Dealing with Conflict: What’s the Best Way?

Conflict

There is no one ideal way of dealing with conflict. The best response is well matched to the situation and may involve multiple approaches over time. The best way to deal with conflict emerges from a familiarity with the options, and the ability to assess the strengths of each. Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann describe five modes for responding to conflict.

Accommodation

An accommodation strategy emphasizes relationship, good will, group cohesion, and the expertise and authority of others. It resolves conflict by accommodating the needs or perspective of others through generosity, respect, support and/or sensitivity.

Avoidance

Avoidance emphasizes the potential fallout of more interactive conflict modes, and only entering conflict when the conditions are appropriate for positive outcomes. This mode provides time and distance for conflicting needs and perspectives to change on their own, or for parties to develop the conditions for successful resolution.

Collaboration

Dealing with conflict through collaboration emphasizes identifying the best, most robust, long-term solution with the greatest buy-in. With this mode, parties invest the time, attention, and resources to fully consider and integrate multiple perspectives, needs, and implications.

Competition

Competition emphasizes facts, strength and courage of convictions, and speed and action. This strategy resolves conflict through testing ideas and commitment. A hallmark of competition is strong advocacy for a subset of needs and perspectives that are seen as highly compelling.

Compromise

This mode emphasizes pragmatism, reciprocity, and workable solutions (even if temporary). Compromise resolves conflict through flexibility, negotiation, and an emphasis on short-term progress.

 

 

 

 

Previous Post
Tectonic Plates, Ocean Liners, and Academe
Next Post
The Challenges of Making Change in Academia, Part I

On related topics

Separating and coming back together

Intent vs. Impact: Narrowing the Gap

Impact vs. intent: Yes, I’m talking about that much-dreaded moment when someone tells you that something you’ve just said or done hurts or has a negative impact in some way. Perhaps it came across as racist or sexist (or both), or demeaning in some other way. And you (and by “you”…

Achieving the Benefits of Conflict in Academia

Starting this fall, we’re dedicating ourselves to a conversation about conflict in academia. Why? Because we want academia to achieve the potential benefits of conflict. If you’re interested in joining us in this conversation, consider signing up for our conflict skills snapshot. We, like so many others, are tired of the…

Start with Heart – Ok, but which one?

One of the foundational pieces of the Crucial Conversations ** paradigm for dealing with conflict is: Start with Heart. One translation of that is the question, what do I want?  Or, what do I really want? There is invariably a layered assortment of ways to answer that question – rather like one…
keyboard_arrow_up