Unit 4: Conflict Resolution
Activity 2: Conflict Resolution Styles
Part A: Take the Quiz
PDF File
The following quiz will help you identify your conflict management style. After taking it, use the scoring guide to find out about your dominant conflict management style(s).
Part B: Watch the Video
Watch
Watch the following video. What is each style about?
Part C: Categorize
Categorize
Part D: Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking
Part E: Read the Text
Read
Skim the text below. What information did you gain about the style(s) you use the most? Or the least? Share your answers in your groups.
Conflict Management Style
Source: 5 Conflict Management Styles every Manager Must Know
Reproduced with permission from Valamis.com
When it comes to conflict, there is no one solution that will work in all situations. Each situation will be different, from the trigger of the conflict to the parties involved.
A manager skilled in conflict resolution should be able to take a birds-eye view of the conflict and apply the conflict management style that is called for in that specific situation.
1. Accommodating
This style is about simply putting the other parties’ needs before one’s own. You allow them to ‘win’ and get their way.
Accommodation is for situations where you don’t care as strongly about the issue as the other person, if prolonging the conflict is not worth your time, or if you think you might be wrong. This option is about keeping the peace, not putting in more effort than the issue is worth and knowing when to pick battles.
While it might seem somewhat weak, accommodation can be the absolute best choice to resolve a small conflict and move on with more important issues. This style is highly cooperative on the part of the resolver but can lead to resentment.
Pros: Small disagreements can be handled quickly and easily, with a minimum of effort. Managers can build a reputation as an easygoing person, and employees will know that they can speak their mind about problems without reprisal.
Cons: Managers might be viewed as weak if they accommodate too often. Using this technique with larger or more important issues will not solve any issues in a meaningful way and should absolutely be avoided.
2. Avoiding
This style aims to reduce conflict by ignoring it, removing the conflicted parties, or evading it in some manner. Team members in conflict can be removed from the project they are in conflict over, deadlines are pushed, or people are even reassigned to other departments.
This can be an effective conflict resolution style if there is a chance that a cool-down period would be helpful or if you need more time to consider your stance on the conflict itself.
Avoidance should not be a substitute for a proper resolution. Pushing back conflict indefinitely can and will lead to more (and bigger) conflicts down the line.
Pros: Giving people time to calm down can solve a surprising number of issues. Time and space can give a much-needed perspective to those in conflict, and some issues will resolve themselves. Managers show that they trust employees to act like adults and solve issues.
Cons: If used in the wrong situations, this technique will make conflicts worse. Managers can seem incompetent if they overuse avoidance because employees will think that they are incapable of handling disagreements.
3. Compromising
This style seeks to find the middle ground by asking both parties to concede some aspects of their desires so that a solution can be agreed upon.
This style is sometimes known as lose-lose, in that both parties will have to give up a few things in order to agree on the larger issue. This is used when there is a time crunch, or when a solution simply needs to happen, rather than be perfect.
Compromise can lead to resentment, especially if overused as a conflict resolution tactic, so use sparingly.
Pros: Issues can be resolved quickly, and the parties in conflict will leave understanding more about the other person’s perspective. Compromise can set the stage for collaboration down the road and allows both parties to feel heard. Managers using this tactic are seen as facilitating agreement, being hands-on and finding solutions.
Cons: No one leaves completely happy. In some cases, one side might feel as though they sacrificed too much and be unwilling to compromise again in the future. Managers who rely on this technique will burn up their employees’ goodwill and be seen as unable to execute collaboration.
Example: Rosa and Charles are in charge of the advertising budget for the next quarter. Rosa wants to hire a full-time social media person, while Charles wants to increase targeted digital ads.
A compromise is reached by hiring a social media person to work part-time, with the remainder of the budget being spent on digital advertising.
4. Competing
This style rejects compromise and involves not giving in to others’ viewpoints or wants.
One party stands firm in what they think is the correct handling of a situation and does not back down until they get their way.
This style can be used in situations where morals dictate that a specific course of action is taken, when there is no time to try and find a different solution or when there is an unpopular decision to be made. It can resolve disputes quickly, but there is a high chance of morale and productivity being lessened.
Note: This is not a style that should be relied upon heavily.
Pros: Managers using this style show that they are strong and will not back down on their principles. Disputes are solved quickly, as there is no space for any disagreement or discussion.
Cons: Managers using this style will be seen as unreasonable and authoritarian. Handling conflicts by crushing any dissent will not lead to happy, productive employees, nor will it lead to finding the best solutions in most cases.
Example: Sophia is the head of her department. Within her staff, she has been dealing with several conflicts. First, Paul & Kevin could not agree on where to hold the annual team-building activity. Therefore, she stepped in and decided that the department would do an escape room.
Second, Cecile and Eduardo have been fighting over which one of them will have to deal with a particularly difficult client. Neither wants to put in the time and effort and has been arguing that it is the other’s job to deal with it. Sophia decides it is Cecile’s job to handle the client, even though it arguably could be both people’s jobs.
Third, Alex has come to Sophia several times, asking for permission to change the management of the project he is running. He thinks the changes he is proposing will make the project much more successful. Sophia will not budge on the way the project is run and tells him to get the job done the way she has ordered him to.
As you can see, in the first example, Sophia made a quick decision to stop a small conflict from escalating or wasting more time. This is an appropriate use of this style.
IN the second decision, while she solved an issue, she created another one: Cecile is now resentful. Especially in cases where a boss favours an employee, this type of unilateral decision making will lead to angry employees.
In the third situation, Sophia should not have used the competing style. Not only is Alex now upset that he is not being heard, but Sophia is missing an opportunity to improve the project.
5. Collaborating
This style produces the best long-term results, and at the same time, it is often the most difficult and time-consuming to reach.
Each party’s needs and wants are considered, and a win-win solution is found so that everyone leaves satisfied. This often involves all parties sitting down together, talking through the conflict and negotiating a solution together.
This is used when it is vital to preserve the relationship between all parties or when the solution itself will have a significant impact.
Pros: Everyone leaves happy. A solution that in fact solves the problem is found, and the manager who implements this tactic will be seen as skilled.
Cons: This style of conflict management is time-consuming. Deadlines or production may have to be delayed and losses might be made while solutions are found which might take a long time, depending on the parties involved.
Example: Terry and Janet are leading the design of a new prototype. They are having difficulties as Terry wants to incorporate a specific set of features. Janet wants to incorporate a different set of features.
To reach a solution, they sit down, talk through each feature and finally reach a solution, incorporating a mix of their features and some new ones they realized were important as they negotiated.
In each of the above conflict management examples, a solution is found, but there will be lasting effects on morale, productivity, and overall happiness of employees, depending on how that solution was reached. Skilled conflict management is minimizing the lasting effect of conflicts by using the right tactic at the right time.
For your convenience, you can download an MS Word version of the activities to work on your device or print and fill by hand.