In many cases, conflict management tends to be carried out in a reactive and unplanned manner. For example, we often hear that when a dispute erupts, government officials from agencies that have the authority related to the subject of the dispute immediately summon and bring together the disputing parties and invite them to seek solutions through deliberation. But often these good intentions result in an agreement that is unacceptable to the parties. This situation is caused, among others, by:

• The parties have no serious intention to end the conflict as yet. They are attending the conflict resolution process merely to fulfill the invitation of the authorized agency official.
• The parties do not fully understand the conflict experienced or even in some cases, feel that they do not have a conflict.
• Representatives of the negotiating parties do not actually represent the interests of policy makers, the company’s, the communities, or the wider interests of society.
• There no adequate information available as a basis for designing the best possible solution in the reality of the conflict context at the time.

To reduce and avoid these conditions, CRU seeks to utilize rational and systematic methods of conflict resolution which include, among others, (1) building cooperative relationships between the parties, (2) studies to build an adequate information base to understand the conflict and its context. properly and identify effective alternative solutions, (3) design and guide cooperation between conflicting parties, usually through negotiation and joint planning. In the realm of conflict resolution methodology, this method is called “mediated negotiation”, or often just “mediation”. Better conflict management will ultimately bring the conflicting parties to an acceptable, actionable and sustainable agreement.