Unit 4: Conflict Resolution Strategies
Without appropriate intervention, dysfunctional conflict – caused by poor communication, biases, and personality disputes – can damage morale, workplace efficiencies, and general productivity. In this unit, we learn that it is rarely a good idea to rely on a court of law to resolve these issues. Litigation is time-consuming, costly, and often takes a mental and emotional toll on everyone involved.
Completing this unit should take you approximately 3 hours.
Upon successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:
- compare the five styles for handling conflict: competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating;
- compare the ADR strategies of negotiation, mediation, and arbitration;
- explain the role of unions and collective bargaining in conflict resolution;
- discuss the pros and cons of mandatory arbitration agreements;
- compare formal and informal conflict resolution strategies;
- explain the importance of legal standing in litigation;
- explain how class action lawsuits affect corporations;
- describe the jury trial process;
- identify risks companies face when they use litigation to resolve conflicts rather than ADR strategies;
- discuss methods managers can use to understand the perspective of their employees;
- define what it means to work toward a common goal to resolve conflicts;
- list some common methods of progressive discipline; and
- discuss ways managers engage workers who are not performing according to expectations.
4.1: Five Styles for Handling Conflict
Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann created the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument in 1974 to describe five styles for handling conflict: competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating. They based each style on an individual's appetite for assertiveness and cooperation. Understanding what you hope to gain when you face a workplace conflict or disagreement and what those around you wish to achieve will help you negotiate a beneficial solution.
Notice the similarities between these five styles for handling conflict and our discussion on negotiation styles in Unit 1. Here we explore these traits in terms of how individuals act in the workplace.- Competing: People with a competing style play to win. While other employees may perceive these individuals as aggressive, assertive, bossy, or inconsiderate, competing individuals often do well when a swift decision is in order. When you work with someone with a competitive conflict style, remember they want to win, so position your ideas in a way that makes them think they are winning.
- Collaborating: Collaborators try to create solutions where everyone wins. They take time to think through all options before deciding and are known for their strong relationships with others. However, they may take too long and expend too much effort when deciding. When you work with someone of this style, give them time and space to think through different views and options before forcing them to decide.
- Compromising: In compromises, no one wins outright in a negotiation, but each side achieves something they can tolerate and loses something they may have preferred. Politicians compromise by taking the best ideas from as many parties as possible to create an alternate solution. Remember that parties that compromise may later resent giving up something they value. When you work with someone of this style, decide what is important to you in the negotiation before you begin.
- Avoiding: Conflict avoiders seek any workaround to avoid conflict. Some may perceive conflict avoiders as uncaring, but they may just hope the conflict disappears. Conflict avoidance can hurt relationships and business decisions because the perpetrators often avoid confronting the issue beyond the decision deadline. When you work with someone who avoids conflict, you may have to bring up the issues and suggest solutions.
- Accommodating: Individuals who adopt this style allow the other party to win. This can be a good strategy if you feel you are on the wrong track or want to preserve a relationship. When you work with someone who is accommodating, you may have to ask a lot of questions to discern what their needs are so you can address them.
Read this article to learn how the five conflict resolution approaches described above relate to the scales of individual characteristics of assertiveness and cooperativeness.
Read this resource to learn how to use Thomas-Killmann's approaches to conflict resolution to obtain a positive outcome. Pay special attention to the role emotional intelligence plays in guiding our thinking and behavior.
- Competing: People with a competing style play to win. While other employees may perceive these individuals as aggressive, assertive, bossy, or inconsiderate, competing individuals often do well when a swift decision is in order. When you work with someone with a competitive conflict style, remember they want to win, so position your ideas in a way that makes them think they are winning.
4.2: Alternative Dispute Resolution
Resolving conflicts benefit from three established alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods. Each technique – negotiation, mediation, and arbitration – has advantages and disadvantages, but all are considered preferable to litigation. In the sections below, we learn about each type of ADR and when each is the preferred method individuals and organizations can use to resolve a dispute.
