Using Equitable Power-With Decision Making Processes for the Tough Core Issues

6. Civic Knowledge and Skills

By Heidi Burgess

January 9, 2025

The rules of constructive confrontation are that one "strips away" as many of the overlay or "complicating" factors as possible, until one clearly exposes the core issues. These are the fundamental disagreements over high-stakes distributional issues (who should get a particular piece of land or a particular job, for example), moral disagreements (e.g., whether abortion should be the right of a women and her doctor to decide), and status conflicts (conflicts, for instance, between oppressed groups and their oppressors).

Typically, these conflicts cannot be negotiated, as values, and needs (such as identity and security) are not typically compromised, and these core issues tend to involve some combination of these factors. But that does not necessarily mean they are inevitably win-lose, or that competitive, winner-take-all, power-over battles are the only way to resolve these conflicts.

Needs, perhaps surprisingly, are usually win-win in nature, not win lose. That's because the more security one side feels, the less they are likely to threaten the security of the other side. The more one side feels its identity is respected, the more it will likely treat the other side with respect in return. The more one side feels it is being treated fairly, the more likely it is to treat the other side fairly. But if one feels one's security, identity or fair treatment are threatened, one is likely to lash back--often threatening the security, identity, or just treatment of the other. So, instead of being win-lose, needs are either win-win or lose-lose. So why not go for the double win?

Unfortunately, in America's ultra-polarized political climate, both sides are convinced that the other side will not allow them to have those things (and right now, they are probably right about that!). But the result is clearly lose-lose. Even the side in power is losing, because they can't accomplish what they want, due to opposition from the other side.

The solution to this problem is a power-with approach. Based on the notion of power-strategy mix, all parties to the conflict try to use a combination of the three basic power strategies: integrative power, exchange power, and coercive power, to get what they need, using as much of the first two types of power, and the least amount of coercive power as possible. Integrative power is created through respect, tolerance, transparency, and fair processes (including the rule of law and checks and balances on governmental power) that create legitimacy for any coercive power that is necessary. Exchange power takes advantage of the fact that people will more likely cooperate with the other, and give them what they want and need, if they are given what they want and need in return. This does not mean one needs to compromise one's basic morals, or one's identity. It is taking advantage of the fact that these fundamental core issues are actually win-win, and not win-lose.

We explore these ideas and more in the readings below.