Conflict Management Styles - Coursework Example

Conflict Management Introduction A concept is a generalized idea, or mental schema of a thing or class of things that is derived from specific instances or occurrences. This paper will examine specific parts of the concept of conflict management. In particular, this work will highlight the importance of engaging in conflict and delineate the different conflict handling styles that can be used in a conflict situation. It will state that conflicts are an inevitable part of our everyday lives and that it is healthy to engage in conflict. Finally, it will state that different conflict handling styles can be employed depending upon the situation as well as the individual propensity of the person dealing with the conflict situation. The paper will be structured in the following manner. To begin with, a broad definition of conflict will be provided. Thereafter the paper will explain that conflict is positive and point out the importance of engaging in conflict. The benefits of constrictive conflict management will also be elucidated. Having established the importance of engaging in conflict, the next part of the paper will highlight the two categories of conflict that we are likely to face in our daily lives as well as the causes of each type of conflict. Having elaborated on the different varieties of conflict, the two dimensions of conflict behavior that these different conflict situations evoke will be explained and the various conflict handling styles will be examined. A definition of conflict: A conflict is a disagreement between individuals or groups who have differing needs, interests, opinions, and values. A conflict can be defined as a “condition in which people’s concerns appear to be incompatible” (Thomas 2). Anger, blame and distress are common emotions associated with conflict. There are certain misconceptions and pre-conceived notions about conflict. Most people believe that conflict is negative, abnormal or unhealthy. However, the reality is that conflict is positive and it is healthy to engage in it. Conflict is inevitable! Whether it is in business or personal relationships, conflicts are bound to happen. Conflict is often considered a taboo and people often try their best to avoid it. However, the reality is that most relationships require productive conflict in order to grow. Individuals who prefer to avoid debate on important issues and stay away from conflict are likely to cause dangerous tension. They may resort to personal attacks which are more harmful than heated arguments over issues. While conflict has its risks, in most cases it is a learning experience and an opportunity for growth. Hence it is a mistake to assume that conflict is harmful “because only if people express their differences will new ideas emerge. Indeed some degree of conflict between individuals and groups…potentially beneficial in terms of motivation and setting higher standards” (Marsden and Ritson 320). Engaging in conflict has several advantages. Individuals and groups that engage in conflict can discuss and resolve issues quickly and efficiently and arrive at the best possible solution. They are also likely to emerge from conflict situations with no residual ill feelings and are ready to engage in frank discussions on critical topics. On the other hand, individuals who avoid conflict tend to repeatedly re-examine issues without resolution and often fail to draw on the opinions and perspectives of others. Lack of effective conflict management can cause stress, anxiety, and mistrust. Individuals may become so focused on the conflict situation that they may lose sight of their goals. There is also the possibility that judgments and perceptions become inaccurate and collaboration across groups may decrease. Individuals fail to see other points of view and cannot compromise on an issue. Having established that it is healthy and beneficial to engage in conflict, the question arises as to what is the best way to proceed in a conflict situation. Here it is important to remember that there is no cast-in-iron process that can be applied to all conflict situations to bring about a successful resolution. Indeed different conflict situations call for different resolution techniques. So before examining the conflict handling strategies, it is first important to recognize the different types of conflict that one is likely to face and also the various factors that cause each type of conflict. This kind of categorization of conflict situations will give an individual a better handle on dealing with them effectively. Generally conflicts can be divided into two main categories: issue-specific conflict and interpersonal conflict. Issue-specific conflict is generally about decisions, issues, ideas, or actions. It occurs when two individuals or groups disagree about an issue. On the other hand, interpersonal conflict is more personalized. It occurs when individuals or teams do not like each others behaviors. Interpersonal conflict is generally rooted in negative emotions such as anger or frustration. It is fuelled by perceptions about a person’s character or motives. Issue-specific conflict can be further sub-divided into data conflicts, interest conflicts, and structural conflicts. Data conflicts are caused by missing information, misinformation, or differing interpretations of information. Interest conflict is caused by differing interests on substantiate issues, issues related to processes, or differing psychological interests. Structural conflicts are caused by an imbalance in the distribution of resources, power or authority and other factors such as constraints imposed by time or geographical or environmental conditions. Coming to interpersonal conflicts, they are generally of two kinds, relationship conflicts and value conflicts. Relationship conflicts are generally caused by powerful emotions, a belief in stereotypes, poor communication or miscommunication. On the other hand, value conflicts are caused by differing goals regarding value systems or differing criteria for assessing a person’s behavior. However, while there are many types and causes of conflict, keep in mind that a conflict situation cannot be pigeonholed into any one specific type. Often a single situation may be triggered by multiple causes and can be categorized into many types. Just as conflict situations can be broadly classified into two types, issue-specific and interpersonal conflict, similarly, conflict situations also evoke two different kinds of behavioral patterns from individuals. They are goal centered behavior and relationship centered behavior. These behaviors influence the approach that people adopt while dealing with conflict. Generally, there are five approaches that people adopt five different styles while dealing with conflict. They are “forcing, accommodating, avoiding, compromising, collaborating” (Whetten, Cameron, and Woods 15). These approaches can be mapped along the two dimensions of conflict behavior: goal-centered behavior and relationship-centered behavior. The accommodating approach “reflects the importance of the relationship” while the forcing approach reflects the “individual’s attempts to