Association Conflict, Us Versus Them?

It seems, based on the outcome of past Legislative Sessions here in Arizona, that Homeowners Associations are a hotbed of conflict with tyrannical boards of directors demanding indentured servitude from the Association’s members. Those of us who work with Associations on a day-to-day basis know that in most cases the opposite is closer to the truth. Directors are often reluctant to exert too much pressure on members of the Association, and many spend hours debating the level of corrective response to apply in a given situation. Some will even practice blatant avoidance of an issue in the hope it will just go away. Sure, we all know of those boards who can’t get beyond the literal translation of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs), but most boards, with the help of a good manager, find that there may be some room for interpretation of the documents, and develop unique solutions in conflict resolution which lead to consensus between all parties concerned, successfully eliminating the us versus them paradigm.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary provides us with an appropriate definition for the conflicts that arise within an HOA -- Conflict: The mental struggle resulting from incompatible or opposing needs, drives, wishes, or external or internal demands. Let us face facts, for as long as there have been people conflict has existed. If everyone agreed on everything, life would be very dull and HOA’s are no exception. Managers and boards frequently find themselves in the middle of these conflicts. Be they between the board and homeowners over an architectural improvement or issue of noncompliance. Homeowners and the board over a new policy or assessment rate increase. Of course, we cannot forget board members versus fellow board members as they defend their position on an important issue. Each of these situations, while the result of differing circumstances, are fundamentally handled in the same manner, and based on the manager’s or board’s skill level can range from somewhat difficult to downright daunting.

A successful resolution to conflict can be achieved through a variety of techniques; negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and litigation are the most common. Managers and boards are most often involved directly with the less formal processes of negotiation and mediation. As these are the most beneficial to all parties concerned, we should concentrate on those processes, striving to avoid the more caustic and costly alternatives involving attorney’s and the court system. A successful manager must be a skilled negotiator/mediator; they are the one most often called upon to facilitate these processes when a conflict arises.

While somewhat informal, lack of preparation is certainly the roadmap to the failure of process. Simple items such as procuring a neutral location for the meeting, and providing copies of pertinent documents regarding the conflict are things that should be handled by the manager. Managers should also work to guide both parties in cooperative problem solving and in gaining objective focus on both sides of the conflict. The key is not allowing the parties to defend blindly their position. A successful negotiator works to draw out possible alternatives from both parties. This is the challenge; failure by either party to recognize that the other has a valid position will result in failure of the process. By restating key points and assisting in the clarification of those points, the negotiator can add value to the process. A successfully negotiated resolution to conflict is a win-win for both parties concerned, as the aggrieved parties develop the solution and agree to make it work. Developing a successful negotiation/mediation strategy is a powerful management tool, and resolving a situation before it escalates will hold a manager and board in good standing with community residents.

Ken Bade, CMCA®, AMS®, PCAM®
President/CEO
Lewis Management Resources
Tucson, AZ