The SNT Formula
Author: Dr. Iqbal Unus
Principal Associate at Education, Training and Research Associates (ETR)
Director of IIFTIHAR-USA
As Muslims who are aspiring to become a model Muslim community, one of the things that frustrate us is that so often we tend to differ, disagree and dispute with one another, and in the process sometimes dismember our relationships and our groups. It is not that we do not hear the words of Allah that we are One Ummah, Ummatun Wahidah, nor is it that we do not hear the words of the Prophet (saw) that all Muslims are like one body.
Our problem is probably that we may be focusing on solving the wrong problem. Instead of being frustrated by the presence of dispute, disagreement, difference, or any combination of those, we should be focusing on how we deal with them when they occur. This is what I hope to discuss in a brief way as a way of reminding myself and all of us of our responsibility in this matter.
I use the word CONFLICT to refer to all kinds of disputes or differences in thinking or action between individuals or between groups of individuals.
We must first recognize that no group of people is free of conflict. That is the nature of human beings and societies. We do a disservice by insisting on an absence of conflict.
Allah SWT created us different in many ways: The Qur'an says:
"If your Lord had so willed, He would have made mankind one people, but they will not cease to differ, except those on whom your Lord and Sustainer has bestowed His mercy, and for this did He create them." [11:118-9]
Instead, we should look at conflict in a positive way. It can be good for our collective social health. Conflict can be good because it can help bring about necessary changes in a situation, and can even lead to good decision making. We lose much by attempting to eliminate conflict. We gain much by managing it in order to benefit from it.
Rather than suppressing or avoiding it, we should respond to conflict methodically so that it contributes to the group's success. Let us analyze the nature of conflict a little further.
The Nature of Conflict
Conflict can be functional or dysfunctional, and occasional or chronic.
- Conflict is functional when it improves the group's performance by forcing examination of basic issues and identifying new opportunities.
- Conflict is dysfunctional when it hinders and prevents the group's goals from being achieved.
- Conflict is occasional when it is the exception, not the rule in the individual's or the group's behavior.
- Conflict is chronic when individuals or groups routinely differ in their approaches.
A healthy tension within a group, caused by conflict, is desirable for success. The companions of the Prophet (saw) experienced functional and occasional conflict.
For example, upon the death of the Prophet (saw), Umar RA insisted that the Messenger of Allah did not die, and threatened to punish those who said so, until Abu Bakr RA appeared on the scene and recited the verse of the Qur'an that began: "Muhammad is no more than a Messenger...." [3:144]
The companions differed on where to bury the Prophet (saw). They had conflict of opinions about who should be the successor of the Prophet (saw), raising several questions, like: should the successor be from the Ansars or the Muhajireen; should it be one person or a group of persons, should he given the same authority as the Prophet had as judge and leader or less or different?
Sayyidina Umar and Sayyidina Abu Bakr had conflicting opinions on the permissibility of fighting those who withheld zakah.
Now, conflict may sound like a strong word to some; they may prefer use of words like disagreement or difference of opinion. Whatever word you choose, the nature of the phenomenon remains the same. I will use the word conflict, recognizing that some may disagree with me.
Conflict may arise on matters of limited significance like where to go for dinner or on matters of great significance like the results of the supreme sacrifice of millions of Muslims on the battlefields of Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, one of the most glorious chapters in contemporary Muslim history is in danger of becoming a messy footnote.
Chronic conflict occurs when individuals or organizations routinely differ in their approaches, expectations or views in matters that have an impact on the parties involved. These differences cause tensions and hard feelings whose intensity increases as the significance of the matters under consideration does.
Conflict management cannot be done in isolation. Conflict has a context and this context must be understood by all concerned.
A confrontational approach to conflict management forces people to take sides. If this occurs early in the conflict resolution process, the chances of arriving at an acceptable solution diminish greatly. To manage and possibly resolve a conflict, start by not taking sides. Keep an open mind. Encourage the other side to do the same.
Chronic conflict is usually caused by bad systems, not bad people. It is a situation that recurs time after time and often even when the parties to the conflict are no longer the same as before.
Chronic conflict is a product of - for example - misunderstood instructions, mismatched objectives, misdirected communication, mishandled decisions, etc. Individuals and groups in such situations become defensive even though they may themselves be victims of a bad system of policies and procedures that govern their interaction. Properly understood instruction, clearly matched objectives, well-directed communication, and correctly handled decision can create a system that minimizes conflict.
Occasional conflict - as opposed to chronic conflict - may require the leader or manager to focus on specific causes, often of personnel nature. However, new circumstances may produce new avenues for occasional conflict. The right approach for dealing with such a situation is to create a culture of acceptance and mutual respect for one another-within the bounds of right and wrong. Occasional conflict is an acceptable risk we take when we work together.
