Conflict management is the methodical and cooperative effort required to resolve differences between individuals or groups. Each organization contains some level of interpersonal, intrapersonal, or intergroup conflict. This is because it is unrealistic to demand unanimous agreement between multiple people at all times. Executives, directors, and workers sometimes spend 20–80% of their time trying to handle or manage conflicts that arise weekly or monthly (Mills & Mene, 2020). To succeed as a business manager, one should always be ready to address a conflict. Disagreements are inevitable in business, so every company needs to implement a system for handling them.
Modalities of Conflict Resolution
Although conflict is normal, it causes problems in the workplace due to arguments, misunderstandings, frustrations, discontent, and confrontations between management and employees. Nevertheless, conflict can be fruitful if the people concerned are able to work through their differences and create something new, whether it is an initiative, an invention, a social concern, or a political establishment. Five distinct approaches to handling conflict can come in handy. There are many different approaches to resolving conflict, including accommodating, avoiding, collaborating, competing, and compromising.
Accommodating Strategy
An accommodating approach to dispute resolution entails reaching a middle ground. When one decides to put the needs of others before their own for the sake of harmony, it works to resolve arising conflicts. When one party has less invested in the situation at hand than the other, it may be simpler to compromise (Maiti & Choi, 2021). For instance, if only one desktop computer is available and two coworkers need to utilize it, the situation may call for compromise. They may both need to use it simultaneously, creating an awkward position. For both parties to advance, someone must give up something important. The accommodating tactic involves giving in to a coworker’s wishes. An accommodating strategy is a mediation approach where one side is more willing to bend to the other side’s demands to reach a compromise.
The accommodating tactic is a rapid fix that may be used when stuck in a bind, which is a major plus. Another perk of the accommodating approach is that it can help one gain the admiration and respect of those around them. It is easier to sway people’s opinions during this kind of mediation (Verderber & MacGeorge, 2015). The downside of the accommodating approach is that it can lead to others misjudging one’s strength if they continually give in to their demands. Another drawback of the strategy is that it discourages people, especially high-ranking managers, from employing it when the stakes are particularly high. Bargaining parties may be unwilling to consider novel, alternative solutions.
Avoiding Conflict Style
The goal of the avoiding strategy is to put off dealing with difficult situations indefinitely. When one side suddenly changes its mind or withdraws from the mediation, this is called avoiding or withdrawal. Stakeholders may raise the issue, but no matter how much attention it gets, someone will always find a way to avoid dealing with it (Sinskey et al., 2019). Avoiding conflict is a strategy that some people use when they do not care about the issue or fear offending others with their opinions. Such techniques can be utilized, for instance, when one gives up after a heated disagreement with a coworker. One can choose to be less combative by adopting a more even-keeled demeanor. When one person in an argument calms down, the situation can defuse fast. Withdrawal, or the technique of avoiding conflict as much as possible, is a lose-lose tactic.
The ability to quickly regain composure during tense situations is a benefit of the conflict-avoiding resolution style. The person who uses the technique can better comprehend the perspectives of those around them (Min et al., 2020). However, if the individual utilizing this approach always tries to maintain composure in tense situations, they risk being seen as weak. Negative aspects of conflict avoidance include the cultivation of pent-up anger that, if left unchecked, could detonate in an explosive outburst later. This posture cannot be tolerated, as the mediation will terminate with neither side satisfied and could lead to increased tension in future mediations if it continues in this vein.
Collaborating Style
The collaborative strategy is the only method of conflict resolution that seeks to make everyone happy. The goal of the collaborative conflict style is to ensure that all parties benefit from the solution, and this approach is typically employed when competing interests must be balanced. To illustrate, consider a scenario in which a five-person lead generating team gets together for a meeting to pool their separate ideas (Verderber & MacGeorge, 2015). When everyone’s suggestions are compiled into a large list that will be used in their lead generation strategy, everyone can feel that their voices have been heard. When parties to a mediation process come together to craft a solution that satisfies all parties, they collaborate.
One of the benefits of using a collaborative approach to resolving conflicts is that it can help a person stand out as a competent manager. In addition to its numerous benefits, a conflict management approach based on cooperation resolves issues to everyone’s satisfaction. It is a fantastic tool for fostering communication and opening the mind to new ideas. Considering that the consequences benefit all groups, people are more likely to stick to the resolutions and see them through to completion (Omene, 2021). Contrariwise, working together to resolve conflicts is effective but can be time-consuming. The collaborative approach to conflict management is a highly time-consuming method. Collaborative mediation is a tedious and difficult way to conflict management since it necessitates the willingness of all parties to cooperate and the right kind of mediation skills for the circumstance.
