Taking sides: A lose-lose situation

If you have ever witnessed a relationship breakdown between mutual friends or maybe you were the child between warring parents, you will understand the pressure to may be pick a side. As an adult, if you refuse to, you may be called ‘Switzerland’ or a ‘fence-sitter’; essentially, ‘inaction’ tends to be viewed as being disloyal or cowardly.

Having witnessed the breakdown of friendships, marriages and work-relationships, and then in my profession as a mediator, having to deal with the aftermath of disputes, it is clear that people taking sides rarely benefits anyone in these situations. Yes, there are times when an injustice requires us to speak up for someone, or for an issue, out of principal; the intention being to prevent further injustices, or potential damage to a person’s reputation/relationships/career. However, I would suggest that it is rarely necessary in such situations to actually ‘pick a side’, in terms of choosing one person over the other or criticising the other person. Instead, focussing on the issue that needs addressing is what is required to realise a positive and productive outcome.

As an example, in relationship breakdowns where children are involved, the parents that can maintain a good level of respect in their communication effectively are usually those where the issue of ‘protecting the welfare of the children’ is the first focus of both parties. Doing so doesn’t diminish the pain caused by hurtful behaviours but it can prevent further fallout or damage being done to their relationship – and, by default, also helps to ensure the protection of their children’s welfare.

When disputes concern colleagues or friends, being asked to pick a side tends to occur when someone believes one side of the dispute has ‘behaved badly’. It is instinctive to want to right the 'wrong' or defend the 'victim' and so we get involved, speak our mind and make sure everyone knows whose side we are backing and why.

Here are some reasons why taking sides may not be the best course of action:

1. There are three sides to every argument – one person’s side, the other person’s side, and the truth

• In other words, no one truly knows the fully story and it is unlikely that you have always heard an unbiased versions of events. So, to proactively take one person's side over the other may be imprudent; you may later discover additional facts that suggest your initial conclusions weren't correct.

 2. Everyone is human

• When you decide you are backing someone or are against another, it is hard to remember that no one involved is totally innocent or totally evil.
• Unfortunately, having chosen your side, you may begin to defend behaviours you otherwise would have disagreed with, or criticise good behaviours you otherwise would have applauded.

3. Reciprocal altruism or friendship?

• Reciprocal altruism describes when you do a good thing for someone with the - perhaps unspoken - understanding that the other person will reciprocate the good deed for them later – i.e. ‘if you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours’.

• This kind of loyalty can put pressure on relationships and create resentment over having a friendship that has burdensome expectations attached. There is a tendency in these situations to also blindly defend without first assessing whether the behaviours are even defensible.

 4. The dispute is exacerbated

• This is not ‘a problem shared = a problem halved’ scenario. The more opinions thrown into the mix, the harder it becomes to resolve the conflict and heal broken relationships.
• More often, those at the centre of the dispute maybe able to resolve their issues in time but those third parties who got involved from the side lines remain entrenched in their ‘loyalties’ and so find it harder to mend their relationships with the ‘other side’ or resolve their own anger or hurt.

• So often people get involved in another person’s dispute at the height of emotional turmoil: someone has just ended the relationship, or they have just had a shouting match with the other person, or they have just discovered a deception or have just heard a rumour.

• At such times, people usually say what they are feeling but not always what they truly mean once they have processed the situation. It would be unwise to take what they say as a consistent reflection of what they always think. I can recount multiple scenarios where someone will say how they feel at the peak of emotional turmoil which they would either: genuinely not remember, or adamantly disagree with, later.

Does this mean that when someone is having difficulties with another person, you should quietly back away into a corner or bury your head in the proverbial sand? No, p referably, you can support someone and stand up for your principles, without creating additional and unnecessary conflict.

Here are some tips on how to walk that fine line:

Focus on the issue

When people have a disagreement, it may seem like the appropriate time to air all the things you didn’t like about the other person - all their faults and previous failings. Unfortunately, though this may provide a temporary feeling of comradery with your ‘wronged’ friend or colleague, it’s overriding effect would also potentially be to fan the flames of their anger, solidify their feelings of solely being the injured party and make it harder to resolve their issues with the other person in future. Focussing on the main issues that caused the dispute will also be a helpful way to encourage forward-thinking and providing an environment that allows for problem-solving ideas and steps towards some form of resolution.

Empathise without agreeing

It is generally considered to be healthy for someone to vent when they are going through a difficult time. You can empathise with their feelings during a situation without verbalising your agreement with their opinion of the other person. It is almost impossible to know exactly what went on and how much you have been told is factually accurate or an emotionally driven recollection of events. More often – especially for emotionally volatile relationships - people don’t stay angry at each other forever and though they may forget what they said in the heat of the moment, they more than likely will remember your words.

It is also wise to ask before offering advice and, when you do, remember that all situations are different so what may have worked for one person may not necessarily work for another. Be aware of the benefits of having accountable relationships where you can talk to each other about behaviours that may not be helpful. If appropriate, the kindest way to help your friend or colleague may be to help them reflect on what part they may have played in the conflict, even if isn’t well received at first.

Have boundaries

Choosing not to take sides can make your friend or colleague feel insecure about the strength of your relationship. However, on reflection, they will have seen your ability to support without needing to bad-mouth anyone else. If you are honest with each other and respectful of their right to have an opposing view, it is very possible to have a strong and healthy relationship with people and agree to disagree at times. If the situation continues to escalate and all advice is replied to with a 'Yes, but...', it may be time to take a step back and just provide emotional support from the side lines.

‘To err is human…’

It is so easy to view the other party as the ‘villain’ but, unlike the portrayal of cartoon villains, most people most of the time don’t want to hurt anyone . They are also likely to be hurting or feel disrespected or betrayed, depending on what has occurred. Even if from the outside, they seem unfeeling or the main perpetrator, the root cause of their actions could well come from genuine hurt or fear. In my experience – both personally and professionally – it is also worth remembering that most communication between people is flawed and misunderstandings are often the principal causes of conflict. Is it possible that someone just heard or received something differently to how it was intended?

Stay in your lane

When we see someone getting hurt or witness what we perceive to be an injustice occurring, it is difficult to resist getting involved. What starts off with great intentions may have the potential to cause further damage or prompt further fodder for gossip. Here are some questions to consider before getting involved:

1. Are you the most appropriate person to get involved? Is it better coming from someone more neutral?

2. Why do want to get involved? What is your motivation and aim?

3. Do you have all the facts you need to engage with the situation reasonably?

4. Could your approach possibly cause further unnecessary conflict or is it likely to help resolve the issue?

As a mediator it is imperative that, throughout, I remain neutral. In fact, beyond passively NOT taking sides, I am actually proactively on BOTH sides, aiming for a win-win situation. Feelings are respected and valued but the focus is on finding ways forward that work for both parties, not on placing blame. There is a difference between standing up for what you believe is right and taking sides against another.

To improve the chances of conflict not being exacerbated: focus on the issues, empathise without agreeing, have boundaries, remember each person’s ‘human-ness’ and stay in your lane. If you think there is a situation at work which may benefit from a neutral qualified mediator’s input; or, if you are interested in hearing about how training on communication could improve your workplace culture and reduce the likelihood of unnecessary conflict, please get in contact . You can email emma.jenkings@mosaicmediation.co.uk or get in touch through the Contact page.