Research Paper on Modes of Conflict Resolution
Number of words: 1427
The goal of this research paper is to identify the various modes of resolving conflicts and develop a new version of conflict resolution by integrating the already available models. This research paper examines in detail the different methods of resolving conflicts. The research involves analysis of the existing modes of conflict resolution, which managers adapt to counter the various types of conflicts in their organizations. The goal of the study is to recognize the current means of conflict resolution and use the same methods to develop a more dynamic version of resolving the conflicts in an organization. The study has been possible by finding and analyzing models suggested by various scholars. The method used was to browse the various journals and books available on the web.
A conflict in an organization turns out to be a common headache for the managers in every organization. In the light, if this, scholars have come out with various modes of conflict resolution within the organization. Whereas a particular manager mode may be relevant to a given situation, it might be completely irrelevant in solving a different type of conflict, hence the need to familiarize oneself in all as many conflict resolution models as possible.
Thomas-kilmann conflict resolution model
Understanding ones conflict handling style, and the full range of conflict modes can help individuals manage conflicts effectively. Thomas kilmann resolution model examines a person behavior in conflict situations. Thomas kilmann’s design incorporates five different styles of handling disputes; they include; competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding and accommodating. These modes are further narrowed into two dimensions; assertiveness and cooperativeness. Assertiveness is the extent to which a person attempts to satisfy their demands and concerns; this is opposed to cooperativeness where a person puts efforts in meeting other person’s needs and interests. Below is an overview of the five modes of the Kilmann-model of responding to conflict situations;
Competing is both assertive and uncooperative. It is a power-oriented mode in which an individual tries to satisfy their concerns at the expense of other person’s interests. In this model, a person results to using whatever power they have at their disposal and in which they seem to be appropriate to win their position, including their ability to argue, their rank and economic status. Competing means that a person defends the position in which they believe is correct.
Accommodating is both unassertive and cooperative. In this mode, the individual neglects his concerns and concentrates more on satisfying other person’s interests. It is a complete opposite of competing. This method can be termed as selfless generosity or an act of charity.
Compromising is a both assertive and cooperative mode. The aim of compromising is to find an expedient universally acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties. Compromising focuses on addressing the issue instead of avoiding it, it includes embracing the differences between the two sides, exchanging concessions and arriving at a middle ground solution.
Collaborating is both assertive and cooperative. It is a mode which involves working with others to in an attempt to find solutions that fully satisfy their concerns. The aim of collaborating is to obtain a win-win situation by exploring a disagreement and developing a solution to the interpersonal problem.
Avoiding is unassertive and uncooperative. Individuals sidestep the conflict without satisfying either person’s concern. Avoiding is a way of postponing an issue, or withdrawing from a threatening situation. ( Johnson A. Thompson C. Anderson G, 2014)
Courageous conversations model
As much as people like to engage in conversations that move them toward a positive outcome, they occasionally don’t like these exchanges. People do have a conversation for a variety of reasons. Switching from a cool, comfortable debate to uncomfortable debate requires great courage and caution. At times, people are disturbed by the thought of an issue which needs to be addressed by with a colleague on delivering some bad news to them. They get worried about what would go wrong, and the manner in which such report will be received. Instead of concentrating a lot on the negative aspects, people can reframe these conversations to be courageous conversations. These requirements necessitate the change of the culture of an organization to a positive challenge. The bold conversation model uses an approach to three modes of managing a conflict.
Explain the gap
Explaining the gap is a critical stage of courageous conversation in which an individual describes the issue and puts on the table the issues that they need to be discussed. The source of the conflict is laid bare on all the conflicting parties, the differences between the parties are made open to all, and each side gives out reasons for their dissent opinions.
Exploring the gap
In this phase of the conversation, people shift from discussions to real dialogue. It is a stage which is based on much questioning and listening from both all the conflicting parties. The phase attempt to answer questions on what brought the conflict and to what extent has the conflict affected the parties. The effects of the conflict are also explored, and the next step is to bridge the gap.
Eliminating the gap
In this phase, a clear and tested consensus is arrived at, through avoidance of unnecessary misunderstandings. The phase focuses on protecting each party’s power and incorporating them all together. The parties could also be separated if this it is seen as the only way reconciliation would be possible. By separating the conflicting parties, the heat of the conflict is given more time to cool and gives them an opportunity to adopt a rational perspective on the issue. By separating the conflicting parties, the conflict is given a chance to fade out through elimination of the conflict situation. (Conflict resolution models, 2017),
Deduced model of conflict resolution
– Clarification of the disagreement
– Establishment of a common goal
– Finding ways of meeting a common goal
– Agreeing the best way of resolving the conflict
– Acknowledging the laid out solutions
Clarification of the disagreement
Clarifying constitutes getting to the bottom of the conflict. The aim here is to get both sides to agree on what the disagreement is all about. Each of the conflicting parties gives their side of view and why they believe that they are right.
Establishing a common goal
The aim here is to make both sides agree on the desired outcome, and convince them that they are working towards a particular common purpose.
Finding ways of meeting a common goal
This stage involves getting the two parties to work together by accommodating each other’s concerns. A common goal is achieved through incorporating each parties ideas and beliefs.
Agreeing the best way of resolving the conflict
Both sides need to give consent of the best solution. The solution may take the form of incorporating or even separation. Let both parties decide which option best suits their situation.
Acknowledging the laid solutions
Both sides will have to honor their responsibility in the resolution process and express aloud what they have agreed.
Acknowledge the laid solutions
Agree the best ways of solving the conflict
Find the means to meeting a common goal
Establishing a common goal
Clarifying the disagreement
This research paper introduced three models of conflict resolution; the Thomas-Kilmann’s model, the courageous conversation model and the deduced model which was developed by integrating the first two models. Each model is ideal for solving any conflict situation, but the inferred model is the best compared to the other two models. The deduced model offers a long-lasting solution to conflict resolution.
Johnson A. Thompson C. Anderson G, (2014), Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode instrument. Retrieved from; http://www.cppasiapacific.sg/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TKI-GRP-tech-brief.pdf
Conflict resolution models retrieved 24,2017 from http://www.crowe-associates.co.uk/courageous-conversations/conflict-resolution-models-2/
Tamara Lytle (2015), How to resolve workplace conflict, Retrieved from; https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/pages/070815-conflict-management.aspx
2015, Conflict management. Retrieved from; https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/conflict-management-shift-direction_tcm18-10803.pdf