Conflict Resolution Styles - Essay Example

Name Tutor Course Date Conflict Resolution Styles Introduction Within an organization, a number of issues are common to the day to day operations. Among the issues common to any organization are conflicts that are known to take various dimensions. A conflict can thus be defined as a situation where by the concerns of two individuals are not in line with each other or rather incompatible. Conflicts are thus the various differences that are bound to emerge within an organization. Conflict resolution is an aspect that is bound to foster effective communication within an organization. How negative or bad conflicts can be within any organization is measured by the effectiveness with which they are resolved. Effective conflict resolution can lead to both professional and personal growth. There are a number measures that can be taken to resolve conflicts within an organization. This paper examines conflict resolution styles in line with the benefits associated with effective conflict resolution within an organization. Benefits of conflict resolution The emergence of conflicts within an organization does not point to a downfall of an organization. This is more so if there exists ideal measures to solve the conflicts whenever they emerge. It is more advisable for an organization to identify and immediately solve conflicts as soon as they emerge. Allowing conflicts to accumulate over a long period of time is bound to translate in to yet another crisis. Such a crisis may be more catastrophic to the organization than the conflicts. Conflict resolution in an organization is thus bound to yield the following benefits: Increased understanding, increased cohesion and improved levels of self knowledge. With regard to increased understanding, it emerges that the discussion upheld is bound to expand the awareness of the conflict among the individuals and at the same time provide an insight in to how effective goals can be achieved. This can be done without necessarily undermining others within the same organization (Deutsch 209). When conflicts are effectively resolved, it becomes possible for the individuals affected by the conflicts to develop a better mutual respect for each other and further renew their ability and faith to work as a team. This is n aspect that will in the long run foster group cohesion. In the event of any conflict within an organization, individuals are usually obliged to critically examine their own goals. This is thought to help them understand a number of aspects that are very important to them. This not only fosters their effectiveness but also helps people within an organization to sharpen their line of focus. This is an aspect that will translate in to very high self-knowledge. The failure to effectively resolve conflicts within an organization can have very adverse effects. This is because a number of conflicting goals among individuals may develop in to a number of individual dislikes. With such a scenario, team work is bound to be destroyed as much talent and ability is thrown to waste when individuals distance themselves from their responsibilities. Such a situation is bound to amount in to a spiral of strong negativity and recrimination within an organization (Deutsch 209). The Conflict Resolution Styles According to Ralph Kilmann and Kenneth Thomas, there are five major styles of handling conflicts within an organization. These five styles are thought to vary with the inherent assertiveness and cooperativeness. According to the two, individuals in any organization usually develop a preferred way of resolving their conflicts. Thomas and Kilmann further identified that various styles find their application in different situations. These two further coined the Thomas –Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) which helps individuals to identify the type of style to heed to in the event of a conflict. The TKI has thus identified five different styles of conflict resolution that can be applied in the event of conflicts within an organization. The five styles include; the competitive, collaborative, compromising, avoiding and accommodating styles. With regard to the competitive style, TKI identifies that individuals who are bound to have a competitive style show a tendency of a very firm stand and at the same time seem to know what they really want. Such individuals are thought to operate from a certain position of power. Such a position is evidently drawn away from expertise, persuasive ability, position and rank. Such a style can be adopted in the event that there is a very urgent decision that needs to be made within an organization. The decision is usually not common and may alternatively be termed as unpopular (Douglass 123).The competing style is also applied in the event that there is a need to protect against an individual that may hold selfish gains or interests within the conflict. Such a style of conflict resolution is feared for leaving some individuals with a hurting feeling. Most individuals in conflicts are bound to be left feeling unsatisfied and at the same time resentful. The competing style is uncooperative but very assertive. With this style, one individual in the conflict is shown to strongly pursue interests that are common to him at the expense of another individual’s interest. With regard to the position of power, an individual goes a head to use his position to earn an upper hand. This style generally revolves around the concept of winning or alternatively standing to an individual’s rights. Other than in the event of the need to uphold an urgent decision, this style is also applicable in the event that there are a number of vital issues and some unpopular action needs to be implemented. It is also applicable in the event of issues related to a large group of people where one clearly understands his or her right. A competing style is relatively important in the event of the need to protect oneself from individuals who are bound to take advantage of emerging forms of non-competitive behaviour (Douglass 123). For the collaborating style, the individuals involved in the resolution of the conflict try their best to meet the exact needs of each of the individuals involved in a conflict. Such individuals are bound to be very assertive but at the same time may effectively cooperate and further acknowledge each other’s importance. This is quite contrary to the competing style. This style of conflict resolution is very applicable in the event that one wishes to bring together various individuals with different opinions. This is relevant in the pursuit of a better solution in the event that there have been a conflict. Such a situation must be very important to the individuals involved in the search of the solution (Deutsch 209). The collaborative style is found to be both assertive and cooperative. This style entails a common search for a solution that may benefit a large group of people. In an attempt to solve a conflict with this style, the parties involved in the conflict resolution try to get the fine details of the problem in an attempt to meet the needs of conflicting individuals. In this regard, the conflict or disagreement between the conflicting individuals is fully explored. Such an exploration of a conflict enables the individuals involved in the resolution of the conflict to effectively learn of each others stand and later find a long term solution to a number of interpersonal problems. With this style of conflict resolution, the