Causes of Conflict
1. Differences in Goals
One cause of conflict is the difference in goals espoused by the parties in conflict. For example, two groups of people championing the same policy may be doing so for different reasons. Group A wants to expand the community center so that it can organize larger social functions, while Group B want to do the same in order to expand the library and reading room. They are both involved in fund raising, space planning, designing, and so on but each step they come into conflict because each group offers solutions that respond to what it thinks the purpose of the extension is.
2. Interdependence
The interdependence of two individuals or groups can also lead to conflict. For example, one group feels constrained in doing what it feels it must because it is tied to actions and approvals of the other group. One individual or group may think the other is moving too slow or too erratically to work with. Each of the two may be independently capable of achieving much but interdependently they are in conflict. There are several types of interdependence:
- Pooled
Pooled interdependence comes into play when the individual or the group acts as a part of a larger group. The ability to work together, to build consensus, and to support one another become important. The lack of this ability becomes a source of conflict when each individual starts viewing himself /herself as being totally autonomous.
- Sequential
Sequential interdependence comes into play when the work of one individual or group must later be reviewed approved or critiqued by another. The principle sources of conflict in sequential interdependence come from variance in expectations of what was to be achieved or how the task was to be carried out.
- Reciprocal
Conflict in this type of interdependence comes from misunderstanding of mutual responsibilities and relationships. For example, a staff member works through a holiday on the condition that a fellow employee will do his work on another day, so he can take that day off. If the other employee fails to do so, the reciprocal interdependence is strained and conflict emerges.
3. Perceptions
Conflict can be caused by a difference of perception between parties in conflict. One may perceive a situation or circumstance differently from the other. Group status and time are two factors perceived differently by different people.
- Varying Perceptions of Group Status
two or more individuals or groups in conflict may see their individual positions as different in terms of their rights and privileges. One may consider its status to be higher than the others and expect concessions or rewards merely on the basis of its self-perceived status.
- Differences in Time Perspectives
Differing understanding of what is meant by a certain time variable can be a source of conflict. For example, the parties in conflict can derive a variety of meanings from qualifications like "early," or "late," or "timely." A "short-term" commitment can be longer than a "long-term" commitment to other people or even to the same people in other circumstances.
Patterns of Conflict
Conflict develops and grows in a certain way. We will examine two instances of conflict in early Muslim history to observe the underlying pattern of conflict. The first incidence is the case of land distribution after the conquest of Iraq in the days of 'Umar (RA). The other incidence is that of the conflict between 'All (RA) and Mu'awiya (RA) regarding succession following the death of 'Uthman (RA).
1. Distribution of Land
A crisis emerges
After Muslim armies had entered Iraq as victors, the responsibility to decide if and how to divide the conquered land fell on the khalifah, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA). Opinions were divided on the issue and Muslims were in conflict with one another.
The disagreement escalates.
On the one hand, the army commanders thought that the land should be divided and distributed. For example, a senior companion `Abdur Rahman ibn `Awf also favored distribution. `Uthman, `Ali and `Umar (RA) thought that the land should not be distributed but left with the original cultivators.
Confrontation occupies the center of attention.
A general assembly was called. It included all Muhajireen, and five representatives each from Aws and Khazraj tribes.
Crisis deepens.
The general assembly discussed the matter for several days. The crisis became prolonged and complicated. Further crisis is resorted to.
The conflict is resolved.
`Umar (RA) one day referred to the Qur'anic verse that concluded with the words "...those who come after them." The assembly was convinced when `Umar (RA) said: "How, then, can I distribute it amongst you and leave those who come afterwards without any share?" Thus, the conflict was resolved by resorting to an acceptable authority.
2. Succession of Khilafah
The crisis emerges.
`Uthman (RA)'s assassination resulted in a deep division among people who demanded that the new Khalifah, `Ali ibn Talib (RA) punish the assassins and those who favored the conciliatory approach of the Khalifah. Mu`awaiya (RA) refused to accept the leadership of `Ali (RA).
The conflict escalates.
`Ali (RA) replaced, only with partial success, governors appointed by the previous Khalifah, while refusing to accede to the demands that the those who murdered `Uthman be punished. On the other hand, Mu`awiya (RA) continued to seek subjugation of tribes through persuasion or fore, in defiance of the Khalifah.
Confrontation occupies the center of attention.
`Ali (RA) sent a letter to Mu`awiya (RA) asking him to submit to his leadership. Mu'awiya refused. The Khalifah sent an army to subdue him. The two armies faced each other for three months while concerned people on either side continued to attempt a settlement. A truce lasted an additional month before it broke out into an all out war. There was much bloodshed, but no victor. The two leaders continued to exhort their followers against the other.
The crisis deepens.
