Conflict – Page 4 – understand-culture

Sworn Testimony

During a hearing, called by their boss, Americans are careful, factual, cooperative. Most importantly they are discreet. Anger, impatience, any lack of self control is considered to be unprofessional.

The boss listens carefully to what each party to the conflict claims. In a formal hearing, within the legal system, parties providing testimony first swear that they will provide „the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.“

The consequences for lying – perjury – are serious: a felony which can lead to a prison sentence for up to five years.

Perjury: the voluntary violation of an oath or vow either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath; false swearing.

American managers take very seriously their obligation, duty, responsibility to resolve conflicts within their organizations. Any attempt by a conflict party to manipulate that process is punished quickly and severely.

“It was me, but ….”

There are numerous cases brought to court in America each year. Some of these involve suspects who wish to clarify their misdeeds amongst public discourse. This is particularly prevalent in the current case regarding the suspect of the Boston Marathon Bombings.

The suspect in the case pleaded not guilty although his defense lawyer admits “it was him.” This brings about the right to appear in court to argue your side of the story and expect a fair hearing followed by a fair trial.

Fruit or Vegetable?

In 1893, the case Nix v.s. Hedden found its way to the American Supreme Court. In this case, John Nix, John W. Nix, and Frank W. Nix filed a suit against Edward Hedden, a collector at the Port of New York, who had charged them a vegetable tax on their imported tomatoes.

The Nixes argued that, because a tomato is, botanically speaking, a fruit, the vegetable tax shouldn’t have applied.

At the trial, dictionary definitions were ignored, because, according to the Court, “dictionaries are admitted, not as evidence, but only as aids to the memory and understanding of the court.”

Instead, the Court looked at such things as the “ordinary meaning” of the words “fruit” and “vegetable” and precedent. In 1889, the case Robertson v. Salomon had established that, although technically white beans were seeds, they were eaten like vegetables instead of planted, so they should be taxed as a vegetable.

Ultimately, the court decided that a tomato should be taxed as a vegetable. The opinion of the court read: “Botanically speaking, tomatoes are the fruit of a vine, just as are cucumbers, squashes, beans, and peas.

But in the common language of the people, whether sellers or consumers of provisions, all these are vegetables which are grown in kitchen gardens, and which, whether eaten cooked or raw, are, like potatoes, carrots, parsnips, turnips, beets, cauliflower, cabbage, celery, and lettuce, usually served at dinner in, with, or after the soup, fish, or meats which constitute the principal part of the repast, and not, like fruits generally, as dessert.”

6th Amendment

The Bill of Rights are first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution which guaranty personal freedoms and limit governmental powers. The Sixth Amendment states:

„In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.“

The following part of the Sixth Amendment is named the confrontation clause: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right … to be confronted with the witnesses against him.”

The Confrontation Clause has its roots in both English Common Law, protecting the right of cross-examination, and Roman Law, which guaranteed persons accused of a crime the right to look their accusers in the eye.

According to the Bible, Acts 25:16, the Roman Governor Festus, discussing the proper treatment of his prisoner, Paul, stated: “It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man up to die before the accused has met his accusers face-to-face, and has been given a chance to defend himself against the charges.“

Embrace Conflict

In 2012, American business magazine Forbes published an article that lists several keys to dealing with workplace conflict. In the article, the author suggests that every business leader should adhere to the principle “don’t fear conflict; embrace it – it’s your job.”

The article also recommends that every conflict should be resolved quickly, and, if possible, business leaders should identify people who are likely to get into conflicts and stage pre-conflict interventions with everyone who seems likely to become involved.

Another article from About Money lists actions to avoid when resolving workplace conflicts. The top two points on the list advise leaders not to avoid conflict and not to meet separately with the people in conflict. Most articles from American business journals include similar advice.

Coffee Burns

In 1992, 79 year old Stella Liebeck bought a cup of coffee from a McDonald’s in New Mexico, spilled it on her lap, suffered multiple third-degree burns, and required skin grafts on her inner thighs and elsewhere. She subsequently sued McDonald’s.