need to satisfy both the individual’s needs and other people’s need is held high. This type of style is relevant in the event of searching for an integrative solution. In this regard, the individual attempting to resolve the conflict is supposed to learn of the opinions of the two individuals affected by the conflict. This style involves testing assumptions and merging insights from conflicting individuals. The parties involved in the resolution of the conflict have to commit themselves by possibly incorporating other people’s concerns to come up with a consensual decision. The style is relevant in the process of working out hard feelings that have been affecting interpersonal relationships (Douglass 123). The compromising style is applicable in the event of individuals who tend to search for a solution that may seem to suit a large majority of people in a conflict. With such a style, every individual is expected to contribute part of the solution. Individuals who appear to compromise are also expected to bring out their own opinion that may relinquish them from the situation. This style of conflict resolution is preferred in the event that the cost associated with the loss of the battle is lower than the implicated cost of the conflict. This is more common in the event that both the conflicting parties have equal strength and there exists a looming deadline. This style is both cooperative and assertive. The main objective of using this type of conflict resolution is to attain an expedient and mutually appealing remedy that may partially convince or rather satisfy all the parties in a conflict. This style is thus an intermediate of both the collaborating and competing styles of conflict resolution. The compromising style unlike the competing style of conflict resolution tends to give up more. However this style tends to address a conflict directly and does not evade the problem but rather explores the conflict in more details. In a number of conflict resolution situations, the use of the compromising style has been seen to divide the difference among the individuals in a conflict as it seeks to exchange the concessions and at the same time seek a fast solution within the middle ground. With such a concept of splitting the difference between two conflicting individuals, the probability of satisfying individivual interests becomes fifty percent as the probability of satisfying other people’s interests also remains at fifty percent. This style is thus preferred in the event that the goals of the organization are relatively important but not necessarily worthy of the effort or rather the potential for modes that are more assertive. In this respect, both the conflicting parties hold equal strength and seem to be committed strongly towards goals inherent in the management of labour. The compromising style of conflict resolutions helps in achieving temporary solutions to situations that may appear complex. With this style, it becomes possible to attain an expedient remedy to a problem especially in the event of amounting pressure. This style is also very applicable in the event of the need for supporting a mode especially when competition or collaboration seems to be failing (Douglass 123). For the accommodating style of conflict resolution, there exists a certain kind of willingness to attempt meeting the needs of other individuals at the expense of personal interests. With this style of conflict resolution, the individual attempting to fore go his own interests for the sake of other people’s interests knows when exactly to do so. In this respect, such an individual can effectively be persuaded to forsake a position once held for the sake of another party even when the situation is not warranted. With this in mind, the individual is thought to be highly cooperative but not assertive. This style is highly applicable in the event that the issues leading to the conflict matter more to one party than they matter to yet another party. Such a style is only possible in the event that peace precedes the concept of winning or loosing a battle. It can only be evident in the event that one wishes to earn credit for the favour that he might have given. Since very few individuals are bound to return favours, this style of conflict resolution may appear not to give very good out comes. This type of conflict resolution style is an exact opposite of the competing style (Deutsch 209). Here one individual in a conflict is persuaded to forego his own concerns at the expense of another individual’s concerns. This style of conflict resolution has a very strong concept of sacrifice. The concept of sacrifice in this regard may take various forms including charity or selfless generosity alongside obedience towards another person’s opinions when one has no obligation to do so .Such a form of sacrificing also revolves around yielding to another individual’s opinion. With this style of conflict resolution, the need to satisfy other people’s interests is definitely higher than the need to satisfy one’s own interests. The accommodating style of conflict resolution is applicable in the event that the issue to be solved is more important to others than to the accommodator of the situation. Such a type of resolution is thus upheld as a form of a good will gesture. This style helps to foster good credit that may be of relevance to an individual. The style is thus useful in the event where competition may damage one’s cause especially when out done .With this style harmony is thus preserved and is thought to be more of a courting kind of behaviour (Deutsch 209). The last style of conflict resolution identified by both Thomas and Kilmann is the avoiding style. The use of this style fosters the concept of literally evading the conflict. This style is thus upheld by typically delegating any decisions that may amount in to controversy. In this style, an individual delegates the responsibility of accepting defaults or mistakes. In this regard, an individual does not wish to hurt another individual’s feelings. Such a style is very appropriate in a case where victory does not matter or when one is better placed to solve the crisis. Thre are a number of situations where this style of conflict resolution has been considered ineffective. The avoiding style is relevant if an issue is trivial or when there exists other issues of more importance. In such a style, one has no interest of satisfying his or her own concerns. In such a case it is more important to gather more information on the conflict (Deutsch 209). This is a style that can be effectively adopted if other people are involved with the resolving of the conflict. Conclusion Understanding the different styles of conflict resolution is a very important aspect of communication within an organization. How conflicts are resolved within an organization measures both the ability to negotiate and the ability to foster appropriate behaviour. The conflict resolution instrument designed by Thomas and Kilmann is a vital tool of conflict resolution in organizations. This model is an ideal insight in to how a number of common conflicts can be resolved. Conflicts are common to any organization and there is need for an organization to adopt effective measures that can help resolve conflicts when they emerge. Works cited Deutsch Morton. The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice. Washington: John Wiley & Sons, 2006. Douglass Laura. The effective Nurse: Leader and Manager. Michigan: Mosby-year book, 1992. Read More

