencesthat I had I still carry with me.
Laura May (17:22):
Incredible.
Okay.
So then coming a bit to the methodology,I mean, I'm assuming step one is
make sure you pack extra coffee andsnacks in case it goes late at night.
But I mean, beyond that, what are someof the tried and tested strategies
from your book that listeners canstart using immediately to help
navigate conflicts in their own lives?
Rob Fersh (17:44):
You know, basically, the whole process is about building
relationships of trust amongst people.
So before you do that, you have tofigure out, okay what's the issue
at hand, whether you're in a familydispute, a community dispute,
divisions of a business disagreeingon where the expansion should be.
So you need to identify what's the issue.
(18:04):
You need to identify who needs to talkto whom in order to make progress,
who's got the knowledge, experience andinfluence to make a difference on that
issue, whether it's an internal issueor a public policy issue, and then you
need to be able to engage people andmany of them are scared to come, or
they come in a defensive posture and forthem to see the possibility of coming
(18:26):
to a table on an issue that's stuckor very difficult would work for them.
So a lot is done to prepare, to dohomework in advance, understand what the
issues are and who needs to talk to whom.
And then the other, major steps areto convene people in a way that's
skillful with what I call ground rules.
So people don't attack motives.
(18:48):
They learn to listen and share time.
And then there's a skillful processof facilitating conversation where
the group often develops some basicprinciples to even guide whatever
solutions they come up with.
And that's a great starting pointbecause most people will agree again
on goals, on basic principles, evenif they disagree on how to get there.
So, for instance, in a project wedid on economic mobility, there
(19:10):
were people from business groups andpeople from liberal advocacy groups.
The liberal advocacy groups wanted a muchhigher minimum wage, and the business
community resisted a uniform high minimumwage, citing all the information they
had about how it might affect smallbusinesses or different geographic areas.
But basically, they agreed ona fundamental principle, which
is, if you work full time,you shouldn't live in poverty.
(19:33):
Okay.
Well, that gives yousomething to talk about.
So, is it higher minimum wages?
Is it better government supports?
Is it more training?
Whatever it is, but at least peoplewere aligned on values and, and
understood there was compassion onboth sides for people who are working
and not making enough money to get by.
So, that's the beginnings of the process.
Eventually the goal of the process isto reach agreement on ideas and then
(19:56):
figure out who's going to implement them.
It's possible who's ever conveningit has the power to implement.
But otherwise, we often haveto organize the stakeholders.
Or the leaders and experts inthat particular field to then
work together to put theirideas into practice in the world.
Mariah Levison (20:11):
I think you did a great summary there, Rob.
Maybe one, not super exciting thingI would add is just to emphasize that
all of that takes some time, and thatit's a really good investment of time.
It takes time to slow down, get to knoweach other, to have meals together to come
to understand each other and the issuesin a more nuanced and thoughtful way, to
(20:34):
develop these more, you know, creativeand thoughtful and integrative solutions.
It all takes some time and peoplewill sometimes ask about that.
And I'll say it does.
And you should be prepared for that.
And you should resource that andinvest in that, and it still takes a
lot less time than intractable conflictfighting core you know, the alternative
(20:55):
to getting it resolved . You know, ifit could be solved quickly, go for it.
Definitely do that.
But presumably, if you're thinking aboutthis approach, it's feeling kind of stuck.
And so that investment of time,I think, is really worth making.
Rob Fersh (21:07):
Let me, if I can just jump in with a quick story about
that, that reinforces Mariah's point.
Convergence is now 15 years old,but when we turned 10, we had
a celebration that we survived.
You know, we were started in 2009 atthe height of the greatest recession
at that point, the United States hadsince the 1930s and somehow we got by.
(21:28):
But we had a terrific panel that dayof people who had been in various
of our projects who'd been socalled stakeholders at our projects.
And these are high level people atthe national level, very busy and
don't have a lot of time and normallyrun from one meeting to the next.
And we had this panel and thena woman who'd been on our board.
(21:49):
Raise your hand and askthe question to this group.
There's a couple hundred people inthe room saying, okay, it took you
a year and a half or so to get thesolutions in each of your projects.
Couldn't this have been done ifwe just locked you in a room for
10 days and just went at it andtalked about it and got it done?
And to a person, and it was evensurprising to me, they said,
(22:10):
no, it took time to build trust.
To have meals, to absorb what wasgoing on, to think about things in
between, to ask questions and tolearn and to grow with each other.
