Communication Styles

Negotiation and Conflict Resolution CONFLICT STYLES Most Valuable Communication Help Communication is central to the management of conflict and organizational leaders know this too well (Jones & Brinkert, 2008). Possessing the most brilliant ideas or translating them into action means little or nothing unless existing conflict is adequately dealt with. Conflict usually involves communication behaviors in relationships. Chapter 8 discusses the functions of communication in conflict, namely confrontation, confirmation, and comprehension and how coaches help their clients perform these functions.

They enable clients to transmit the message on the need for conflict management, which is confrontation; respect and protect individual and cultural identity, which is confirmation; and establish understanding on both sides concerning the conflict, which is comprehension. The individual is the main focus. The client should be able to objectively understand his conflict and craft the correct strategies and skills to address and solve it. The authors propose a coaching model, consisting of four stages.

In the first stage, the client breaks the situation in detail from several accounts and viewpoints, In the second stage, the client evaluates the accounts and perspectives by applying the perspectives of identity, emotion and power. In the third stage, he designs a future narrative that connects with the first accounts and perspectives. And under stage four, the coach helps the client create an action plan, based on the three functions.

At the same time, the coach applies a learning assessment method in devising a solution and identifying areas of improvement. The authors tackle the importance of assessing needs and how one-on-one coaching could be considered and made part of it. Coaches can take advantage of the client's narrative of events and his interpretation in forming the appropriate response to the conflict and in shaping the precise and effective action plan to deal and solve his own conflicts (Jones & Brinkert). B.

Conflict Styles Framework Summary The authors suggest the adoption of the Thomas-Kilmann five-style approach in adopting a conflict styles approach (Jones & Brinkert, 2008). It consists of avoidance, accommodation, competition, compromising, and collaboration. Avoidance, according to Thomas and Killman, reflects a low-level self-concern and concern for other. It can take the shape of sub-types, such as protecting or preventing a conflict with the other person or persons; withdrawing or staying out of the situation to avoid further conflict; and smoothing or passively avoiding all sensitive circumstances relating to the conflict.

Accommodating is accepting the opposite party's view instead of one's own. It also reflects low self-concern. Sub-types are yielding and conceding. Yielding is giving up without fighting for one's own view or interest. Conceding is giving in after expressing one's position. Competing is struggling to place one's view or interest over that of the opposing party. Subtypes are forcing and contending. Forcing applies power to impose one's view or position. Contending is more flexible without giving up one's view.

Compromising consists of giving and yielding and reflects concern for both the self and the other. It works faster than collaboration but cannot work when moral principles are involved. And collaborating gets both parties to meet most or all of their separate interests. It reflects a high level of both self-concern and concern for the opposite party. It is considered the best way to solve important problems and relationships, although it takes more time.

Its general principles stress client identification, his own conflict style and the other person's style; cultural backgrounds; behavioral choices; competency in conflict communication; and the limitations of any conflict styles framework (Jones & Brinkert). It also recommends specific approaches, consisting of conflict style survey tools; debriefing him on a particular conflict situation; introducing individual conflict styles and suggesting their use; and encouraging him to devise his own, based on his preferences and his organization's goals and values (Jones & Brinkert,. 2008). C.

My Natural Conflict Style Of the five styles, I seldom adopt avoidance if the conflict is serious. It is serious if it affects my work or personal values. If I can peaceably discuss the conflict with the other party, I would opt for it. If it is not possible or advisable or if it fails, I would ask our common superior for assistance. I would not resort to competing.

I would much prefer to work for either a collaboration or a compromise if my job or moral principles are not disturbed. If this does not work, my ultimate choice is will be to separate from the organization. D. Circumstances Where It is Most Appropriate These will include sexual harassment, false intrigues, unreasonable workloads, nepotism and the imposition of unreasonable preferences.

More specifically, I would seek out a collaboration if my employer imposes his own personal preferences on me and my work and if these preferences are not expressly those of the organizations and opposed to my moral principles. My employer, for example, may insist on a particular dress style when there is no office uniform or expresses disfavor if I do not behave in a way that is flattering to him or her but not in violation of organizational policies.

If the conflict does not offend my moral principles or violate the organization's own code of ethics, I may agree to a compromise. E. What to Add for Effectiveness in More Situations The authors' recommended narrative mechanism banks on the client's perception of the event of conflict and the assumption that the solution hangs on what the client recognizes. Applying this perspective to my natural or preferred conflict style, I would be willing to learn more about the other party's perception and seek out third-party perceptions too.

I can incorporate other perceptions into my own store of beliefs and preferences but without violating self-respect. I will endeavor to see my opponent's viewpoint as far as possible and in objectiveness as well as in the pursuit of organization's goals and code of ethical conduct. At the same time, I will seek out means of getting my view to the opposite side as objectively as possible without being condescending or ingratiating.

I will be willing to come to terms with him or her without losing self-respect or sacrificing cherished personal moral values. F. How to Develop this Skill Jones and Blinkert (2008) believe that focusing or emphasizing mistakes and problems in a conflict situation is likely to lead to action that will eliminate both the good and the bad aspects and details of the conflict. Instead, they suggest giving more attention and effort to one's strengths. When this is done, weaknesses will necessarily surface. But will lose some relevance (Jones & Blinkert).

I believe that my natural conflict style will be effective in more situations if I take a closer look at the strengths or reasonableness of the other party's position or viewpoint. I am willing to stretch my understanding to the maximum. But I will not understate the weaknesses or mistakes, if they are of substantial significance. I would appeal to the reason of the other party as far as possible or repeatedly. At the same.