By Lorna Riley, CSP
When you find yourself in conflict with another person or even groups of people, you have five ways to work through the situation. Choose the most appropriate strategy for the situation. There are benefits and weakness to each approach.
1. Accommodate
Accommodate means to adjust your actions, needs, or wants in response to the needs of others. Subordinate your personal power and give others what they want.
Accommodate when…
1. you think you are wrong.
2. continued competition would be damaging.
3. "keeping the peace" is more important.
4. earning "points" for other important issue.
5. outcome is more important to another person.
6. learning from mistakes.
Possible Weaknesses of Accommodation
1. positive self-esteem may be stunted.
2. decrease in respect or influence.
3. best solution may not be reached.
4. frustration from not meeting one's own needs.
5. lack of recognition or feelings of achievement.
2. Collaborate
Collaboration means to work with another person or a group in order to achieve win-win desired outcomes. You may not get entirely what you want, but if you “can live with it,” then you have collaborated. It is a cooperative mindset where outcomes are mutually agreeable with “no hard feelings.”
Collaborate when…
1. you need consensus.
2. working through "hard feelings."
3. both issues are equally important.
4. merging differing perspectives.
5. testing your own assumptions.
6. trying to understand another's view.
Possible Weaknesses of Collaboration
1. unfounded or unearned trust
2. too much time invested on an insignificant conflict issue
3. ineffective resolutions or decisions are made with input from people who are unfamiliar with the situation
3. Compromise
Sometimes you will have to give up something in order to resolve an issue. Compromise is a negotiated settlement over a dispute in which two ore more parties agree to accept less than what they originally wanted.
Compromise when…
1. competition or collaboration methods fail.
2. a temporary resolution is needed, as in complex matters.
3. two parties with equal power are committed to mutually exclusive goals
4. the outcome is time pressured.
5. the attainment of the goal(s) isn’t worth the effort required by more assertive conflict resolution styles.
Possible Weaknesses of Compromise
1. No one is really satisfied with the outcome
2. a "sell-out" belief creates a cynical atmosphere
3. can produce a short-lived solution
4. focusing on "practicality" of the moment can make people lose sight of
the big-picture, long-term objectives, values, and organizational welfare
4. Avoid
Avoiding conflict doesn’t mean taking the cowardly way out. There are instances that are best served by postponing further involvement.
Avoid conflict when…
1. there is a need to gather more information.
2. the conflict is trivial or insignificant.
3. issue(s) can be resolved more effectively by others.
4. the issue is a subset of a larger issue.
5. when one needs to rethink, cool down, or reduce tensions.
6. there’s no chance to get what you want.
7. the benefits of resolution are less than the damage of the act of confrontation.
Possible Weakness of Avoidance
1. unresolved issues
2. resolutions or decisions made by default
3. lowering of self-esteem through self-doubt
4. lack of credibility
5. creative input is stilted
6. depression sets in from postponed resolutions
5. Compete
When faced with critical or highly important issues, you may want to compete for what you want. In this case your goal is to get what you want or make your position clear without compromise.
Compete when…
1. protection is needed from those who take advantage of less assertive people.
2. you are certain you are right on an important issue.
3. a fast, decisive resolution is needed.
4. unpopular courses of actions on important issues need to be implemented.
Possible Weakness of Competing
1. irreparable damage to the relationship
2. incorrect or distorted perceptions of reality
3. closed lines of communication
4. eventually surrounded by "yes" people
5. need to "micro-manage" the resolution during implementation
6. no buy-in from the other person
For more information or complementary analysis, contact us.
| 