And that none of them suggestedthat the process was too slow.
To a person, they said, no, take the time.
It was well worth it.
(22:30):
It was a great use of our time.
Mariah Levison (22:32):
Rob made me think of something that I think
is really interesting about ourprocess that does take time.
Is that one of the things that happensis that folks do have an identity
shift, and I think that is particularlyinteresting in this moment where we
think a lot about identities, and they'vebecome so central to how we think about
divided issues, is that generally,not always, but generally folks come
(22:54):
in, wearing some sort of identity hat.
I'm union, I'm labor, I'm prothis, I'm against this, I come from
this demographic or the other one.
And often they're, you know, wearingthat hat really prominently because
they're there to be a representative.
I mean, to some degree,that's intentional.
We want this full array ofperspectives represented in these
processes in order to achieve thesewiser and more durable solutions.
(23:16):
But over time, I watch people evolvethis new identity of a problem solver.
And they feel really bonded to thepeople in the room, and they feel really
committed to not only achieving theconsensus solutions, but getting them
adopted and implemented in the world.
And I just see this new identityemerge it's like, I can almost see
them taking off the identity hat thatthey came into the room with and putting
(23:37):
on this other one, like, this otheridentity becoming so strong, maybe not
for the rest of their life forever,but at least when they're in the room
and we do see, I think, as Rob was alsoalluding to, that for many people, that
identity sticks to some degree, thatit's been a formative experience to come
into a room with people who you didn'tthink you had anything in common with,
(23:58):
you didn't think you could agree toanything with, you didn't think really
had anything to add to the conversation.
Maybe had suspected themof negative motives.
To see that, whether youagree with them fully or not.
These are people who have,you know, important needs and
concerns and who I can work with.
We see that perspective shift lastfor folks and see them approaching
their work in a different way, fora long time to come in many cases.
Laura May (24:22):
I mean, that really chimes with my experience as well
in sort of the mediation world andthe facilitation world, because
I do a bunch of facilitationswithin companies across companies.
And, you know, at the startof things, people are always
like, why are we in this room?
And by the end, like without fail,every single group is like, I can't
believe how much we have in common.
I just can't believe it.
(24:44):
And it's always really striking.
So it's an incredibly interesting andpowerful experience that it sounds
like these people are going through.
So huge kudos on that process.
Anyway, so then turningfrom your successes.
What are some of the challenges you facein implementing these methodologies?
Rob Fersh (25:04):
So it depends on what you mean by implementing the methodology.
I mean, there is achallenge to begin with.
To get people in the door, andthat alone is an achievement.
In fact in the book, you'll seethe story about health care.
I mentioned before, and one of thepeople on our board who was a participant
in that early health care projectwith me before Convergence, Stuart
Butler, who at the time was with thevery conservative Heritage Foundation.
(25:29):
His comment in the book was, after the socalled fiasco of the Clinton healthcare
plan in the 1990s, where people wereat each other's throats, it was just
remarkable we even got people in theroom to talk to each other to begin with.
So, especially in this day and age whereso much partisan politics and really
a lot of so much bad blood and nowassumptions about each other run so deep
(25:51):
in the United States it's not easy toget people to come to a common table.
So that's, that's a big challenge.
There can be other challenges gettingpeople to find common ground, but
I think for the most part virtuallyevery project Mariah and I've done has
been successful in getting that done.
Then the other huge issue isimplementation of the ideas.
And this can range, If it's a familydispute and the participants are there
(26:15):
and they have a good conversationand they know what they need to
do, it might happen right away.
Or if you're a business leader or anon profit leader and you've convened
people and you've got decision makingauthority and you've brought everyone's
points of view into play, the wholeidea of this process is to be inclusive
of all the people whose voices matter.
Can push thinking to a higherlevel and whose voices can
(26:36):
help get better solutions.
Or a governor might have convened andmight have the power to implement ideas.
That's, easier and more likelyto bring immediate results.
A lot of the work we've both done hasbeen more open ended public policy kinds
of work and in some cases, companiesmight leave our process with ideas.
They go ahead and implement in theirown companies, Walmart and McDonald's
(26:59):
went ahead and took the ideas andimplemented them in their own companies.
But when it comes to having to havea legislature, a city council, or
somebody actually pass legislation orother public policy, it may take some
time to organize that and get it done.
So, none of our projects are selfimplementing, and then sometimes
politics can override what people arewilling to do in a particular moment.
