In May class with Dr. Pete, we grouped into teams of three. One played Dr. P.W. Roland, another played Dr. H.P. Jones, and last person was an observer. Dr. Pete himself played Mr. Cardoza, a fruit exporter. Both Dr. Roland and Dr. Jones who are biologists for pharmaceutical firms are urgently seeking purchase of Ugli oranges to save lives. The oranges are only available from Mr Cardoza. How they can resolve this situation? Some team found the solution easily and some struggled with no solutions but yelling to each other “ I need all of the oranges”. There was simple solution which was only available when both provide honest and open information to resolve the problem together. The team who engaged in honest dialogue soon realized that they need a different part of orange. Dr. Roland needs rinds of orange and Dr. Jones needs Juice of orange. It means they can buy orange together and take only what they want at half of the cost. The team who just wanted to win and secure all the oranges available without making effort to understand each other and the situation had no winners. Also, there was no team shared the reason why they needs orange with Mr. Cardonza. Who knows he can give all of his oranges at no or lower cost?
Dr. Pete further explained with two mental models in terms of resolving conflict. Model I, you must win no matter what it takes and control everything. Model II, you are making open and honest dialogues and willing redirect your direction with new information. As we leaned in this role play, only open dialogues with honest questions and answers can lead you to the right direction.
As an architects, we always have to discuss with other team members, consultants, clients and others to resolve conflicts. Are we settling with compromised solutions or truly seeking for win win solutions?
Jae Lee
Beck Architecture
