Humans are complex, with a range of emotions, beliefs and needs.
Often, there is conflict when one person’s characteristics clash
with another’s. When there is a clash with someone you work with,
it presents a problem that has to be dealt with.
Conflict is normal in relationships; differences of perception,
interpretation of events and opinion are inevitable. It is not
conflict that damages relationships, but the refusal or inability
to deal with it that is the problem.
According to the Thomas Killman Model, there are five strategies
that can be used to manage conflict. It must be stressed that no
strategy is in itself right or wrong. It may, however, be more or
less applicable in certain circumstances.
Here are strategies to manage conflict:
1. Domination/competition
This strategy results from a high concern for your group’s own
interests with less concern for others. The outcome is win or
lose.
This strategy includes attempts at bargaining. It is generally used
when basic rights are at stake or to set a precedent.
However, it can cause the conflict to escalate and losers may try
to retaliate.
When to use:
When quick, decisive action is needed;
On important issues where unpopular actions need implementing;
On issues vital to the organisation’s welfare and when you believe
you are right; or
Against people who take advantage of non-competitive behaviour.
2. Collaboration
This results from a high concern for your group’s own interests,
matched with a high concern for the interests of other partners.
This results in a “win-win” outcome.
It is also generally the best strategy when society’s interest is
at stake. This approach helps to build commitment and reduce bad
feelings.
The drawbacks are that it takes time and energy. In addition, some
partners may take advantage of the others’ trust and openness.
Generally regarded as the best approach for managing conflict, the
objective of collaboration is to reach consensus.
When to use:
To find an integrative solution when both sets of concerns are too
important to be compromised;
When your objective is to learn;
To merge insights from people with different perspectives; or
To work through feelings that have interfered with a
relationship.
3. Compromise
This strategy results from a high concern for your group’s own
interests along with a moderate concern for the interests of other
partners. The outcome is “win some or lose some”.
This strategy is generally used to achieve temporary solutions, to
avoid destructive power struggles or when time pressures exist.
One drawback is that partners can lose sight of important values
and long-term objectives. This approach can also distract the
partners from the merits of an issue and create a cynical
climate.
When to use:
When goals are important, but not worth the effort or potential
disruption of more assertive modes;
To achieve temporary settlements of complex issues; or
To arrive at expedient solutions under time pressure.
4. Avoidance
This results from a low concern for your group’s own interests
coupled with a low concern for the interests of others. This
results in a “lose-lose” outcome.
This strategy is generally used when the issue is trivial or other
issues are more pressing. It is also used when confrontation has a
high potential for damage or more information is needed.
It may be beneficial for both parties to shelve the problem till
the climate changes. This allows both parties to maintain cordial
relationships in the short to medium term.
The drawback is that important decisions may be made by
default.
When to use:
When an issue is trivial, or more important issues are
pressing;
When you perceive no chance of satisfying your concerns;
When potential disruption outweighs the benefits of resolution;
To let people cool down and regain perspective; or
When gathering information supersedes immediate decisions.
5. Accommodation
This results from a low concern for your group’s own interests
combined with a high concern for the interests of other partners.
This results in a “win-or-lose” outcome.
This is generally used when the issue is more important to others
than to you. It is a goodwill gesture and is appropriate when you
recognise that you are in the wrong.
The drawbacks are that your own ideas and concerns don’t get
attention. You may also lose credibility and future influence.
When to use:
When you find that you are in the wrong — to allow a better
position to be heard, to learn and show your reasonableness;
To build social credits for later issues;
To minimise loss when you are outmatched and losing; or
When harmony and stability are especially important.
jobstreet