(27:22):
But the fact that we got people togetherand the ideas are there and ready to go at
any time when the moment is opportune isreally important, and we think it's really
important for the stakeholders who comeup with these ideas, these shared ideas,
to get invested and for them to carry theball forward in moving these ideas out.
Convergence, for instance, isneutral, never takes positions, even
(27:44):
in favor of whatever our groups comeup with, because it's always of the
moment, whatever they came up with.
And so we try to make sure that we staysomewhat pristine, that people know they
don't have to fight us about any policy.
Our job is to get people to come togetherand find common ground and then to
help them, convene them as necessary.
Facilitate them as necessary.
Help them move their ideas forward.
Mariah Levison (28:07):
Something that's surprising for most people is I wouldn't
say it's easy to build this trust andthese higher ground solutions, but it
works really reliably as Rob said, andalmost all the processes here I have been
a part of for what's getting to be quite along time now, we develop those outcomes.
But the other piece that he talkedabout, about getting people into the
room and getting solutions implemented.
(28:30):
Those are fairly uniqueConvergence challenges.
Convergence does a pretty rarething where we look at the world and
say, where is there some agreementthat uh this isn't working.
So we recently had a project calledsupports for working families.
We said, you know, there's agreementon the left and the right that it's
too hard to raise a family in Americatoday, maybe for different reasons.
(28:52):
But we haven't seen enough bigsolutions, policy movement on solutions.
So we brought a group togetherand they came up with some
very thoughtful solutions.
And we're in the implementationphase of that work now.
But that work of getting folks into theroom and then getting them implemented
when we're the ones who identify the issueand do all the convening is challenging.
And in my past job where I ran somethingcalled the Minnesota State Office for
(29:15):
collaboration and dispute resolution,I worked from within government
and the processes were called forby political leaders, legislators.
Executive branch leaders, governor,state agency leaders, tribal leaders.
And in those cases, both of thoseproblems were largely taken care of
when the relevant political leadercalls folks together and says, you
(29:36):
know, I'm willing to be within somebounds neutral on the outcome of this,
but I want all of the stakeholders tocome together and present the solution.
Then I'll do everything in mypower to see it be implemented.
People want to be at that table.
It's not very hard to get peopleto that table for the most part.
And it's also then not very hard toget the solutions implemented, not
easy, but not so challenging becausepolitical pieces are in place.
(30:00):
And so a spin that I would put on thechallenge that Rob named is and where
we end the book, I think, is in a callfor more collaborative leadership.
So I think one of the things thatwe want to do with this book is
call on more leaders in all sectors.
Political leaders, leaders of companies,of academic institutions, religious
institutions, schools, to play more ofthat convener role and to not, I think,
(30:25):
have the fear that the solution willnot be a good one, because inherently
when you bring together the fullrange of perspective and have them
build consensus, they're going to comeup with something that's thoughtful
and nuanced and meets lots of needs.
Otherwise everyone isn'tgoing to agree to it.
So to have kind of the couragethat bringing folks together.
Works and then we can have moreof these types of higher ground
(30:46):
solutions emerging and then gettingimplemented because the leaders who
can implement them are on board.
Laura May (30:54):
I mean, reflecting on some of the work that's been done here in
Europe as well, just to sort of makea bit of a, a jump across the pond,
because I mean, it's hugely in vogueat the moment for all the international
EU funded projects, to have thatstakeholder co creation and bring
people into the room, as you mentioned,as was the case in your past role.
And people love to be involved.
(31:15):
They absolutely want to talk about whethertheir street should be regreened or
whatever the case may be, or the roleof tourism in their economy and stuff.
And so, I mean, I think there often,the challenge is making sure the right
people are in the room because thatso strongly influences the outcome.
And so how do you cope with thatparticular challenge at Convergence,
of making sure that you're notaccidentally skewing the outcome by
(31:37):
having the wrong people in the room?
Can you talk a bit about thatprocess of person selection?
Rob's nodding.
So.
Mariah Levison (31:44):
so we do.
We uh, at Convergence, wecall it discovery and design
because it sounds cute and isreflective of what really happens.
But we, we invest, I think, more onthe front end again than sometimes some
groups do to learn and design the process.
So we're really thoughtfulabout doing a lot of homework.
And I think that the most distinctivething about that homework is that we're
(32:08):
really focused on interviewing people whorepresent the full range of perspective.
So we read documents and do other things,but we really want to hear that full range
of perspective because that really helpsgive us the clarity to design a process
that will meet the goals of the process.