Read this text, which describes the continuum of types of conflict resolution or alternative dispute resolution. We call the process "alternative" because it occurs outside the courtroom.
4.3: Negotiation
Let's look at negotiation as a way to resolve a conflict or disagreement rather than simply a way to negotiate business deals. The goal of negotiation is to establish an agreement between the two parties with a stake in the outcome. The resolution should offer stakeholders common or agreed-upon terms and understandings.
Negotiations do not need to be contentious or disagreeable. For example, we participate in a subtle negotiation when we ask a coworker to turn down the volume on their computer, wear less perfume, or consider another point of view when deciding. We succeed in negotiation when we express our views, and the coworker agrees to change their behavior or make an accommodation. Often the other person was unaware they were causing any discomfort. They agree to change because they value working in a comfortable, inclusive environment.
Read this article to explore how different communities respond to conflict.
Read this resource for some general guidance on solving conflicts in the workplace.
Negotiations can be contentious, fraught with infighting, and create hurt feelings when one party does not believe the other is addressing their concerns in a fair manner. However, the two parties can resolve their differences and restore peaceful operation when they find common ground or understanding.
For example, workers may organize to form a coalition (or union) to negotiate for better working conditions or receive extra pay. In this case, the union steps in to negotiate on behalf of the workers. They may even threaten to strike or refuse to work until the employer agrees to meet their terms. These unions may push employers to create a healthier work environment, such as by supplying special safety or protective gear or paying workers overtime pay in exchange for working extra hours. These steps can create a healthier, more productive workforce that benefits everyone.
Read this resource to review how American workers have created unions to fight for a better work environment since the 1860s. Workers' unions tend to get involved in political activities as they strive to promote better working conditions on behalf of their members with local, statewide, and national legislation. The negotiations union leaders undergo with companies on behalf of their members are called collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining describes the negotiation process workers' unions undertake with employers to regulate salaries, working conditions, benefits, and other aspects of workers' compensation and rights. Read this text for more information and context on collective bargaining in the United States.
4.4: Mediation
Mediation is an alternative dispute resolution process that involves co-opting or hiring a neutral, third-party mediator amenable to both parties involved in the dispute. The mediator should help the parties understand each other's perspectives, work toward commonality, create an action plan to resolve the issue, and follow up with the parties to maintain peace.
Mediators should remain impartial during the discussions, which means they should allow each party to present their case and arguments fairly and accurately without appearing to favor one side over the other. For example, the mediator should not receive payment or services from one of the parties. They also should not have or appear to have a conflict of interest or any connection that may lead one party to believe they are acting unfairly, such as a personal relationship, conviction, religious belief, or a future business opportunity. This makes sense. You would not want to hire someone to mediate a dispute if you believe they are friends with the other party or if you think they will gain financially when the dispute is resolved in a certain way.
In many disputes, such as legal disagreements, divorce, and other negotiated settlements, stakeholders hire an outside professional mediator to help resolve their differences amicably. In the workplace, a professional from the human resources department often serves as the third-party mediator for disputes. However, since they are a company employee charged with resolving conflicts in the company's interests, many would argue they are not impartial.
Read the article below to learn the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)'s view of the many advantages of mediation. Note the positive review of this informal dispute resolution given by two employers.
4.5: Arbitration
Arbitration is a more formal method of alternative dispute resolution in which parties that disagree select a professional arbiter, usually an attorney who specializes in arbitration (or a panel of arbitrators), to help resolve disputes outside the courtroom.
The arbitration process involves many of the same processes as a courtroom trial, including the presentation of evidence, statements from witnesses, a discussion of any relevant local laws or ordinances, and an examination of any signed legal documents, such as contracts, receipts for damages, and other evidence. The parties usually meet to discuss and present their arguments and evidence before the arbiter. The arbiter will present their judgment, damages due, and a specific course of action within a specified time.