Although the jury found Liebeck to be partly responsible for her injuries, based on evidence that McDonald’s coffee was unreasonably hot and had caused other injuries in the past, the jury decided to award Stella the equivalent of two days’ worth of coffee sales revenue for the entire restaurant chain. Some of the evidence presented at the trial includes:

1) An engineer from the University of Texas and the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation both testified that the risk of harm from the coffee was unacceptable.

2) An expert witness testified that the number of burns the coffee caused was insignificant compared to the number of cups of coffee sold every year.

3) A McDonald’s quality assurance manager testified that the coffee at the serving temperature was not fit for consumption because it would burn the throat.

4) After several other similar lawsuits, McDonald’s knew about the risk of serious burns from its coffee, but did not warn customers of the risk.

Fair Hearing

“A fair hearing is a judicial proceeding that is conducted in such a manner as to conform to fundamental concepts of justice and equality.

A fair hearing means that an individual will have an opportunity to present evidence to support his or her case and to discover what evidence exists against him or her . . . . during which time he or she may offer evidence, cross-examine opposition witnesses, and offer a defense.”

In criminal law, when an individual is arrested, a fair hearing means the right to be notified of the charge being brought against him or her and the chance to meet that charge.

Source: legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary(dot)com/fair+hearing

No Best Practice

Short-, mid-, long-term. Fast, faster, fastest. We know that Americans and Germans define those terms differently. So it is when resolving a conflict.

Germans seek lasting, best practice-like, resolutions. This requires more time upfront, but saves time by reducing the chances that the same or similar conflict arises. Should it arrive, the team need only refer back to the best practice resolution.

Americans seek pragmatic resolutions. Often “down and dirty”, neither elegant nor perfect, they are fast in order to maintain forward movement and team cohesion.

Americans rarely seek a best practice resolution to a given conflict. From their experience, every situation is unique. The context, the content, the people involved, the ramifications, may be similar, but are not the same. Resolution is not a matter of referring to a manual, a process description or an organizational chart.

6th Amendment, again

The Sixth Amendment states: „In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right … to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, ….“

For Americans, whether in the legal system or in the workplace, the right to a hearing is fundamental. The hearing allows for the parties in conflict to make their arguments and counter-arguments. It is the beginning of the formal process of conflict resolution. Americans expect the team lead to call a hearing quickly.

In a fair hearing the conflict parties have the opportunity to present evidence – including witnesses – and to discover what evidence is brought against them. The hearing also allows for questioning (cross-examination) of the opposing party‘s witnesses. A hearing is only fair if it is administered by an impartial third party.

In the American business context the manager, as judge, may resolve the conflict based on those arguments and counter-arguments, or use the hearing as a basis for further investigation into the reasons for the conflict.

Because American managers are responsible for the results their teams produce, they focus on maintaining internal team cohesion. Conflict of any kind threatens cohesion. After having learned of an internal conflict, American managers are inclined to call the conflict parties together at very short notice. That first hearing is direct, informal and personal. The manager wants to „get to the bottom of the problem.“

Litigious

Litigious: To be litigious means to argue, to contend, to take your dispute to the courts. American society has become very litigious. With a population of roughly 310 million people, the U.S. has 1.2 million attorneys, 200 law schools, graduating approximately 45,000 lawyers each and every year. The court of law is where conflict is resolved.

How conflict is resolved is foundational to any society. It is a system for balancing out conflicting interest. Conflict resolution is so central to our daily lives, in so many or our interactions, that we are continuously fascinated by how they play out.

This fascination is the reason why many movies and television shows are based on the law and legal proceedings. Among the most popular in the U.S. were: L.A. Law (1986-94), the classic Perry Mason (1957-66), The Defenders (1961-65), Law & Order (1990-2010).

The popularity of these shows has led to the reality court room shows, a combination of reality television and the workings of the American legal system. The best known are Judge Judy, The People‘s Court and Divorce Court.