Game, Set, Resolve: What We Can Learn From Tennis for Effective Conflict Resolution

In every profession, there are nuances and complexities that outsiders rarely appreciate. Take tennis, for instance. In each shot of a professional tennis match, the player returning the ball (the receiver) watches the opponent closely to anticipate the type and placement of the shot. The receiver hopes to read the opponent’s intent as early as possible, allowing them to react swiftly and position themselves to return the ball with power and control. Of course, the opponent will do everything possible to conceal or delay their shot to keep the receiver guessing. At the highest levels of tennis, where professionals such as Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic play, waiting to commit to a shot until the last second is an art form.

The Hidden Skills Behind Effective Conflict Resolution

I recall watching a match between Nadal and Djokovic years ago when an announcer excitedly exclaimed, "Nadal got Djokovic going the wrong way and hit the ball into the open court for an easy winner!" A friend who was watching with me, a novice to tennis, innocently asked, "Why doesn’t he do that all the time?" As someone with considerable experience playing tennis, I knew how difficult it was to get a player of Djokovic’s caliber off balance. But because Nadal made it look easy, my friend assumed it was.

This scenario perfectly encapsulates the Dunning–Kruger effect.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias identified by psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger. It describes how people with limited knowledge or expertise in a particular area often overestimate their abilities. In other words, those who know the least are often the most confident in their understanding. Conversely, individuals with deep expertise recognize the challenges and complexities of their field, often leading them to be more humble about their abilities.

This effect is present in many areas of life—tennis, cooking and even professional jobs. A novice who watches a professional execute a difficult play might assume they could replicate the move. The same bias is at play when an outsider observes a conflict resolver work through a challenging mediation and mistakenly believes it is easy.

While I have no delusions about my abilities in certain fields (I’ve never once imagined I could dunk a basketball like Julius Erving), the Dunning–Kruger effect sneaks up on all of us. At times, I’ve found myself thinking I could easily transition to another field—perhaps law, medicine or architecture—and excel because, after all, “how hard could it be?” I’ve even caught myself thinking that I could outperform some political leaders if I were in their shoes. These thoughts are amusing and humbling at the same time.

The Dunning–Kruger Effect in Conflict Resolution

After nearly 40 years working in the field of conflict resolution—mediating disputes, facilitating resolutions and teaching others—I still find myself learning every day. As someone with significant experience in the field, I’ve come to appreciate the intricate skill set required for effective conflict resolution. The art of conflict resolution involves understanding economics, psychology, strategy (insights from game theory), law, negotiation, cross-cultural dynamics, interpersonal communication and process architecture (for longer, larger conflicts). Skilled conflict resolvers pull relevant tools from these disciplines and know which tools not to use in a given situation.

However, many people I work with—whether they’re surgeons, business executives or university deans—often express surprise when my team and I design and execute processes that help resolve their conflicts. After a successful facilitation, I sometimes hear comments such as "That went really well," which are often laced with a hint of disbelief. What they don’t realize is how many micro-decisions we make during a session—choices about which conflict resolution techniques to employ and which pitfalls to avoid. Like the seasoned tennis player anticipating their opponent’s moves, we continuously read the situation, make adjustments and employ strategies that are invisible to the lay observer.

One reason people fall prey to the Dunning–Kruger effect in conflict resolution is that everyone has some experience with conflict. While few people have experience performing surgery or piloting an airplane, almost everyone has resolved conflicts in their personal lives—whether it’s a disagreement with a spouse, a dispute with a colleague or a family argument. This leads people to believe that resolving large-scale or organizational conflicts requires the same skills they’ve honed in their personal lives.

However, being able to swim doesn’t make a person an Olympic swimmer, and resolving personal conflicts does not qualify a person to act as a professional conflict resolver. The difference between managing a personal disagreement and resolving complex organizational disputes is vast. Effective conflict resolution in the workplace requires many years mastering the intricacies of effective conflict resolution techniques, learning which strategies for conflict resolution are most appropriate in different scenarios.

Effective Conflict Resolution: Strategic Considerations

Tennis players always have two considerations in mind: what surface they are playing on (e.g., clay, grass, hardcourt) and who their opponent is. Their strategies change based on these considerations. The same is true of conflict resolution.

An effective conflict resolution strategy must be structured at the appropriate level to resolve the conflict. Conflict can occur within a person (many hard decisions involve internally conflicting interests), between individuals, within groups (small and large) or between groups. Changes in degree produce changes in kind, and what works for a group of eight will not work for a group of 60, and what works for 60 individuals will not work for two factions of 30.  

Conflicts can be based in dysfunctions at many different levels of an organization. Is the conflict occurring because of personality clashes between people who work on the same team, or because a supervisor failed to communicate effectively to the team about who is doing what part of a project, or because a policy or rule is a poor fit for a situation? Before a strategy can be chosen, an assessment must be done. It’s inefficient to resolve individual matters if they stem from a systemic problem—a whack-a-mole strategy is not optimal.

Steps to Effective Conflict Resolution

Effective tennis is easy to measure. One player wins and the other loses. Effective conflict resolution is a little more complex than that, but there are a few steps that apply to most situations.

CONVENE: Identify the people who are required to reach resolution. Gather them and create a mechanism to communicate with everyone necessary to resolve the problem. Revisit the membership as stakeholders identify parties who were missed.

LEARN: Help identify their interests. Look for shared interests, differing interests and conflicting interests. Find opportunities to create value by exploring and mining differences in preferences, risk attitudes, forecasts, capabilities and the like. 

DESIGN AND VET: Create a broad menu of options and structure a process that elevates the option that meets the most interests to the top. 

EVALUATE: Compare it to the status quo—this particular change vs. keep doing what we’re doing. 

CONCLUDE: Choose the winner—rinse and repeat!

The Importance of Calling in a Professional

Like a highly skilled surgeon or accomplished athlete, a seasoned conflict resolution professional brings years of experience, training and practice to each situation. They know which conflict resolution strategies to deploy and which to avoid, and they can anticipate problems before they manifest. The earlier you bring in a mediator or facilitator, the better the chances of preventing long-term damage to your organization.

Don’t let the Dunning–Kruger effect fool you into thinking conflict resolution is as simple as sitting down and talking. When handled by a professional, the results may appear effortless, but the work behind those results is anything but simple. If your organization is facing a significant conflict or a major decision, bringing in an experienced professional is an excellent idea.

We go into more detail on that subject in the blog post Why Conflict Resolution Training Is Essential for Your Organization. Understanding the value of formal training can help you take that next step toward training your team to be better prepared to handle conflicts effectively and proactively.

Conclusion

Conflict resolution is more complex than it appears. As suggested by the Dunning–Kruger effect, it’s easy to be overconfident and get in over your head. Partnering with experienced conflict resolvers is often the best course of action to address complex disputes with precision and care.

If you're looking to enhance your team's conflict resolution skills and develop greater confidence in managing disputes, consider booking a free discovery call with JAMS Pathways today to explore tailored conflict resolution training and professional development.

Alternatively, if your organization is facing a challenging conflict, bringing in a conflict resolver who applies proven and effective conflict resolution techniques may help reduce the likelihood of disputes escalating and could contribute to more sustainable and long-lasting outcomes.