And one piece of that design is makingsure we understand who are the range of
(32:30):
people and of influence who are neededto be in a room to get the job done.
As Rob said earlier, it's not rocketscience, but it's really making that
investment up front, not just opening itup to whoever, but being really thoughtful
about who's there and how we engage them.
And by listening to a lot of peoplefrom the beginning, it builds trust
(32:50):
in the process, which helps toget people who are more skeptical.
Into the eventual room, whatever thatroom looks like, sometimes that's,
30 people who meet once a month for ayear, sometimes it's hundreds of people
providing feedback, and five meetings.
I mean, it can look lots of differentways, but starting from the place
of really listening to that fullrange of perspective, builds that
(33:11):
trust to help bring people into theroom who are not so sure if it's,
you know, a good use of their time.
Rob Fersh (33:17):
Our goal at Convergence has never been just to get people
who are very close to agreementjust disagree a little bit.
They're in the middle.
It's always been to get the widestpossible swath of people who are at
least willing to come to a table to reachagreement, because the wider the legs
of the stool in terms of disagreement,the more durable the answers are,
if you get them to common ground.
(33:39):
So it depends.
Sometimes some projects arrivethat are pretty fully together.
And we know who's going to talk to whom
.But with these interviews, we always ask people, well, who are we missing?
What perspectives do we need to hear?
We're aware of who might be aspoiler, and we have to make a
choice whether they keep them close.
I mean, we always try tocommunicate with everybody.
(34:01):
There are some people who aren't thatgood in group settings and they may not
make it to the table and they may behappy not to be, but it's always important
to try to be as inclusive as possible.
We usually create a culture in the roomin which people who literally didn't
think they could talk to each other.
We had a project where an academic whohad written a book, very critical of
prisons in the United States, includingprivate prisons, told us about The
(34:27):
trepidation he had because we sat himnext to a private prison official at
the first dinner of the group, andhe texted, he texted his wife saying,
Oh, my God, you can't believe wherethey're going to sit me with a dinner.
And then they hit it off, and it turnedout they had a lot in common, and now
they actually are colleagues workingtogether and finding that they have
each bring value to each other's work.
(34:47):
So I think 1 last point I'd liketo sort of make, and on top of
everything else we just said is.
It's really important for people toknow this isn't soft and naive stuff.
This isn't, it's proven.
And it takes a lot ofguts to come to the table.
And it's hard nosed.
And many people are hard nosed.
It's not about just being polite and nice.
It's not just for nice people.
(35:08):
I mean, we do think we create aculture in the room where people
get respectful of each other.
And often develop tremendous personalrelationships despite political or policy
or other or business sense differences.
But this is, this is hard nosedstuff to get people in a room and
to have a conversation, to go deep.
(35:29):
Tempers can flare, but normally we'reable to draw people back to their
fundamental values, their wishes,and to a code of conduct that they've
agreed to about how they will treateach other in the midst of their
disagreement, we urge strong disagreement.
That's fine because disagreementpushes thinking to a higher level.
But I wanted to emphasize that this isnot just about being nice and only nice
(35:50):
people do it, or just being polite.
It's far from that.
Although often the result is people becomemore polite and more understanding and
more loving toward each other, but that'snot guaranteed, nor is it necessary.
Laura May (36:03):
And so I guess in a related question, what would you
say to listeners who are currentlystruggling with seemingly intractable
conflicts in their own lives?
What are some tips or some, evensome hope as you put it earlier,
Mariah, you could give them?
Mariah Levison (36:19):
You know, I've been blessed to do this, all day, every
day for most of my career across, themost divided issues that we have in
our country and see that, again,if not easily, but reliably, folks
can come together Build trust, buildrelationships and find wiser and more
durable solutions in terms of tips.
(36:40):
One of my favorites, a thing thatI say all the time is is giving
people the benefit of the doubt.
It's one of our mindsets in today'sworld I think that's getting increasingly
hard with all of these things comingat us about how, how, you know, bad and
untrustworthy and what bad motives theother side, whoever the other side is
(37:00):
ideological or or other divides uh, butI, often say, you know, most people do
not wake up in the morning thinking, howcan I make the world a worse place today?
Most people are doing whatthey think is the right thing.
It doesn't mean that it's always,the best or the most effective or
the most efficient or backed by dataor always kind, but people are doing
(37:21):
what they think is the right thing.