Finally, it was agreed that the matter of the appointment of the Khalifah be left to the decision of two referees, Abu Musa from `Ali (RA)'s side and `Amr ibn al-`As from the other side. After six months the referees met and after much discussion agreed to the solution that both the contenders be deposed and then people be allowed to choose whomever they wish to. After Abu Musa announced the withdrawal of the `Ali and Mu`awiya, `Amr announced that he accepts `Ali’s withdrawal but confirms Mu`awiya's claim to the Khilafah! The schism widened further.
Conflict is resolved.
With no solution in sight, a group of Muslims decided that the struggle would end only with the assassination of `Ali (RA), Mu`awiya (RA) and `Amr (RA). They succeeded only in killing `Ali (RA), enabling Mu`awiya to become the undisputed ruler. From a shortsighted point of view, the conflict was resolved by resorting to brute force. From a long-term perspective, the apparent resolution eventually led to a profound schism in the Muslim Ummah.
The Do's and Don’ts of Conflict
Do
1. Do assume that everybody is doing the best that he or she can do. Everybody is behaving in ways that make sense to him or herself.
2. Do accept that most conflicts are the result of bad systems and not bad people.
3. Do allow that often conflicts arise when present systems do not allow people to get what they need from each other.
Don't
1. Do not assume that the 'right' answer has already been discovered and is held by one of the parties involved in the conflict.
2. Do not assume that the-truth of a particular position is related to the force or eloquence with which it is presented, the number of people who hold that position, the title of the person who espouses it, or other circumstances that are irrelevant to the merit of the position itself.
3. Do not go for 'winning,' 'being right,'- and 'having the answer,' rather than being willing to negotiate and seek alternatives.
4. Do not assume that people rather than systems are at fault.
5. Do not assume that others' positions or behaviors are unreasonable.
6. Do not assume that resolution will necessarily create winners and losers.
The S-A-L-A-M Model
It is not the purpose of this booklet to talk about the theory of conflict - on why and how it occurs - but to point out how we can handle it to our advantage. For this purpose, I draw your attention to a model which I call the SALAM model of conflict management.
The English acronym SALAM is a transliterated version of the corresponding Islamic terms. I want to use the letters of SALAM to refer to a process of dealing with conflict.
The SALAM model points to a systematic way of approaching the conflict and moving towards a fair resolution, assuming of course that all parties to the conflict want to reach a fair conclusion.
S = stating the conflicting view
A = agreeing that a conflict exists
L = listening for and learning the difference
A = advising one another
M = minimizing areas of disagreement that could lead to aggression or withdrawal.
The first letter S stands for stating the conflicting view. We should not assume that we already know what the nature or content of the conflict is. Let it be stated what it is that we are in conflict about. The Qur'an advises us not to act on what we do not know.
In Sûrah Al Isra: "And pursue not that of which you have no knowledge; for every act of hearing or of seeing or of (feeling in) the heart will be inquired into (on the Day of Reckoning)." [17:36] In Sûrah Al Najm: "But they have no knowledge therein. They follow nothing but conjecture; and conjecture avails nothing against the truth." [53:28]
Once what is in conflict is clearly stated - without agreement or disagreement, it is possible to relate it to the conflicting parties' purposes. This will establish what is at stake and how critical is the disagreement. Some conflict might be resolved just by stating the parameters of conflict clearly, because one party or the other might find that it can live with the situation without trying to change it.
Therefore, S stands for stating the conflicting view.
The second letter A stands for agreeing that a conflict exists, again without making any judgment.
At this stage, we must detach issues from personalities. One way to do that is, when possible, let each side state the other side's position as fairly as it can. This enables them both to focus on issue, not persons.
The third letter L stands for listening for and learning the difference. Of course, that is the tough part.
Most of the time, we listen not to learn but to respond when our turn comes. Here we must turn to the essence of the Islamic principles of shura, by focusing on the issues. The two parties should move to a higher level by consulting with one another on how to attack the problem between them. Through this exercise of shura, they direct their mutual resources of creativity, experience, wisdom, etc. to attack the problem, not one another.
As far as shura is concerned, there is probably no other Islamic concept that is talked about as much as and practiced as little as shura. Therefore, I will not spend more time discussing what shura is.
However, within the context of avoiding conflict, one must stress the pro-active nature of shura. When the Prophet received the news about Abu Sufyan's caravan before the Battle of Badr, he consulted the members of his expedition. Sayiddina Abu Bakr and Sayyidina Umar spoke and then al Miqdad ibn 'Amr spoke, and then there was a long silence. The Prophet (saw) asked for advice. It seemed he was anxious to hear the Ansar's view because he had made a pledge with at al `Aqabah.
Then Sa'd ibn Mua'dh, their leaders, addressed the Prophet (saw) asking the Prophet (saw) if he was seeking to hear their views, and the Prophet (saw) confirmed that indeed he was. This anecdote stresses the pro-active nature of shura, the idea the one has to invite and seek shura, not simply engage in it because it is forced by circumstances.