Competing Strategy
This alternative approach entails maintaining a firm stance on an issue until all requests are met. The implication is clear: one will not consider the other person’s point of view. This response may be warranted when someone’s values or rights are violated (John-Eke & Akintokunbo, 2020). A severe measure may be necessary to bring about a resolution that the individual believes is impossible to achieve through more conventional means. An example may be when women in a company try to get their boss to give in to their demands for equal pay. It is possible that the length of the dispute prompts them to go on strike. When one side of a disagreement prioritizes its interests over those of the other, competitive strategies emerge, and one side of the dispute ends on top.
Compared to the alternative methods of conflict resolution, this one has the advantage of facilitating the rapid discovery of a workable solution to protracted disagreements. The competing approach to conflict management offers the impression of a principled person to those around them (Verderber & MacGeorge, 2015). One potential drawback of the alternative method of conflict resolution is that it may give off a dictatorial air to those around. The approach another has the disadvantage of making one’s position look irrational and self-centered. Although quick and useful as a weapon against another person who constantly holds an opposing view, it is harmful to interpersonal relationships. The lack of commitment on the part of the opposing side makes this solution largely temporary, as it leaves them in a difficult position from which to attempt to resolve the issue once again.
Compromising Strategy
In contrast to the combative approach, the compromise strategy aims to satisfy all parties involved in the disagreement. The goal is to achieve a compromise where everyone involved is content but not overjoyed (Verderber & MacGeorge, 2015). The crux of this approach is the belief that any deal is preferable to no agreement at all, generating a lose-lose situation in the process. Two coworkers may need help coordinating their schedules if, for instance, their department head assigns them to work on a certain task jointly. It is likely that they will not be able to collaborate owing to conflicting schedules. They can agree to work in shifts so that each person does their share at their most convenient time. For example, one person could perform their portion of the job in the morning while the other does theirs in the afternoon.
The time savings associated with using a compromising approach to conflict management are a welcome bonus. The tactic provides a gentler way out of a sticky situation or argument, which is a definite advantage. Understanding the emotions of others, improving teamwork, and becoming more unselfish are all outcomes that can be facilitated by adopting a compromising approach to conflict management (Verderber & MacGeorge, 2015). Compromise can be an effective method for resolving conflicts, but it has a potential downside: it can breed resentment. Another drawback is that one side may feel they are sacrificing more than the other, making the compromising method impractical for regular application.
An executive can improve interactions with staff and clients by adopting effective methods of handling conflicts within the company. One’s approach to conflict as a business owner may necessitate a shift in leadership style. In the right hands, conflict can help one grow as a business manager. Management of conflict is essential to the prosperity of any organization. There is a place and a time for each conflict management style: competition, avoidance, collaboration, compromise, and accommodation. A better bottom line might be the outcome of a more harmonious workplace created by employees who are well-versed in the various methods of resolving conflicts.
References
John-Eke, E. C., & Akintokunbo, O. O. (2020). Conflict management as a tool for increasing organizational effectiveness: A review of literature. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(5), 299-311. Web.
Maiti, S., & Choi, J. H. (2021). Investigation and implementation of conflict management strategies to minimize conflicts in the construction industry. International Journal of Construction Management, 21(4), 337-352. Web.
Mills, B. R., & Mene, C. T. (2020). Conflicts and its management in an organization: A theoretical review. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publication, 10(5), 540-545. Web.
Min, J., Iqbal, S., Khan, M. A. S., Akhtar, S., Anwar, F., & Qalati, S. A. (2020). Impact of supervisory behavior on sustainable employee performance: Mediation of conflict management strategies using PLS-SEM. PloS One, 15(9), e0236650. Web.
Omene, G. R. (2021). Conflict management strategies as a prerequisite for effective organizational performance: An exploratory analysis. International Journal of Business & Law Research 9 (4), 187-199. Web.
Sinskey, J. L., Chang, J. M., Shibata, G. S., Infosino, A. J., & Rouine-Rapp, K. (2019). Applying conflict management strategies to the pediatric operating room. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 129(4), 1109-1117. Web.
Verderber, K., & MacGeorge, E. (2015). Inter-act: Interpersonal communication concepts, skills, and contexts (14th ed). Oxford University Press.