)
Interventions on Glasl's Escalation Ladder
Friedrich Glasl's (1941) 9-step escalation ladder illustrates human behavior, attitudes, and thought patterns at each stage of a conflict.
28-8-2024
4 min. reading time
Glasl's Escalation Ladder
Friedrich Glasl's (1941) escalation ladder illustrates the progression of a conflict. Each step on the ladder affects people's behavior, attitudes, and thought patterns.
Based on their behavior and attitude, it is possible to assess where the conflicting parties stand on the escalation ladder. This assessment can also help parties or referrers determine which intervention might be employed or recommended to resolve the conflict effectively.
Relational Phase
During the relational phase, represented by the top three steps of Glasl's escalation ladder, the focus remains on restoring and maintaining the (work) relationship. At this stage, people often aim for a WIN-WIN outcome. If the issue cannot be resolved collaboratively or with the help of colleagues, an intervention by Corporate Social Work (CSW) may be sufficient to support the parties in resolving the problem constructively.
If there is already a need to make (legally) binding agreements or if the matter is particularly sensitive, mediation can be a valuable recommendation. The confidential nature of mediation creates a safe environment where individuals feel more comfortable addressing the underlying causes of the conflict.
Some referrers or potential participants may perceive mediation as too significant an intervention at this stage, believing it often leads to "exit" outcomes. However, introducing mediation during the relational phase can often prevent "exit" scenarios. Mediation helps the parties establish clear, binding agreements, enabling them to continue their working relationship effectively.
Emotional Phase
During the emotional phase, represented by the middle three steps of Glasl's escalation ladder, emotions such as fear, anger, and sadness overshadow reason and rationality. Positions harden, and empathy and understanding are scarce. It becomes a matter of winning or losing, with the threat of losing face often playing a significant role. People focus solely on their own interests and are unwilling to consider the other party's perspective. This is a WIN-LOSE dynamic.
An example of this is when an employee calls in sick due to a conflict, prioritizing their own needs (health, rest) over those of the employer (continuing to work). Mediation is an effective tool in this phase.
If restoring and continuing the working relationship proves unfeasible, mediation can also be used to explore whether the relationship can be terminated amicably (by mutual agreement). This allows for swift action if the relationship cannot be salvaged. Acting quickly in this phase often prevents a “legal battle,” with its associated negative consequences and financial risks.
Fight Phase
During the fight phase, represented by the bottom three steps of Glasl's escalation ladder, the conflict has escalated into “war.” Lawyers are often already involved, and the parties are unwilling to sit at the same table to talk. The primary goal becomes making the other party lose, even if it is not in one's own interest: LOSE-LOSE.
If there are still interests in avoiding legal proceedings—such as lack of legal expenses insurance, insufficient documentation, high reputational risks, the possibility of losing unemployment benefits, or high legal costs—mediation can serve as a last resort to reach a resolution without going to court.
In such cases, the mediator often “shuttles” between the parties (and often their lawyers), which is why this is also referred to as “shuttle mediation.” The aim is to reach a mutual agreement and terminate the working relationship “by mutual consent.”
Glasl's Escalation Ladder and Interventions by Result Mediation
Glasl's escalation ladder is the most widely used model for determining the degree of conflict escalation. The following overview shows which intervention is most suitable for each level.
The Lowest Level of Escalation
A problem exists, and the parties are discussing it, but they struggle to listen to each other or adequately consider the other party’s interests. They cannot resolve the issue themselves but are willing to try. In these cases, the parties often decide together to engage us.
The Middle Level of Escalation
Discussions about the problem spiral out of control, becoming personal. The focus shifts from the issue itself to the relationship between the parties. They want to resolve the conflict but do not know how to proceed. A referral is usually necessary to prompt the parties to pursue mediation, as they are unlikely to take this step on their own.
The Highest Level of Escalation
The conflict has escalated to the point where one party feels deeply hurt or unjustly treated and seeks to harm the other: "If they won’t listen, they’ll have to feel it." At this stage, an external expert is required to make a decision.
Turn your conflict into an advantage
Result ADR has the tools and expertise to resolve conflicts effectively. We’d love to connect with you, whether online or offline. Call us or leave your details, and we’ll get back to you promptly.