This is thought to help them understand a number of aspects that are very important to them. This not only fosters their effectiveness but also helps people within an organization to sharpen their line of focus. This is an aspect that will translate in to very high self-knowledge. The failure to effectively resolve conflicts within an organization can have very adverse effects. This is because a number of conflicting goals among individuals may develop in to a number of individual dislikes. With such a scenario, team work is bound to be destroyed as much talent and ability is thrown to waste when individuals distance themselves from their responsibilities.

Such a situation is bound to amount in to a spiral of strong negativity and recrimination within an organization (Deutsch 209). The Conflict Resolution Styles According to Ralph Kilmann and Kenneth Thomas, there are five major styles of handling conflicts within an organization. These five styles are thought to vary with the inherent assertiveness and cooperativeness. According to the two, individuals in any organization usually develop a preferred way of resolving their conflicts. Thomas and Kilmann further identified that various styles find their application in different situations.

These two further coined the Thomas –Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) which helps individuals to identify the type of style to heed to in the event of a conflict. The TKI has thus identified five different styles of conflict resolution that can be applied in the event of conflicts within an organization. The five styles include; the competitive, collaborative, compromising, avoiding and accommodating styles. With regard to the competitive style, TKI identifies that individuals who are bound to have a competitive style show a tendency of a very firm stand and at the same time seem to know what they really want.

Such individuals are thought to operate from a certain position of power. Such a position is evidently drawn away from expertise, persuasive ability, position and rank. Such a style can be adopted in the event that there is a very urgent decision that needs to be made within an organization. The decision is usually not common and may alternatively be termed as unpopular (Douglass 123).The competing style is also applied in the event that there is a need to protect against an individual that may hold selfish gains or interests within the conflict.

Such a style of conflict resolution is feared for leaving some individuals with a hurting feeling. Most individuals in conflicts are bound to be left feeling unsatisfied and at the same time resentful. The competing style is uncooperative but very assertive. With this style, one individual in the conflict is shown to strongly pursue interests that are common to him at the expense of another individual’s interest. With regard to the position of power, an individual goes a head to use his position to earn an upper hand.

This style generally revolves around the concept of winning or alternatively standing to an individual’s rights. Other than in the event of the need to uphold an urgent decision, this style is also applicable in the event that there are a number of vital issues and some unpopular action needs to be implemented. It is also applicable in the event of issues related to a large group of people where one clearly understands his or her right. A competing style is relatively important in the event of the need to protect oneself from individuals who are bound to take advantage of emerging forms of non-competitive behaviour (Douglass 123).

For the collaborating style, the individuals involved in the resolution of the conflict try their best to meet the exact needs of each of the individuals involved in a conflict. Such individuals are bound to be very assertive but at the same time may effectively cooperate and further acknowledge each other’s importance. This is quite contrary to the competing style. This style of conflict resolution is very applicable in the event that one wishes to bring together various individuals with different opinions.

Read More