Conflict Management Styles
Conflict Management Definition
Conflict management is the process of limiting the negative aspects of conflict while
increasing the positive aspects of conflict (Wikipedia). Often,
conflict is viewed as negative interactions that are destructive
to relationships (read about Why
do we stay in destructive relationships?). However, if conflict is managed
effectively, it can have a positive impact on people, relationships and conflict
can even be good for business.
Conflict Management Styles Blog - Introduction
I'm dealing with a conflict. What should I do?
This is the essential question of any person who is seeking
to resolve a conflict in their life.
Most conflicts have numerous possible outcomes. For most of us, however, it may seem like
there is only one choice, or maybe a handful of choices. Sometimes none of them are very
appealing. For the purposes of this
post, I assume mainly that we are talking about interpersonal conflicts,
perhaps with friends, co-workers (see also Workplace Conflict), or family members (see also Family Fights), and particularly ones that
are non-violent or personally threatening in nature. Please always remember to
contact the appropriate authorities if you are in any personal danger. See also, what to do if you are in a destructive relationship.
This blog post is based around the Thomas-Kilmann theory of
conflict resolution. You can read more about
it here. Also, check out our blog on Songs about Conflict Management Styles and Songs about Conflict.
Conflict Management Styles - The TKI Model
The context can help determine the right strategy to approach, manage and resolve the conflict. However, across situations, you may consider the style of conflict management, such as the styles outlined by the Thomas-Kilmann Instrument. These styles are “Competing (assertive, uncooperative), Avoiding (unassertive, uncooperative), Accommodating (unassertive, cooperative), Collaborating (assertive, cooperative), and Compromising (intermediate assertiveness and cooperativeness)” (Wikipedia).
Conflict Management Styles - The TKI Model
The conflict management styles are divided
into 5 groups that represent different ways of addressing or failing to address
conflict. To determine your conflict management style, you need to complete the
TKI
instrument.
The context can help determine the right strategy to approach, manage and resolve the conflict. However, across situations, you may consider the style of conflict management, such as the styles outlined by the Thomas-Kilmann Instrument. These styles are “Competing (assertive, uncooperative), Avoiding (unassertive, uncooperative), Accommodating (unassertive, cooperative), Collaborating (assertive, cooperative), and Compromising (intermediate assertiveness and cooperativeness)” (Wikipedia).
Even if you do not complete the assessment, the styles provide
a great deal of insights into the ways people manage conflict. If you do
complete the instrument, it is designed to improve your self-awareness in
conflict situations.
Over time, people may see their conflict
management style change over time or even situation. You might be highly
effective at managing conflict with your partner, but have difficulty managing
conflict in the workplace. The different styles are not necessarily good or
bad, unless you need to balance your styles more appropriately. If you consider
yourself a ‘yes man’, then you might be sacrificing your needs over others.
If you don’t change your conflict
management style, then your style might lead you feel resentful, or it might
even negatively impact your self
esteem. Each style has advantages and disadvantages based on the
circumstances and the levels of
conflict. Some advantages might appear to be negative, but they might be
necessary. For example, the competing style might appear to be negative, but
might be necessary in cases when you cannot accommodate others in any way, like
in matters of personal safety.
If you have a conflict, read about the definition
of trust, how
to build trust, how
to fix a relationship, and the top
10 steps to resolve your conflict.
Conflict Management Style - Avoidance
A first step in any conflict can just be to confront the
binary of action versus inaction.
Avoidance is one method of conflict management. There may be times when avoidance is the most
appropriate solution. This may apply in
“pick your battles”- type situations, such as where another person is posturing
or being antagonistic for reasons or results that ultimately will not affect
you. If we assume, however, that the other parties have a meaningful
relationship with you, avoiding a problem between you is not typically a great
idea. Sometimes it leads to the problem
festering, or blaming each other, especially if no one takes
responsibility (see also Self-Leadership in Conflict Resolution). The results can be
harmful and damaging (see also Conflict Escalation).