Note that state law can dictate whether the settlement is binding (compared to non-binding), which means the parties have a legal obligation to follow through on the arbiter's decision or ruling. Companies interested in keeping disputes private typically prefer to undergo arbitration rather than a courtroom trial since the proceedings and settlement results do not become part of the public record, which anyone, including journalists, potential clients, and other interested parties, can access. The arbitration process tends to be less time-consuming and pricey than a courtroom trial, although it can still be expensive for many participants.
Read this article to learn more about the advantages and disadvantages of arbitration as an alternate dispute resolution. The outcome of this problem-solving may depend on the arbitrator's interpretation of the contract terms. In contrast, in mediation, the third party is neutral, and the participants may not reach a mutually agreed-upon resolution.
Note that employers increasingly include mandatory arbitration clauses as part of their employment contracts to limit the ability of employees to bring legal action against their employer in a court of law. These clauses are controversial, as you will see below.
While they can prevent companies from receiving publicly damaging, so-called frivolous lawsuits from disgruntled employees, others argue that employees, who sign these agreements to get hired, sign away their rights as citizens to obtain due process remedies to unfair work practices in a court of law. By signing these contracts, employees relinquish their ability to sue their employer to protest discrimination, sexual harassment, being terminated without cause, and other grievances.Read this blog post which presents some controversial aspects of mandatory arbitration agreements from the arguments presented before the United States Supreme Court in October 2017.
4.6: Litigation
Bringing a matter of dispute before a court of law in the form of litigation is a last resort for most organizations and companies, to be avoided at all costs. The process is usually expensive and time-consuming for everyone involved. The injured party can receive significant compensation for damage another party caused them, but jury trials can be unpredictable. Putting potentially unethical or unlawful behavior in the public spotlight can also cause irreparable damage to an organization or the company's reputation and future business.
It is generally wise for each party to hire an attorney well-versed in the law to represent their interests, whether they are individuals, organizations, or corporate entities. While expensive, attorneys are usually experts at presenting evidence clearly and convincingly to elicit a positive and legally-binding verdict, or decision, from the jury.
Read this text, which describes two aspects of litigation that are important to consider: legal standing and class action lawsuits.
Watch this video, which explains the different types of risk businesses face, such as legal and reputational risk, and how they manage risk and conflicts that may affect their business. The speaker discusses three steps to managing legal risk: identifying the legal risk, evaluating the chances of something going wrong, and determining the response. Four strategies include risk avoidance, risk reduction, risk shifting, and risk acceptance.
4.7: Understand Each Party's Perspective and Goals
Now that we have discussed several ways individuals, organizations, and companies resolve conflicts or disagreements, let's explore some key elements you should consider when attempting to arrive at a meaningful and lasting agreement or settlement, regardless of the methods used (negotiation, mediation, arbitration, or litigation).
An important first step to resolving a dispute or conflict is for each side to understand the other person's perspective and feelings about the situation. You should recognize their needs and interests going forward. People generally want to know that the other person has heard and understood their thoughts and ideas, despite their disagreement. This step may seem trivial, but it can be a critical component for generating understanding and respect for each side and helping discover an agreeable common goal.
Review the theories about the underlying causes of conflict and the possible motivations and interests of the individuals involved. Understanding the perspective of the other party – to know "where they are coming from" – can establish a sense of trust and convince each side that their differences may not be as important or relevant as they first thought. By identifying the cause, they can create a clear path forward to benefit each side. The stakeholders may resolve their differences for the good of the organization or company without further action.
For example, the individuals may realize their disagreement stemmed from one of the reasons below.
- A lack of clear organizational structure, different understandings of task interdependence, confusion regarding staff hierarchy, or misunderstandings about roles and responsibilities may have caused the conflict.
- Divergent personality types may have caused them to approach the situation differently.
