Seeking Understanding
Focusing on positions nearly led to unnecessary bloodshed in a dispute between farmers and the national oil company in Iraq after the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime.
Displaced farmers in the south of Iraq had banded together, leased land from the government, and used their last savings and borrowings to plant crops. Unfortunately, a few months later the farmers received letters calling for them to vacate the land immediately in accord with the fine print of their lease, because oil had been discovered under it.
Displaced farmers in the south of Iraq had banded together, leased land from the government, and used their last savings and borrowings to plant crops. Unfortunately, a few months later the farmers received letters calling for them to vacate the land immediately in accord with the fine print of their lease, because oil had been discovered under it.
The oil company said, “Get off our land.”
The farmers replied, “It’s our land, and we’re not leaving.”
The oil company threatened to call the police.
The farmers said, “There are more of us.”
The national oil company threatened to bring in the army.
“We have guns too; we aren’t leaving,” came the reply. “We have nothing left to lose.”
As troops gathered, bloodshed was averted only by the last-minute intervention of an official with an open, fresh perspective without experience in either farming or the oil industry.
“How long will it be before you expect to produce oil on this land?” he asked the national oil company.
“Probably three years,” they replied.
“What do you plan to do on the land over the next few months?”
“Mapping; a little seismic surveying of the underground layers.”
“Probably three years,” they replied.
“What do you plan to do on the land over the next few months?”
“Mapping; a little seismic surveying of the underground layers.”
Then he asked the farmers, “What’s the problem with leaving now, as they’ve asked?”
“The harvest is in six weeks. It represents everything we own.”
“The harvest is in six weeks. It represents everything we own.”
Shortly thereafter an agreement was reached: The farmers could harvest their crops. They would not impede the oil company’s preparatory activities. Indeed, the oil company hoped soon to hire many of the farmers as laborers for its construction activities. And it did not object if they continued to plant crops in between oil derricks.
As illustrated in the example, the more attention that is paid to positions, the less attention is devoted to meeting the underlying concerns of the parties. Agreement becomes less likely. Any agreement reached may reflect a mechanical splitting of the difference between final positions rather than a solution carefully crafted to meet the legitimate interests of the parties. The result is frequently an agreement less satisfactory to each side than it could have been, or no agreement at all, when a good agreement was possible.