Can workshops resolve when parties are intensely disagreeing?

This is a question that Sinh Vũ receives quite often: a company is experiencing tug-of-war among two or more parties, each with valid points, and the person in the middle begins to consider organizing a workshop to "untangle" the situation. The answer is not actually complicated, but it depends on a condition that many overlook before scheduling a meeting room.

There are several different types of disagreements

Before deciding whether to organize a workshop, you need to identify the level of disagreement.

• Disagreement about facts: both parties have different understandings of a reality, for example, who owns this decision, which number is correct, which process is running. This is the easiest type to resolve because it just requires presenting the facts for everyone to see.
• Disagreement about interests: each party wants different things and is struggling to express where their true interests lie. This is a type of workshop that can be resolved if facilitated correctly.
• Personal conflicts: Conflicts have escalated into dislike, distrust, or a history of hurt. This type of strategic workshop is not the right tool; a different channel is needed.

Most disagreements in businesses start at the level of data or interests, then gradually escalate to the personal level if not addressed early. Workshops are most beneficial when used at the first and second levels.

Necessary condition: genuine goodwill

Goodwill here does not mean that the parties must like or agree with each other beforehand. Goodwill means that each party genuinely wants to find a common solution, not just to win. This is a condition that many overlook when planning a workshop.

If one party enters the room with the goal of "I must win this session," the workshop will turn into a debate stage. Any consensus reached under those conditions is a false consensus, and it often collapses as soon as the parties leave the room, sometimes leaving worse consequences than before.

Separate the person from the problem. Focus on benefits, not positions. Create multiple options before making a choice. Rely on objective criteria.

Roger Fisher & William Ury, Getting to Yes (Harvard Negotiation Project)

These four principles only work when all parties agree to play by those rules. The facilitator helps maintain the rules, not create new ones.

The uncomfortable area that cannot be skipped

One thing many people are not mentally prepared for before entering a workshop: there will be very tense moments. This is not a sign that the workshop is failing; it is a normal sign when a group with diverse perspectives goes through what Sam Kaner calls the "groan zone": the period between conflicting viewpoints and when the group finds a common understanding.

There are no shortcuts through the noise. Any group that tries to jump straight to consensus will only achieve silence, not agreement.

Sam Kaner, Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making

The facilitator's role is to help the group endure this area and move through it, not to make it disappear by hastily ending early.

When to organize, and when not to

An important boundary: if you are unsure whether the other party is sincere, the right step is to talk privately with each party first, not to bring everyone into the same room immediately.

The viewpoint of Sinh Vũ

When Sinh Vũ takes on the role of facilitator, the first condition is complete neutrality: no bias towards either side, no vested interest in the outcome. This is essential for all parties to speak honestly in the room, not to save face.

Sinh Vũ keeps a data-driven approach, separating emotions from facts so both can be addressed appropriately, and accepts that the meeting may go through tense moments instead of pretending everything is fine. However, Sinh Vũ does not commit to resolving conflicts: that is the responsibility of the parties in the room.

If after the private conversations with each party Sinh Vũ finds that there is no goodwill, Sinh Vũ will speak frankly and suggest postponing, not organizing a workshop just for the sake of it. A session that does not meet the conditions is even more dangerous than having no session at all.