satisfy their own concerns” (Ibid). Each of these conflict handling styles has been elaborated along with guidelines on usage and when it would be best to use it. Forcing: In this approach, “you seek to win your position at the expense of the other party losing theirs” (Hiam 7). This style is best used when the “outcome is extremely important” and your relationship with the other party is of “relatively low importance” (Ibid). There are certain situations which call for the use of this style. In instances in which there can be only one “winner” or when “making a decision is crucial” (Ibid) this style becomes the most appropriate one to use. For instance if two real estate agents were competing for your business, you cannot adopt a compromise style in which you will buy half a house from each of them. This style is best adopted when you are dealing with “important issues” in which “unpopular actions need implementing” (DuBrin 389). Examples of such situations are “cost cutting, enforcing unpopular rules or discipline” (Ibid). Although this style is not negative, it should be used in appropriate situations. Hiam warns that if this style is “overused” it can have a “detrimental effect” (7). This approach is not advisable when both the conflicting parties are equally powerful and complex issues are involved. In such a case, adopting a “wining at all costs” (Ibid) strategy may not be the best thing to do. Accommodating: In this approach “you put aside your needs and desires and acquiesce to the other person’s requests or demands” (Hiam 6). It is appropriate to use this style when you value your relationship with the other person and when the outcome of the conflict is not important to you. When faced with a conflict situation, if you can apply the rationale that maintaining harmonious relationships is your top priority, then it is best to consider this approach. For instance, an owner of a retail store may give an irate customer a full refund, because he wants to retain the customer’s loyalty and expects future business from that customer. Hiam points out that when using this style, it is important that the other party recognizes that “you have given up something of value in order to resolve the conflict” (Hiam 6). You need to ensure that you are viewed as “cooperative” rather than “weak” (Ibid). In other words, you need to get the message across that you have made a “proactive decision” to give up something of value to resolve the conflict. This strategy is not without its drawback: The difficult with the habitual use of the accommodating approach is that it emphasizes preserving a friendly relationship at the expense of appraising issues critically and protecting personal rights. This may result in others taking advantage of you, lowering your self-esteem as you observe yourself being used by others to accomplish their objectives while you fail to make any progress toward your own. (Whetten, Cameron, and Woods 17) Avoiding: In this approach, you withdraw from the conflict situation. You may either postpone dealing with the situation or ignore it altogether. In such cases, the conflict remains largely unresolved. People who are emotionally unqualified to deal with the stress associated with confrontations are likely to use this approach. Repeated use of this tactic can cause frustration to build up as issues never seem to get resolved. While avoiding does not appear to be an ideal strategy to adopt in a conflict situation, there may be instances in which it may be wiser to adopt this approach. Sometimes people may pick an argument with you over trivial issues that may not matter to them later on. In such cases, it is best to avoid the conflict altogether as the situation is likely to resolve itself if left alone. Hiam advises on the use of this strategy as “an initial response to conflicts when you are unprepared for them” (6). It can be used as a strategy to gain time till you figure out a suitable course of action. For example, if you are asked to pick a time for a meeting to discuss a conflict situation, you can pick one as far off in the future as possible so that you have time to weigh your options and consider your approach carefully. Compromising: In this approach “each side concedes some of their issues in order to win others” (Hiam 7). However, if this approach is to work, it is important that both sides involved in the conflict situation are compliant and open to working things out. Hiam believed that this approach is most appropriate when “the outcome is of low to medium importance, and relationship is of high to medium importance” (Ibid). However, if this approach is to work, it is important that there is a level of trust and honesty between both the sides and that the needs of both the parties are mutually understood. DuBrin describes this style as “halfway between domination and appeasement….The term splitting the difference reflects this orientation which is commonly used in activities such as purchasing a house or car” (386). Collaborating: In this style “you collaborate with the other party to try to resolve a common problem to a mutually satisfying outcome” (Hiam 8). This approach is likely to work if each party feels that the results gained through collaboration would be far better than the results they could achieve on their own. If this approach is to work, there should be a high level of trust on both sides. This style is best employed when “both the outcome and the relationship are of high importance to both parties” (Ibid). However, it is advisable not to use this style in situations which require a quick resolution of the problem situation as the process of collaboration is generally time-consuming. This style cannot be used in all situations. Certain situations require “expedient solutions: where to go for lunch, what brand paper to use in the office copier, etc” (Ibid). So collaboration cannot work in such situations and may even lead to a waste in time and effort. Conclusion: As stated earlier, conflict is healthy and can have positive outcomes. People adopt two behavioral modes during conflict. They are goal-centered behavior and relationship-centered behavior. There are different conflict handling styles that people can adopt in conflict situations depending upon whether relationship, outcomes or a mix of both is important in a particular situation. It is best to work at enhancing your mastery of all five approaches. This will help you effectively assess varied conflict situations that you face and apply the approach that best suits the situation. Works Cited DuBrin, Andrew J. Leadership: Research Findings, Practice, and Skills. 4th ed. USA: Houghton Mifflin Co, 2005. Hiam, Alexander. Dealing with Conflict Instrument. Amherst, Massachusetts: HRD Press Inc, 1999. Marsden, A. and N. Ritson. Organisational Management. London: The Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, 2003. Thomas, Kenneth W. “Making Conflict Management a Strategic Advantage.” Psychometrics: 9 pp. Online. Internet. 17 Dec. 2007. Available: http://www.daviesblack.com/content/conflict_whitepaper.pdf Whetten, David A., Kim Cameron, and Mike Woods. Effective Conflict Management. London: Harper Collins, 1996. Read More