Managing interorganizational Relations

  By Fesseha Nair

The Eritrean Democratic Alliance as a partner arrangement was not free from frictions and conflicts. As forum for democracy building it was and is still conflict prone process. Building partnership is a hard task to overcome. Building partnership requires a certain degree of trust, cooperation and honesty. The member political organizations can have different priorities and standards but all are bounded by the success of the project – removal of the dictator in Eritrea. What is required now is to resolve their conflicts in a way that contributes to the long –term effectiveness of their working relationship. In this article, I will deal with some brotherly advices that can lead to innovation, better decisions, and more creative problem solving.

The EDA should have been a conscious effort to form collaborative relationships with all members in the opposition camp but unfortunately it didn’t.

What are the key skills that can make the EDA leadership successful? Here, I would like to confine my analysis in four main points:

-          We Eritreans attack the people in the leadership instead attacking the problems

-          Focus on own interests and positions

-          Invent options for mutual gain

-          Use objective criteria

Separate the people from the problem

The issue of conflict in the EDA congress was the method of election of executive officer. It has nothing to do with personal relations or organizational relations. The result of this disagreement was all burdened to the Eritrean Federal Democratic Movement and its leaders have been black mailed and sentenced to death by some member organization cadres in the internet. Instead of Attacking the problems, ELF-RC  high cadres have been attacking us by our identities as non –eritreans. Once people feel attacked or threatened goes to defending but we preferred not counterattack instead solving the problem. My key advice is then to focus on the problems instead of persons.

Keeping the focus on the issue of conflict inside EDA, As a member of the EFDM, Iam not frustrated or upset by your personal attacks. I keep cool and let all anger fly out the window.

Personal attacks either to Beshir Ishaq or Woldyesus Ammar has nothing to do with the issue of conflict. It is just a bad culture of the so called Eritrean Cadres of the liberation period. I invite the ELF-RC to duel on the issue instead of attacking personalities by their ethnical . religious and regional identities. Beshir and Wolde are from the same ethnicity and have a good culture of respect and resolving conflicts peacefully.

It is important to separate the people from the problem when discussing to solve it. Let us seek solutions for the misunderstandings that split EDA, instead intimidating others to accept your unreasonable arguments.

Nharnet Team Note:  Fesseha rather respond to the particular individual or individuals about whom he is talking about instead of trying to paint our cadres.  Practicing objectivity goes a long way than preaching it.  You seem to forget that it was only a short time ago that ELF-RC which gave its festival platform to Beshir Isaq.  We have not seen any senior cadre or an official talking negative about any individuals.  ELF-RC never labels any one but rather deals with every organization regardless of its influence, size or political orientation.  It is well documented and no one can take it away from it.  Your own statement that Woldeyesus and Beshir being from the same ethnicity rather tells that our cadres could not talk about him on religious or ethnic basis.  ELF-RC represents every ethnic and religious, regional, and religious groups and is proud of it and only looks at differences from political perspective only.

Focus on own interests and positions

In the EDA meeting and before that there were discussions and preparations polarizing the EDA. Such positions were been discussed and stated by the member organizations called themselves , “ Bloc 1” or the , “ Major “ or , “ Mainstream”. This group have driven by their ego that they are the only capable leaders of the time in the opposition camp. What most mattered this so called, “ Capable leaders” is not the interest but the position and this had made them not to understand what the others say. They lacked the habit of humble communication that listens to be listened. They lacked to identify the interests of the other organizations and were driven by their own interests and positions. The key point is try to understand the others interests and positions to be listened by others.

Nharnet Team Note: Nothing could have been the farthest from the truth than this one.  EDA I was the part that showed flexibility.  It was the one which came with various useful, concrete and objective practical solutions.  It was the one that accepted a nominee from EDA 2.  It is EDA I that has a recommendation on the table on how the two parts can have a working cooperation.  There is no need to go into detail as every thing has been elaborately posted on Nharnet and other web sites. 

EDA I has moved on to do the nationalist democratic business of bringing about a change and so has called for cooperation to the extent possible.

Invent options for mutual gain

The EDA member organizations have not identified each others interests in their partnership, they can explore other options for mutual gain. This is not easy. Blackmailing and intimidating inhibit creativity and free exchange.  What is required is collaborative brainstorming in which constituents of both EDA member groups work together to solve the problem in a way that will lead to win the dictator in Eritrea instead of splitting. The key to brainstorming is separating the inventing from deciding. Let us talk to generate as many options as possible and at last focus on the greatest possibilities.

Clarifying interests and exploring mutual options creates the opportunity to know each others interest and needs. Such opportunities help us to reach amicable agreement.

Use objective criteria

The EDA should have been an established organization with developed standards and rules to help deal with common areas of dispute. Developed organizations have blue books and codes for fair practices and policies to resolve conflicts. The EDA lacks established formulas. When the EDA leadership come to election they don’t have a , “ Written electoral rules to refer” except their charter. The Charter is the constitution of the EDA but the EDA has not adopted a legal electoral laws based on the charter. The Arguments for decision making and electoral laws need legal profession to be used as precedent or to adjudicate your claims as legal or illegal.  Using objective criteria in elections is not the same as passing decisions in the congresses, therefore, lack of using objective criteria is important to reach agreement.

In conclusion, it is beneficial to work toward mutually satisfying solutions, but still we will encounter some who have dominant attitude about political life and will be difficult to deal with them. But , here , I would like to prefer the way “ When they push you, don’t push back” method. Avoid putting our strength against theirs directly, instead use our skills to step aside and turn their strength towards the dictator instead against us.

Our primary weapons are not to attack personalities but problems. We are not eager to make statements but instead ask questions. Anger begets anger,our second weapon is silence. If our brothers in ELFRC make an unreasonable attacks on us we sit and say no word. Our best defence against unreasonable attacks is to search the best alternative to reach an agreement.

Our method gives us a power to walk and say, “No deal with unreasonable people unless they work towards mutual respect.”