Chapter 10: Managing Interpersonal Conflicts Flashcards
An expressed struggle between at least two interdependent parties who perceive incompatible goals, scarce resources, and interference from the other party in achieving their goals
Conflict
Conflict is both natural and can be beneficial
Explain in more detail the five aspects of conflict:
Expressed struggle – conflict can exist only when both parties are aware of a disagreement. Both parties must know that a problem exists before they’re in conflict.
Perceived incompatible goals – all conflicts appear as if one parties gain is another’s loss. As long as individuals perceive their goals to be mutually exclusive, conflict will continue to exist.
Perceived scarce resources – conflicts also exist when people believe there isn’t enough of something to go around such as time or money.
Interdependence – the welfare and satisfaction of one party depends on the actions of the other. The parties need each other to solve the problem.
Interference from the other party – a full-fledged conflict won’t occur until the participants act in ways that prevent one another from reaching their goals
What are five conflict styles or ways to approach conflict?
Avoiding, accommodating, competing, compromising, collaborating
A lose-lose conflict style in which the parties ignore the problem at hand
Avoiding
You can avoid someone physically or conversationally by changing the topic, joking, denying that a problem exists. Avoidance reflects the attitude that there’s no good way to resolve an issue, and some avoiders figure that it’s just easier to put up with the problem. But generally results in lose-lose outcomes were neither party gets what it wants. May keep the peace but typically leads to unsatisfying relationships.
Not always a bad idea – you might avoid certain topics or situations when the risk of speaking up is too great or if the relationship isn’t worth the effort.
A lose-win conflict style in which the communicator submits to a situation rather than attempting to have his or her needs met
Accommodating
When you give in to others rather than asserting your own point of view. Accommodator‘s have low concern for themselves and high concern for others, resulting in lose-win, “we’ll do it your way“ outcomes
A win-lose approach to conflict that seeks to resolve them in one’s own way.
Competing
In contrast to accommodating, this win-lose approach involves high concern for self and low concern for others. Competition seeks to resolve conflicts “my way“
Can breed aggression including direct aggression and passive aggression
A criticism or demand that threatens the face of the person at whom it is directed
Direct aggression
For example, character attacks, competence attacks, physical appearance attacks, maledictions or wishing the other ill fortune, teasing, ridicule, threats, swearing, and non-verbal emblems
Direct aggression can have a severe impact on the target, making them feel embarrassed, inadequate, humiliated, hopeless, desperate, or depressed. Results in decreased effectiveness in personal relationships.
An indirect expression of aggression that occurs when a communicator expresses hostility in an obscure or manipulative way
Passive aggression
Often termed “crazymaking“ and occurs when people have feelings of resentment, anger, or rage that they are unable or unwilling to express directly. Instead of keeping them to themselves, crazymakers send aggressive messages in subtle, indirect ways, thus maintaining the front of kindness.
Name some of the 12 crazymaking behaviours one about to
The avoider – they refuse to fight. When a conflict arises, they leave, fall asleep, pretend to be busy at work, or keep from facing the problem and some other way.
The pseudoaccommodator- they pretend to give in and then continue to act in the same way
The guilt maker – instead of expressing dissatisfaction directly, try to make others feel responsible for causing pain. “It’s OK; don’t worry about me”… Accompanied by a big sigh
The mindreader – instead of allowing their partners to express feelings honestly, mind readers go into character analysis, explaining what the partner really means or what’s wrong with the partner
The trapper – they set up a desired behaviour for their partners and then, when it’s met, attacking the very behaviour they requested. For example, saying let’s be totally honest with each other and then attacking the partner self disclosure
The crisis tickler – almost bring what’s bothering them to the surface but never quite come out and express themselves. For example, instead of admitting concern about finances, the innocently ask “how much did that cost?“ Dropping a rather obvious hint but never really dealing with a crisis
The gunnysacker – don’t share complaints as they arise. Instead, they put their resentments into a psychological gunnysack, which after a while begins to bulge with both large and small gripes and when about to burst they pour out all the pent-up aggression on the overwhelmed and unsuspecting victim
Trivial tyrannizer – instead of honestly sharing their resentments, do things they know will get their partners goat such as leaving dirty dishes in the sink or clipping finger nails in bed
The beltliner – gets under a person’s psychological “beltline, where there are subjects too sensitive to be approach without damaging the relationship such as physical characteristics, intelligence, past behavior. They use intimate knowledge to hit below the belt, where they know it will hurt.
The joker – afraid to face conflict squarely, kid around when their partners want to be serious, thus blocking the expression of important feelings
The withholder – instead of expressing their anger honestly and directly, punish their partners by keeping back something such as courtesy, affection, good cooking, humor, or sex
The Benedict Arnold – get back at their partners by sabotage, by failing to defend them from attackers, and even by encouraging ridicule or disregard from outside the relationship
And approach to conflict resolution in which both parties attain at least part of what they wanted through self-sacrifice. Partial lose-lose
Compromising
Gives both people some of what they want and is used when it seems that partial satisfaction is the best they can hope for. In a compromise, you win some, you lose some.
Compromising is sometimes touted as an effective way to handle conflict because it’s better than losing everything. Although they may be the best attainable result in some conflicts, it’s important to realize that both people in a conflict can often work together to find much better solutions.
A conflict management style that seeks win-win solutions
Collaborating
Collaborators demonstrate a high degree of concern for themselves and others. They try to find solutions that meet everyone’s needs. Go beyond a mere compromise
To decide which conflict style to use which four factors should you consider?
- Relationship - for example, accommodation is the best approach when someone else has more power than you such as your boss
- The situation
- The other person- for example, the other person may be unwilling or can’t collaborate
- Your goals
What factors should you consider when choosing an avoiding conflict style? (Lose-lose)
When the issue is of little importance
When the costs of confrontation outweigh the benefits
when you want to cool down and gain perspective
What are some factors to consider when choosing an accommodating conflict style. (Lose-win)
When you discover you are wrong
When the issue is more important to the other person than it is to you
When the long-term cost of winning isn’t worth the short term gain
When you want to build up credits for later conflicts
When you want to let others learn from their mistakes
What are some factors to consider when choosing a competing conflict style? (Win-lose)
When there’s not enough time to seek a win-win outcome
When the issue is not important enough to negotiate at length
When the other person is not willing to cooperate
When you are convinced that your position is right and necessary
When you want to protect yourself against those who take advantage of non-competitive people
