Types of Conflict from Avoidance to Competing

Journal

Day 1: Avoiding Conflict

During a team meeting at work, there was a heated debate about the direction of our new project when one of my colleagues suggested a strategy that I strongly disagreed with. However, instead of voicing my concerns, I chose to stay silent and avoided the conflict altogether.

The conflict style I used today is known as avoiding, and according to Hocker et al. (2022), the avoiding style involves sidestepping the conflict so as to not have to deal with it. It is like withdrawing from the field altogether. It could be considered weak in that there is a failure to engage in the issue altogether, but it could be used for different reasons, as in my case—I use it when the conflict seems trivial. However, I also use it when emotions are running high, or when there is little chance of achieving a positive outcome. That is why I used it on this day.

Still, avoiding the conflict felt ineffective because my silence meant that my valuable input was not being considered. Looking back, I think that the decision that was made may have long-term negative consequences and these could have been avoided if I had spoken up. I did not because I did not believe I would really be heard.

A more effective approach might have been the Learning Conversation technique from Stone et al. (2023), which involves creating a dialogue where everyone can share his or her viewpoints. It is a way for differing opinions to be heard and valued because it comes across as a learning conversation rather than as an argument. I could have expressed my concerns in a non-confrontational manner and perhaps contributed to a more balanced decision.

Day 2: Competing Conflict

In a discussion with my roommate about household chores, I found myself insisting that my method of organizing the kitchen was the best and should be followed. My roommate disagreed and preferred a different method.

So, today, I used the Competing conflict style. Hocker et al. (2022) describe competing as a power-oriented mode where a person pursues his own concerns at the expense of others. It involves assertiveness to achieve one’s goals without regard for the other party’s needs. I proceeded to organize the kitchen the way I saw fit. However, in the end, I did not achieve what I wanted, which was for my roommate to get on board. Thus, the competing style led to a stalemate. My roommate felt disrespected and became defensive, which just increased the tension. We both ended up feeling frustrated by the lack of compromise and the fact that the issue remained unresolved.

Hocker et al. (2022) recommend the "Collaborative" style as t focuses on finding a win-win solution that satisfies both parties’ concerns. It seems that when working together to understand each other's preferences, people can find genuine solutions. I think my roommate and I could have come up with a mutually agreeable method for organizing the kitchen if we had approached the problem with a little more mutual respect and consideration.

Day 3: Accommodating Conflict

At lunch with a friend, we debated where to go on vacation. Although I had a strong preference for a beach destination, I ended up agreeing to my friend’s choice of a mountain trip to make my friend happy.

The conflict style used here is Accommodating, defined by Hocker et al. (2022) as a cooperative, but unassertive approach where one person gives in to the other's needs and desires, and this can even come at the expense of one’s own needs or desires. To be honest, I did desire to see the beach, but I put my friend’s desires before my own.

Accommodating resolved the immediate conflict and maintained harmony, but I felt a sense of loss and disappointment. I am aware that over time, this could lead to resentment. But it probably won’t because I enjoy seeing my friend happy as much as I enjoy going to the beach, so I can view this as a win still.

The getting to yes approach referenced in Difficult Conversations (Stone et al., 2023) could have been useful. This technique involves acknowledging the other person's perspective while also presenting your own. By saying "Yes, I understand you want a mountain trip, and I would love a beach vacation," we could have explored a compromise or alternative that incorporated both of our desires—like a beach with nearby mountains.

Day 4: Compromising Conflict

Today, my roommate and I argued about budgeting for a new appliance. I wanted a high-end model, but my roommate wanted something more affordable—but that meant also being lower quality with fewer options. It was too much either way for me to buy alone, and we had a agreed to go in together on it. In the end we ended up getting a mid-range model.

This conflict was resolved using the "Compromising" style, which is like finding a middle ground where everyone gives up something to reach a solution that everybody can live with.

Our compromise was basically effective as it allowed us to make a decision without further conflict. However, neither of us was fully satisfied with the outcome. My roommate still felt like we spent too much, and I felt like if we were going to spend as much as we did, we should have just spent a little more to get the really nice one.

Interest-Based Negotiation might have been better (Stone et al., 2023). This technique involves focusing on the underlying interests rather than positions. And it basically supports the idea that in understanding why each of us wanted a particular model, we could have brainstormed options that met both our needs more effectively, and that would have given us a better solution.

Day 5: Collaborating Conflict

At work, we had to choose a new software tool for our team. There were differing opinions, but I facilitated a discussion where everyone shared their perspectives, and we evaluated the pros and cons together.

Thus, today, I used the "Collaborating" style. Hocker et al. (2022) view collaborating as a cooperative approach that involves working together to find a way forward that fully satisfies the concerns of all parties.

The collaborating style was very effective. We all were able to reach a good decision that everyone felt good about and committed to. The process also strengthened our teamwork and trust. I actually felt like we bonded a great deal throughout this process, and everyone seemed really appreciative that I helped bring it about.

I found that collaborating was effective, but perhaps incorporating the "Joint Problem-Solving" method could have improved it (Stone et al., 2023). This would have involved jointly defining the problem and brainstorming solutions, so that all voices were heard and valued throughout the process. In a way we kind of did this, but I think if we had more time we could have really gone deeper into it.

Day 6: Competing Conflict

During a family gathering, a disagreement arose about political views. I strongly defended my stance. I was dismissive of opposing viewpoints and I asserted my perspective with a good deal of conviction and force. I basically showed I was not interested in yielding one inch of ground.