Spoilers are not always bad; sometimes the spoilage allows negotiators to have a better view and grasp of the issue or conflict, and consequently, be able to calibrate a new level of engagement that eventually leads to the settlement of the conflict. What matters is how effectively the parties move the process in high gear in spite of the obstacles.
However, this is the view of the positivist and capable. For others, before they realize it, destruction has already been made and venom has already been spread. By its very description, spoilers always have that perceived bad intention inimical to the process.
The sad part of this is the fact that spoilers do not only thrive outside the process. There are those who lurk within organization or government. They pretend to be on board the process but truth is that they have their own agenda, contrary to the desired end state for the process, or more insensibly, undermining their principal’s official instruction.
One effective way to deal with a spoiler is to engage him or her constructively and be ready to listen and react reasonably. But this approach can only click with those who have no deliberate motive and well-planned program of hindering, delaying, or undermining conflict settlement for a range of reasons and through a variety of methods.
Given the time constraint in the current GPH-MILF peace negotiation, the parties must be vigilant in not allowing moles in their ranks. They must focus on the strategic objective of the negotiation and preserve its gains. They must refrain from being obstructed by issues which are sometimes deliberately intended to derail the process. This negotiation is designed as a problem-solving exercise and, therefore, should not be disturbed by side issues. It is like riding an airplane which is passing through an area of turbulence. The pilot must not only fasten his seat belt but more importantly steer the aircraft to its destination safely. Or even in worst case scenario, like high-jacking, the pilot must not join the fray or the whole journey is in peril.
It is to be conceded, however, that not all personal agenda are necessarily ill-intended, contrary to the sense of the word. Some might have anchored on personal conviction that sometime and somewhere such approach that he or she espousing has worked given the similarity of the situations. We respect that personal belief but it should not be brought in to the process. Here the greater interest is what matters and this must be pursued and upheld at all times.
http://www.luwaran.com/index.php/editorial/item/300-spoilers-within
The sad part of this is the fact that spoilers do not only thrive outside the process. There are those who lurk within organization or government. They pretend to be on board the process but truth is that they have their own agenda, contrary to the desired end state for the process, or more insensibly, undermining their principal’s official instruction.
One effective way to deal with a spoiler is to engage him or her constructively and be ready to listen and react reasonably. But this approach can only click with those who have no deliberate motive and well-planned program of hindering, delaying, or undermining conflict settlement for a range of reasons and through a variety of methods.
Given the time constraint in the current GPH-MILF peace negotiation, the parties must be vigilant in not allowing moles in their ranks. They must focus on the strategic objective of the negotiation and preserve its gains. They must refrain from being obstructed by issues which are sometimes deliberately intended to derail the process. This negotiation is designed as a problem-solving exercise and, therefore, should not be disturbed by side issues. It is like riding an airplane which is passing through an area of turbulence. The pilot must not only fasten his seat belt but more importantly steer the aircraft to its destination safely. Or even in worst case scenario, like high-jacking, the pilot must not join the fray or the whole journey is in peril.
It is to be conceded, however, that not all personal agenda are necessarily ill-intended, contrary to the sense of the word. Some might have anchored on personal conviction that sometime and somewhere such approach that he or she espousing has worked given the similarity of the situations. We respect that personal belief but it should not be brought in to the process. Here the greater interest is what matters and this must be pursued and upheld at all times.
http://www.luwaran.com/index.php/editorial/item/300-spoilers-within
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.