9.4 ABCs of Conflict

ABCs of Conflict

Many researchers have attempted to understand how humans handle conflict with one another. In Chapter 2, we learned about the Thomas-Kilmann model. The first researchers to create a taxonomy for understanding conflict management strategies were Richard E. Walton and Robert B. McKersie (1965). Walton and McKersie were primarily interested in how individuals handle conflict during labor negotiations. The Walton and McKersie model consisted of only two methods for managing conflict: integrative and distributive. Recall, integrative conflict is a win-win approach to conflict; whereby, both parties attempt to come to a settled agreement that is mutually beneficial. Distributive conflict is a win-lose approach; whereby, conflicting parties see their job as to win and make sure the other person or group loses. Over the years, a number of different patterns for handling conflict have arisen in the literature, but most of them agree with the first two proposed by Walton and McKersie, but they generally add a third dimension of conflict: avoidance. In this framework, there are three conflict management styles that form the acronym ABC. They are:

• Avoiders,
• Battlers, and
• Collaborators.

Avoiders

Alan Sillars, Stephen, Coletti, Doug Parry, and Mark Rogers (1982) created a taxonomy of different types of strategies that people can use when avoiding conflict. Table 9.1 provides a list of these common tactics.

Table 9.1 Common Strategies

Battlers

For our purposes, we have opted to describe those who engage in distributive conflict as battlers because they often see going into a conflict as heading off to war, which is most appropriately aligned with the distributive conflict management strategies. Battlers believe that conflict should take on an approach where the battler must win the conflict at all costs without regard to the damage they might cause along the way. Furthermore, battlers tend to be very personalistic in their goals and are often highly antagonistic towards those individuals with whom they are engaging in conflict (Sillars et al., 1982). Sillars et al. created a taxonomy of different types of strategies that people can use when using distributive conflict management strategies. Table 9.2 provides a list of these common tactics.

Table 9.2 Distributive Conflict Management Strategies

Collaborators

The last type of conflicting partners are collaborators. There are a range of collaborating choices, from being completely collaborative in an attempt to find a mutually agreed upon solution, to being compromising when you realize that both sides will need to win and lose a little to come to a satisfactory solution. In both cases, the goal is to use prosocial communicative behaviors in an attempt to reach a solution everyone is happy with. Admittedly, this is often easier said than done. Furthermore, it’s entirely possible that one side says they want to collaborate, and the other side refuses to collaborate at all. When this happens, collaborative conflict management strategies may not be as effective, because it’s hard to collaborate with someone who truly believes you need to lose the conflict.

Alan Sillars, Stephen, Coletti, Doug Parry, and Mark Rogers created a taxonomy of different types of strategies that people can use when collaborating during a conflict. Table 9.3 provides a list of these common tactics.

Table 9.3 Integrative Conflict Management Strategies

Before we conclude this section, it is important to point out that conflict management strategies are often reciprocated by others. If you start a conflict in a highly competitive way, do not be surprised when your conflicting partner mirrors you and starts using distributive conflict management strategies in return. The same is also true for integrative conflict management strategies. When you start using integrative conflict management strategies, you can often deescalate a problematic conflict by using integrative conflict management strategies (Wrench & McGee, 2000).