- Erroneous stereotypes, biases, or cultural misunderstandings may have caused them to act in an insensitive or boorish way.
- Different approaches to conflict – competitive, collaborative, compromising, avoiding, or accommodating – may have led them to react objectionably.
Read this blog, where the author explains that negotiators should define and express their self-interests, enlarged interests, enlightened interests, and aligned interests, so each side in the dispute can arrive at a common point of understanding. This way, they can identify a common path forward that is mutually beneficial. Negotiators can create amenable solutions when they understand what each party wants to achieve.
4.8: Working toward a Common Goal
During the conflict resolution process, mediators should grasp the needs of each party so they can find areas where the stakeholders share the same goals. Individuals who disagree can compromise by letting less important areas go and favoring items of greater priority. Each side also needs to trust the other party to have a frank discussion, keep sensitive information private, and keep their promises.
In the workplace, the shared goal may be to work together in ways that benefit the company for "the good of the order." Using our problem-solving skills to create new solutions that benefit everyone are components of creativity and innovation that can help our company thrive.
Read this text, which provides some best practices for effective teamwork.
4.9: Barriers to Reaching a Common Goal
During any negotiation, you should try to articulate real and perceived barriers that sow mistrust, derail the search for common ground, and prevent us from identifying a peaceful path forward.
As you read this text, pay attention to the phases of conflicts, which explains that taking preventative steps during the potential conflict and gestation phases can help you avoid conflict escalation and barriers that could become insurmountable.
The author discusses barriers to conflict resolution in "Hindrances to the Smooth Implementation of the Process of Integration." Differences of opinion may remain, but interest in the common good should prevail and help participants surmount real or perceived roadblocks.
4.10: Create a Plan to Move toward a Common Goal
Once you have articulated and considered areas of agreement, common goals, and potential barriers, you should create a work plan for remediation. As with any good plan, you should document your actions, such as with a project completion template. This allows stakeholders to disagree, find common ground, and determine a timeframe for completing tasks and responsibilities. The mediator should check in at various intervals to ensure everything is on track and make appropriate adjustments.
Read this chapter to review the project life cycle to ensure stakeholders are satisfied with the progress and manner of project completion. Are the project members fulfilling their responsibilities and accounting for resources properly? When the project is finished, team members should conduct a post-project evaluation to reflect on lessons learned, recognize positive ideas, and discuss ways to avoid mistakes during future projects.
4.11: Intra-organizational Conflict
Intra-organizational conflict exists within all businesses and organizations. Leaders are charged with exploring the situation to discover why conflict occurs. They need to address underlying issues rather than simply avoid conflict. Compassion and respect are at the heart of effective conflict resolution.
Read this interview, which explains that community groups need a formal way to deal with conflict resolution. Incorporating components of respect and compassion is critical to good conflict resolution. This is especially important in today's media environment, where news that a conflict resolution attempt has turned chaotic and disrespectful can be highly damaging. Negative press will severely impact profit and community outreach.
4.12: Grievance Procedures
Responding to grievances and conflict is often stressful for managers and employees alike. While most do not like to discuss conflict, think about this process as an opportunity to resolve misunderstandings and differences before they become contentious.
Watch this video to learn five reasons why managers should talk openly with employees they consider to be poor performers.
Read this article for advice on how to converse with an employee who is not contributing to the company or organization as well as expected.
Many companies have a policy of progressive discipline to respond to employee misconduct. Managers usually begin the process by discussing expectations and asking for feedback from their underperforming employees. If this conversation does not improve, you may need to document the negative results and collect the legal documentation you need to discipline or terminate an employee. Read this resource, which details this process of escalation.
Unit 4 Assessment
- Receive a grade
Take this assessment to see how well you understood this unit.
- This assessment does not count towards your grade. It is just for practice!
- You will see the correct answers when you submit your answers. Use this to help you study for the final exam!
- You can take this assessment as many times as you want, whenever you want.