Conflict Resolution Modes and Reducing Unnecessary Conflict

 Conflict Resolution Modes

Exhibit 19 describes conflict resolution modes based on the work of Robert Blake and Jane Mouton. The five conflict resolution modes represent different ways of responding to two basic concerns: the task that must be accomplished and the relationships between the people in conflict.

                                             Exhibit 19: Conflict Resolution Tactics

Mode	Description	Comment
Accommodate (or smooth)	The leader restores good relations by emphasizing agreement and downplaying disagreement.	Useful when there is little time to be lost and movement forward is needed. It does not, however, address the root conflict. If the group continues, the conflict will probably recur.
Assert/ compete (or force)	The leader imposes a solution. One side wins and the other loses- hence the term "win/lose" conflict resolution.	Useful in a crisis because it resolves the issue quickly, also when authority is being challenged or when the impact on future relations with the group is minimal. Like accommodation, it does not permanently address the problem.
Avoid	The leader withdraws from the situation or accepts it, leaving the conflict to be resolved by others or remain unresolved.	Useful when the conflict will resolve soon without any direct intervention or when the conflict or relationship is not worth the time investment. Leaders should be aware that avoiding conflict can weaken their role in the organization and may damage the group by leaving a problem unresolved or allowing it to be poorly resolved.
Collaborate (or confront)	The leader and those in conflict accept the fact that they disagree and look for a "third way," a new solution to the problem of the conflict. Since both sides contribute to the solution, this may be seen as "win/win" conflict resolution.	Useful when the stakes are high, relationships are important, and time allows. (It does require time and strong interpersonal skills.) There is greater chance for an enduring, equitable, mutually satisfying resolution.
Compromise	The leader asks those in conflict to bargain-altering positions on different issues until a mutually acceptable solution is defined. The solution relies on concessions. For this reason, it is often referred to as "lose/lose" conflict resolution.	Useful for complex issues, when both sides are determined to win, and when time doesn't allow for true problem solving. Solutions may be temporary and only partially effective, but when strong personalities are involved, it does preserve the egos of all parties.

 

Taking an assertive or competitive approach typically means rejecting compromise. As a "win/lose" tactic, it aims to maximize your goals (win) at the expense of the other party's (lose). There are times when this might be the most useful or effective tactic to choose. For example, it can be effective if the other party insists on employing an assertive/competitive approach. Similarly, there are times when a firm hand during negotiations can bolster the reputation of a leader as strong and principled, for example, by refusing to bend on environmental protections. However, to insist on competing or asserting your own goals over others' will likely result in difficulties in the long run. One might develop a reputation for being difficult or impossible to negotiate with, and relationships and business will likely suffer. This can in turn cause the organization's culture to suffer, as morale and productivity drop. The important thing is to ensure that competitiveness doesn't change into something destructive or become the default. By understanding why others choose the tactics and strategies they do, conflict managers can defuse the negative aspects and consequences of competition and can work toward achieving a collaborative, mutually beneficial approach.

There are times when each of the conflict resolution approaches may be effective. When relationships are ongoing, however, a collaborative approach has more enduring results, probably because all sides have participated in creating the solution.

 

In a collaborative approach:

. Both sides express their own perspectives of the disagreement.

. They then paraphrase each other's positions to confirm their understanding.

. Both sides (and the facilitator) brainstorm solutions in a positive manner and focus on solutions that both sides believe are workable.

· All parties agree on next steps.

. The facilitator works to end the meeting in a positive manner, emphasizing the advantages of the new solution to each side and to the organization and the benefits of the collaborative approach.

Conflict resolution in a multicultural organization will be more challenging. Leaders must take into account employees' willingness to raise issues and challenge those with more status. They must also realize that some individualist cultures are more tolerant of and comfortable with conflict than collectivist cultures.

Reducing Unnecessary Conflict

Because of the potential costs of conflict, HR professionals should consider approaching conflict proactively. Many sources of conflict can be eliminated through clarity and communication by establishing ground rules for conduct, clarifying authority and responsibility, setting objectives with input from all stakeholders and team members, considering the possible effects of decisions and actions on others, creating avenues for communication, and monitoring and checking in on team members periodically.

Team leaders can also reduce levels of conflict on their teams by acting fairly and consistently-by being positive and unifying team members behind a common goal, paying attention to group stress levels, being attentive to group differences and the potential for interpersonal conflict, distributing opportunities among team members, treating all team members respectfully, and avoiding favoritism.