Ever wish you never had to deal with conflict? Well, that is not very realistic. We cannot avoid conflict. However, thanks to researchers Robert Blake and Jane Mouton we have some options on how to deal with conflict based on two underlying dimensions: your concern for yourself and what you want, and your concern for the other party and what they want. Let's break down this illustration that shows the five strategies for engaging in conflict.
Surprisingly, conflict in itself is never always a positive or negative experience. Rather, it is neutral. What determines whether it is good or bad is the strategy you go with to handle the conflict. No single strategy is the right one to handle every single conflict. Even though some strategies may seem more constructive than the other when looking at them. Rather than only one safe way to go every time, there is probably one particular strategy to work through a certain conflict in the moment.
Competing
The competing strategy is your classic win-lose scenario. You have a high concern for yourself and what you want, and no concern for the other's or their outcome. There are no ties.
This strategy would make sense if the outcome were concrete and nothing can be shared, like getting a job over someone else. Ongoing competition may enhance relationships, as long as the parties see it as a positive aspect of their relationship. It becomes a problem when it starts leading to feelings of resentment or desires to get even with the other person.
Avoiding
When there is no concern for what you want or what others want, this leads to avoiding conflict. Whether the motives are as simple as not caring or being uncomfortable with the conflict, some people will go with avoiding conflict altogether.
If you are cool with avoiding conflict, or leaving an issue alone and not engaging, in order to maintain harmony, then this may be the strategy to go with. Heads up, conflicts that are avoided can just get worse. Especially, when some conflicts are so important that they can come up again or often. Because conflicts are left unresolved, relationships can start to feel unsatisfactory.
Accommodating
Since you would be taking one for the team following this strategy, you are doing the exact opposite of competing. This level of sacrifice shows low concern for yourself and high concern for the other party. This is often shown in an effort to keep the peace. Be careful, if you keep accommodating, the other party may make you feel resentful. Also, within our culture, this may be seen as weak.
Collaborating
This strategy can take a lot of effort. An effort in patience, work, and creativity to understand each others' desires and accomplish those goals. This is because you are concerned with your needs as well as the other.
Compromising
The last strategy falls smack in the middle as the concern for all parties for under "moderate." I feel this leaves the parties in a "lose-lose" situation. The parties didn't get exactly what they wanted, yet they came out of the conflict with something valuable.
So, which strategy would work best for you in any given conflict? Can you take into consideration a desire to have a positive experience?
What other factors come to mind when facing different scenarios of conflict? The biggest one for me when conflict or negotiations come to mind is the balance of power and who's holding the most cards.
Things can get pretty tricky when facing conflict, but I hope that this has demonstrated a clearer picture and understanding of where you stand to go into the conflict and how much you care about the other party and outcome.
Comments
Post a Comment