Conflict of Needs - Dana's Lowerarchy of Needs

ALL … and I mean ALL conflict arises from a “CONFLICT of NEEDS”.

While this seems trite on the surface, I want each reader to remember the above key point. So the next time you or a loved one (or you AND your loved one) are in ANY kind of conflict you’ll be armed with this simple personal insight.

A conflict of needs can be between two people, two groups of people, two institutions¹, or even two or more conflicting needs in one person. I’ll give examples below, but for now, know that conflicting needs by definition are mutually exclusive. That means that both parties CANNOT get their needs met at the same time. The two opposing needs are in conflict. One party must relinquish their need, or some compromise must be found where each party gets a portion of their respective need met.

Note: It’s rare when a person or group of persons is trying to get a single need met. More common is that the parties are attempting to get several needs met. Often one particular need is based on another foundational need (see my post on “Chained Needs)”.

Some examples:

Institutional, Country, Political needs:

[International conflict of needs]

PARTY A) “We need this land. The creator gave it to us. Therefore, we’re entitled to it.² It is OURS!”

PARTY B) “We need this land. We’ve been farming it for the last 500 years. Therefore, we’re entitled to it.²It is OURS!”

Note: The above need is for the same piece of land.

Two people in conflict:

PARTY A) “That’s MY parking spot! I saw it first!”

PARTY B) “That’s MY parking spot! I was waiting here!”

Note: The above need is for the same piece of land …errr …parking space.

Conflict between an organization* and its customer:

PARTY A, organization) “We need to cut costs*. We’ll relocate our customer support center to a country where we can pay lower wages.”

PARTY B, customer) “I need to get my issue resolved quickly. I really need to talk to a human being who speaks my language.”

* Many will argue that an organization (business, religious body, company, country, government entity etc) has needs. I submit this is not so. In my opinion, there is no such thing as an organization when it comes to needs. An organization’s needs are really the collective needs of those running that organization. Many organizations have “hidden” behind this concept as those in charge have attempted to get their individual “needs” met. Some have even gone so far as to declare their entities have “rights”… implying needs to be met, and have created laws accordingly. This is a travesty! This concept removes individual responsibility for actions.

* [implied: “… so that we can make more profits.” This is an example of a “Chained Need”.]

Note: In this case, PARTY A’s need conflicts with that of PARTY B (by increasing the time and efficiency in getting PARTY B’s issue resolved). Furthermore, the potential for frustration and loss of “customer loyalty” is created causing a conflict with PARTY A’s need to make more profits. If they alienate customers, profits will decrease in the long term.

Conflict between two individuals:

A classic conflict of needs

PARTY A) “I have so much anger inside of me and I need to express it in any way I can.” (PARTY A acts out against PARTY B with verbal, psychological or physical violence.)

PARTY B) “I need to maintain my emotional or physical safety.”

Note: Here the needs differ… and are clearly mutually exclusive. While both PARTIES needs’ ARE valid, PARTY’A’s actions in order to get his/her need met may be completely inappropriate.

Conflicting needs in one person:

SCENARIO A) “I really need to do my taxes, otherwise I’ll be in a very uncomfortable situation.”

SCENARIO B) “Oh my god! Andrew asked me out on a date tonight and I’ve been dying for him to notice me!”

Note: In this scene, one person has two conflicting needs. However there might be room for compromise or alternative solutions… thus alleviating the conflict.

An example of a conflict in one person, AND among two parties:

On the way to work today (my favorite coffee shop where I write), I was reflecting on a social situation that occurred a few years ago. An owner of a bakery had refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. Back when it happened, I couldn’t get clarity in my mind as to the what I saw as “muddled” personal issues. Today I did. Let me toss out one of my favorite following quotes:

“Professionalism is putting one’s personal needs aside in order to do the job at hand.”

Dana J Goulston, 2012

In the above incident, the baker’s needs (expressing one’s religious beliefs) were in conflict with their chosen professional needs (to bake a cake as a means to gain income). The baker had previously made a conscious decision to become a baker, and in doing so assumed a certain level of professionalism, both to himself/herself, but also to the community. These two needs were in conflict. The baker chose to get his/her personal needs met over both his/her professional needs, as well as those of his/her customer.

Same-sex wedding cake