Of course at this stage, we must examine the guidelines of Shariah with respect to the issues at hand. This should also be a mutual effort, to make the Shariah - in a sense - an unbiased arbitrator.
The fourth letter A stand for advising one another. This is a stage where compromises begin to take shape. We advise one another in the Islamic manner of nasîha, recognizing that the advisor is not always right. Two things are important here.
First: we move to common ground by proposing action that meets the principal needs of the other party while enabling us to reach our goals.
Second: we offer to help carry out whatever is agreed upon. Again, we are talking about a pro-active mode of behavior. It requires a continual monitoring of actions and prompt evaluative response to them.
We all know the very famous hadith of the Prophet (saw) related by Muslim on the authority of Abu Ruqayya Tamim ibn Aus ad-Dari (ra): The Prophet (saw) said: Religion is good advice. We said: To whom? He said: To Allah and His Book, and His Messenger, and to the leaders of the Muslims and their common folk.
We see that the Prophet (saw) extended the principle of nasîha to every one from the top to the bottom, from the leaders to the common folks. Thus the giving or receiving of nasîha is not restricted to one group of the other but is a general operational principle, specially when we study this hadith with the other famous one: A believer is a mirror to his brother.
The last letter M stands for minimizing areas of disagreement that could lead to aggression or withdrawal.
We do not want the other party to become an aggressor because they did not get what they wanted. In most situations, we also do not want the other party to withdraw from us. In most situations, this will be only a short-lived resolution of the conflict, until the other party feels strong enough to challenge the resolution.
Therefore, we want to seek agreement in as many aspects of the conflict as possible, minimizing those aspects in which either party has to yield its position. We recognize that conflict is unavoidable; and that it is even desirable to have functional and occasional conflict.
When two people always agree with one another, one of them is redundant.
The S-N-T Formula
There are ways to keep conflict functional and occasional, and avoid the emergence of dysfunctional and chronic conflict. This can be achieved by adopting a mode of behavior that I call the S-N-T formula.
Those of you need who need crutches to remember things - as I do - can make a mental note that S-N-T is the English word SAINT without the vowels.
S = Shura (Consultation)
N = Naseeha (Advice)
T = Ta'wun (Co-operation)
As far as shura is concerned, we have already discussed it above. However, within the context of avoiding conflict, one must stress the pro-active nature of shura, the idea that one has to invite and seek shura, not simply engage in it because it is forced by circumstances. The case of decision making before the Battle of Badr quoted earlier is illustrative of this point.
If we consult others in a pro-active way, seeking shura before crises emerge, differing points of view are brought into focus well before positions harden, and those consulted are likely to be supportive and accommodating even if things do not go their way entirely.
Nasîha is the second element in the S-N-T formula. Again, we are talking about a pro-active mode of behavior. It requires a continual monitoring of actions and prompt evaluative response to them.
We have seen that in the famous hadith "Religion is advice..." the Prophet (saw) extended the principle of nasîha to every one from the top to the bottom, from the leaders to the common folks, as exemplified in the two hadiths quoted earlier. Nasîha is not a passive mode of behavior. It requires an active monitoring of actions and prompt evaluative response to them. It calls for acting on the hadith of the Prophet (saw) "A believer is a mirror to his brother."
Like consultation, giving and receiving advice is also a prophetic tradition. The Qur'an attributes this quality of character to many prophets' including Shuayb AS, Yunus AS, Hud AS, and Prophet Muhammad SAW himself. When parties that could be in a conflict engage in a give and take of sincere advice as a normal mode of inter-personal and inter-group behavior, the potential of conflict is minimized. This happens because the parties involved are able to correct one another’s views and action before they become a source of conflict.
The third element of the S-N-T formula is Ta'wun, that is cooperation. The Qur'an advise Muslims to cooperate with one another. Thus the Muslim way of doing things should be in cooperation, but within the envelope which the Qur'an defines by saying: "Cooperate with one another in goodness and piety; and do not cooperate with one another in sin and transgression." This attitude of practicing ta'wun in a discrete way forces one to come to grips with what is goodness and piety and what is sin and transgression. And this coming to grips with issues in a pro-active way leads to reduced incidence of conflict that could be dysfunctional or chronic.
Thus if one were to adopt the S-N-T formula, that is shura, nasîha and ta'wun, as a mode of inter-personal or inter-group and intra-group behavior, one's effort will be less diminished by avoidable conflict.
reprinted in www.crescentlife.com with permission from the author.
You may reach Dr. Unus by e-mail at: Iqbalunus@aol.com
Office: (703) 779-7477, ext 403
Fax: (703) 779-7999
April 10, 1998
Pre-Publication Draft for limited circulation. Unauthorized copying prohibited. This booklet was written while Dr. Iqbal Unus was the Director of the Human Resource Development Department of the International Institute of Islamic Thought, USA