And if we can start from giving themthe benefit of the doubt that even
though it doesn't make sense to me,they probably have a story for what
they're doing that makes as muchsense to them as my story makes to me.
So starting there from the benefitof the doubt, another one of our
mindsets is about curiosity, tryingto figure out why are they doing this
(37:42):
thing that doesn't make sense to me?
Let me try to understand alittle bit better and then form
some relationship with folks.
I also really encourage folks to practice.
vulnerability really sharing from theheart ourselves about what's important to
us, what shapes our views, our values whatare the personal experiences that have
shaped our views that really encouragesother people to do the same thing.
(38:06):
And that really creates a strongfoundation for relationships.
And once folks have those things inplace, not being afraid to engage,
giving each other the benefit of thedoubt, getting curious, having some
relationships, then they're able toforge those higher ground solutions.
And that's, that's really whatall of our mindsets are about.
And so cultivating those kinds of mindsetsis I think the best tip I can give folks.
(38:29):
I think those mindsets are reallyfoundational to everything else.
Rob Fersh (38:33):
do, Mariah did a really good job.
I really like, and, uh, is thenotion that you yourself, if
you're facing a situation, needto attend to your own needs.
And your own pressures and stresses.
And you know, William Ury's new book,Possible, is quite brilliant about this.
He has a concept about going tothe balcony, a way of looking
(38:53):
at things distance, a bit.
And when you go to the balcony, calmdown, you're not in a fray, you're not
going into a conversation where you'reready just to debate and answer and react.
But you develop a capacityto go to another gear.
And that when you go to that othergear, you can get curious, you're
not as, you know, triggered.
You have a chance to askquestions and learn more.
(39:14):
And when you learn more and hear moreabout people underlying experiences
and their values and why they believewhat believe, chances are, together
is the first step to know that justthe fray to debate or challenger or
retaliate against people who you feelhave said things you disagree with.
It's not a good place to be if you wantto be a collaborative problem solver.
(39:37):
you can't get angry fromtime to time lose it.
We all do.
Uh, But taking care of yourself tobegin with is a really important first
step to be able to have a constructiveconversation where so called high higher
ground kinds of solutions can emerge,whether spouse or with your children
or with or whoever it is you're talking
to.
Laura May (39:56):
Absolutely.
And I mean, speaking of Ury Imean, I think his other book.
Getting to yes with yourself is thebook that really goes into that as well.
Right?
So it's about making sure that youare yourself, I guess, psychologically
safe and whole you're, that's the, uh,you're taking your best self to the
table of facilitation or mediation or
Okay.
And so the book comes out on the 30th ofJuly, which is the day after my birthday.
(40:20):
So I would, yes, I wouldlike a signed copy.
And where will people be able to buythis book From Conflict to Convergence?
Where can they find it?
Mariah Levison (40:28):
You can buy it at all the places that you can buy books at,
Amazon, Barnes and Noble, bookshop.orgthat supports independent booksellers.
And we will be sending you asigned copy for your birthday.
Laura May, we so appreciate you havingus on today and wish you a happy
Laura May (40:45):
Thank you.
Totally fishing for presentss here.
Okay.
No, that's wonderful.
And for those who want to learn moreabout Convergence and your work, what's
the best way they should do that?
I
Mariah Levison (40:56):
You can visit our website, which is convergencepolicy.
org where you can learn moreabout all of these stories that
we've told, these processes.
You can learn more about the books andother ways that you can get involved.
We hope that one of the outcomes aboutthe book is that more people get involved
with Convergence, where there's lotsof ways for folks to work with us to
help bring people together and solvetough problems in their communities and
(41:18):
organizations that they're a part of.
So we hope folks will reachout and connect with us.
Laura May (41:23):
I hope they do too.
Rob Fersh (41:24):
I would just add to that, Laura May, that the book is part of
a new major initiative at Convergencecalled the Learning Lab, which is
intended to inspire and equip peopleto be collaborative problem solvers.
There'll be an e learning platform.
There's the book, there's goingto be consulting and so on.
So we want to make a concertedeffort to help others be able to
do this work more effectively.
Laura May (41:46):
Well, look, thank you so much, Rob, again.
And thank you so much, Mariah, forthe first, but hopefully not the last
time, for joining me here today onthe Conflict Tipping podcast, it has
been a pleasure speaking with you andfor everyone else, until next time,
this is Laura May with the ConflictTipping podcast from Mediate.Com.
Popular Podcasts
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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.