If you contact Bridge Builders for assistance with a case of escalated conflict affecting a larger group, we will:

• Try to get a clear picture of the situation
• Assess, in a preliminary way, the sort of outside help that is appropriate
• Possibly recommend group reconciliation if the conflict has drawn in a considerable number of people
• Try to provide a lead facilitator, who will form a team of two to work on the case, working with someone from our Network with suitable training

Group reconciliation draws on a broader range of processes than interpersonal mediation (although the aims are broadly similar). This is because conflicts that involve a large number of people are invariably complex. Often there is considerable past history tangled up with the presenting issues.

When is group reconciliation likely to be appropriate?

We will not attempt group reconciliation when we judge that the conflict is intractable. On the other hand, there are often more grounds for hope than enquirers first suppose.

Group reconciliation is appropriate when a substantial majority of those who are significantly affected by a conflict are willing to try and resolve their disagreements, and mend broken relationships, yet do not feel able to do so without assistance. Depending on the circumstances, we may encourage everyone in the group to take an active part in the process.  Whoever is involved, we will encourage each person to accept responsibility for their own contribution to the situation, and to express apology or regret where they appropriately can.

Examples:

• A congregation is divided over an important issue
• A large leadership group is unable to resolve disagreements
• There is hostility between different church committees or worship centres

Group reconciliation is not appropriate in cases where there is no support for the idea from the church's leadership group, or where the conflict is focused entirely on the minister's performance.

Essential characteristics of group reconciliation

• The parties who are in dispute can express their views in a variety of ways
• The facilitators lead the process but do not determine the outcome
• Ground rules are agreed at the outset
• It may take several weeks of gathering information before a structure for the process is firmed up
• The facilitators do their best to act impartially
• One aim is to engage with feelings and find agreements that address the concerns of all the parties
• Another aim is to learn better ways of handling conflict in future, so that outside assistance will not be needed again