Considering that avoidance typically requires the least
physical or mental effort, it is easy to allow avoidance to set in
unconsciously. If there is a particular
issue that needs to be addressed, ask yourself how long it has gone
unaddressed. Is there anything in
particular you are waiting on? Is it possible to take control of the situation,
or do you require additional input? Do you need the help of a conflict coach to try to better understand the situation? Is it a matter of not wanting to move
forward (see also How to Move On), or a matter of truly not being able to? If the latter, could it ever
get to the point of being addressable or resolvable?
Finally, even if the proper solution to a conflict is
avoidance, it may be helpful to reconcile with yourself why this is the
case. Perhaps you need to tell yourself
once-and-for-all that it isn’t worth worrying about, and thus the problem can
be left in the past. In other words, you need to set some interpersonal and personal boundaries to resolve conflict. Perhaps this may mean signaling this to others: “I’m
sorry, but really don’t feel this is my responsibility.”; “I am not willing to
move ahead with this.” Acknowledging to
yourself that this is an appropriate solution may also help you move past the conflict.
Conflict Management Style - Accommodating
When you accommodate someone else, you give in and allow the
other party to have their way. By
definition, it involves some sort of forfeiture of your position (see also Negotiation Defined). This is not necessarily a bad thing, and,
like avoiding, accommodation can be of practical use. Think carefully about whether this matter is
a battle worth fighting. One upside may
be that you can maintain a relationship with someone who cares far more about the
conflict than you do, or who may perceive the matter to be more important than
you do.
Downsides can include feelings of resentment or dislike
towards the other party. Also, if
accommodation is your go-to tactic, you run the risk of being taken advantage
of over a longer period or for a series of conflicts with the same person. If the stakes in the conflict are very high
from your perspective, accommodating and admitting defeat is likely not a good
idea.
Conflict Management Style - Competing
A competitive stance is the opposite of accommodation, where
you refuse to give in. This is a good style to use when the issue is very
important to you and when the outcome is significant. A good example might be enforcing your legal
rights if someone has harmed you or rather obviously broken an agreement (See Contract Negotiation Tips).
Being overly competitive has its risks as well. It could earn you or your organization a reputation for being uncooperative or petty. Insisting on a competitive stance can also lead to Pyrrhic victories, where the cost of “winning” is so great that no real benefit is obtained for anyone.
Being overly competitive has its risks as well. It could earn you or your organization a reputation for being uncooperative or petty. Insisting on a competitive stance can also lead to Pyrrhic victories, where the cost of “winning” is so great that no real benefit is obtained for anyone.
Conflict Management Style - Compromising
A compromise necessarily entails the parties’ failing to
fulfill what they each truly want, and instead forego some aspects of their
intended result to appease the other.
This can be viewed as a partial loss from the perspective of both
sides. It can be appropriate when more
time or information is needed to reach a final resolution, when there is no
reasonable prospect of collaboration, or when the two parties cannot agree and
yet must work together.
The problem with compromising is that it can become a
crutch, an easy-way to (perhaps begrudgingly) move forward without considering better
options. Parties that find themselves continuously compromising should beware
of developing this habit. It can also lead to the parties repeatedly misleading
others (or even themselves) about their true expectations or needs, because
they count on being let down.
Conflict Management Style - Collaboration
Collaboration is in many cases a desirable outcome. It results in “win-win” scenarios and can
help all parties move forward content. It can also potentially lead to creative
solutions that neither side had considered before. Sometimes, the whole is worth more than the
sum of its parts.
Dangers with collaboration include the fact that the parties
typically must trust each other enough to reach out and share the burden of the
conflict (see How to Build Trust). This may not even be possible
if, for example, there is a duty of confidentiality owed to someone
involved. There also may not be enough
time or resources available for this method to be practical.
Conflict Management Style - Conclusion
These are the five general styles of the Thomas-Killmann
model. Note that any of these styles can
shift into the other modes depending on circumstances.
Dan Lawlor - Mediate2go Editor and Blogger