09/02 How People Approach Conflict

What People Believe About Conflict

• Is conflict positive or negative? Can be perceived as:

  • Positive

  • Negative

  • Helpful

  • Destructive

  • Necessary

  • Inevitable

  • Avoidable

  • Dangerous

  • Exhilarating

  • Stressful

  • Depressing

  • Terrifying

  • Irrational

An evolving view of conflict

• Early View

  • Indicates an unhealthy, dysfunctional relationship

  • Conflict should be avoided; engaging in it is irrational

  • Conflict is harmful and destructive

• Modern View

  • Conflict is natural and normal

  • Arises from basic human instincts to protect one’s own needs

  • Conflict is inevitable and universal due to differences between people and competition over resources/power

  • Conflict is necessary and functional

    • Can be a way to figure out how to get back on the same page

The implications of how we approach conflict

• The implications that conflicts have for our lives depend on how we approach and manage them

Understanding Approaches to Conflict

• General take-away:

  • There are very diverse ways of dealing with conflict

  • There is no one “right” or “ideal” way, as situations and people differ in many ways

  • However, some approaches are generally more constructive than others

  • Being flexible with your approach is typically advantageous

  • It can be useful to take a few moments to gauge how the other person is approaching the conflict so that you can choose your approach more thoughtfully

Thomas-Killmann Conflict Styles

• Styles (with metaphor names): Competing (the SHARK), Collaborating (the OWL), Avoiding (the TURTLE), Accommodating (the TEDDY BEAR), Compromising (the FOX)

• Core axes:

  • Assertiveness: high vs. low

  • Cooperativeness: high vs. low

• Visual cue: the grid maps each style to levels of assertiveness and cooperativeness

Competing (the SHARK)

• High assertiveness + Low cooperativeness

• “I win, you lose”

• Pursuing own goals and interests at the expense of the other person

• Usually a high power approach—exerting power to win

• When to use: when dire consequences might result from ‘losing’

Collaborating (the OWL)

• High assertiveness + High cooperativeness

• “I win, you win”

• Working together to find a solution that satisfies both

• Requires exploring the issue in great depth, being creative, communicating well, and being patient

• When to use: when you have time and energy, and a conflict partner who is willing to collaborate

Avoiding (the TURTLE)

• Low assertiveness + Low cooperativeness

• “I lose, you lose”

• Ignore the conflict or withdraw from the situation

• Conflict does not get addressed or resolved, sometimes leading to an explosion

• When to use: when engaging is more harmful than leaving the issue unresolved

Accommodating (the TEDDY BEAR)

• Low assertiveness + High cooperativeness

• “I lose, you win”

• Neglects own needs to satisfy the needs of the other

• Can lead to buildup of issues because needs are not met

• When to use: when you need to quickly resolve the issue to preserve the relationship

Compromising (the FOX)

• Moderate assertiveness + moderate cooperativeness

• “I win some/lose some, you win some/lose some”

• Attempt to find a mutually acceptable, expedient solution that both parties can live with

• Not as effective as collaboration, but less time-consuming; sometimes the only way if a creative collaborative solution cannot be found

• When to use: when time is limited but both parties want a tolerable solution for both

Interest-based approach

• Focus on interests (needs) of you and the conflict partner, rather than just wants

• Needs define the problem and the reasons behind the wants

• Clarifying each other’s needs enables:

  • Understanding of the motives behind each other’s wants

  • Potential for coming up with different ways to satisfy each other’s needs

  • Greater insight into more chronic patterns of behavior/relationship issues

• Example: Jeff wants to go out with buddies; Vanessa wants to hang out with Jeff

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

• Four destructive interaction patterns identified in conflict dynamics

Criticism

• Different from voicing a complaint, which is about a specific behavior

• Criticism is an attack on the person

• Implies something is defective in the other person’s character, making them feel assaulted, hurt, angry, defensive

• Examples:

  • Criticism: "You never think about how your behavior is affecting other people. I don’t believe you are that forgetful, you’re just selfish!!"

  • Complaint: "I was scared when you were running late and didn’t call me. I thought we had agreed that we would do that for each other."

Contempt

• Treating others with disrespect, mocking them with sarcasm, ridicule, name-calling, mimicking

• Body language such as eye-rolling

• Contempt makes the other person feel inferior and despised

• Example: "You’re ‘tired?’ Cry me a river. All you do when you come home from work is flop down on that sofa like a child and play those idiotic computer games. I don’t have time to deal with another baby…"

Defensiveness

• Attempts to protect yourself, especially when under “attack” during conflict

• Includes excuses, justifications, denials, blaming the other person

• This strategy is rarely successful and often escalates the conflict

• Example exchange:

  • He: "Did you call Betty and Ralph to let them know that we’re not coming tonight as you promised this morning?"

  • She: "I was too damn busy today. As a matter of fact, you know just how hectic my schedule was. Why didn’t you just do it?"

Stonewalling

• Shutting down, being unresponsive to the conflict partner who is trying to engage

• Can escalate conflict because the other person feels ignored, frustrated, disrespected, and ruminates and catastrophizes