Conflict Management Strategies
Read this chapter, which defines conflict, describes various conflict styles, and offers effective conflict management strategies. Try to answer some of the exercise questions at the bottom of each section.
Conflict Is Normal
Learning Objectives
- Describe the role of contradiction, negation, and rational unit in the thought of Friedrich Hegel.
- Identify two opposing models for characterizing conflict.
- List ways in which healthy conflict can benefit a group.
That
which is willed happens but rarely; in the majority of instances the
numerous desired ends cross and conflict with one another, or these ends
themselves are from the outset incapable of realization, or the means
of attaining them are insufficient. Thus the conflicts of innumerable
individual wills and individual actions in the domain of history produce
a state of affairs entirely analogous to that prevailing in the realm
of unconscious nature.
- Friedrich Engels
I don't like that person. I'm going to have to get to know him better
- Abraham Lincoln
A
cartoon from the 1970s shows two women standing behind a couch where
their husbands are sitting and watching a football game. One woman says
to the other, "I thought they settled all that last year!" Do you
suppose it would be nice if people could settle their differences once
and for all, if conflict would just go away, and if everyone would just
agree with each other and get along all the time?
Of course,
those rosy developments aren't going to take place. Conflict seems to
stubbornly retain its position as part of the human landscape; you can
hardly find a group of people who aren't experiencing it right now or
have never experienced it.
There's reason to believe, too, that a
moderate amount of conflict can actually be a healthy and necessary
part of group life if it is handled productively and ethically. We may
actually be better off, in other words, if we experience conflict than
if we don't, provided that we turn it to advantage.
The
19th-century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel believed
that contradiction and negation, which constitute both causes and
ingredients of conflict, lead every domain of reality toward higher
rational unity. He wrote that each level of interaction among human
beings, including those which take place in larger social structures,
preserves the contradictions of previous levels as phases and
subparts.
Much
more recently, research by Jehn and Mannix indicated that "effective teams over time are
characterized by low but increasing levels of task conflict, low levels
of relationship conflict with a rise toward the end of a project, and
moderate levels of task conflict in the middle of the task timeline".
Conflict and the Hope of Social Change
Many
years ago one of the authors attended a multi-day workshop in New York
City on how to promote international peace and reconciliation. After
hearing a presentation at the workshop about nuclear proliferation and
biological weapons, a participant asked, "Human history is full of
violence, bloodshed, and cruelty. What hope do we have of ever saving
ourselves?"
The presenter replied, "Yes, we've had violence and
bloodshed and cruelty throughout history. And as long as there are
differences between people and their opinions, the danger will exist
that we'll destroy ourselves, especially now that we have weapons that
can wipe out our whole species. But the question isn't, ‘Can we
eliminate conflict?' The question is really, ‘Can we accept conflict as
part of the human condition and handle it so that we move forward
instead of annihilating ourselves?'"
The presenter then offered what she said were signs of hope that groups of people can, indeed, work through even profound differences without descending into chaos or perpetual hatred. Slavery was once considered a normal part of society, she said, but no more. Child labor, too, used to be considered acceptable. And miscegenation laws existed in the United States until 1967. The presenter's point here was that, with hard work, groups can overcome past evils and deficiencies if they're willing to work through the conflict that invariably crops up when individuals are asked to change their behavior.
Two Models of Conflict
The
presenter in New York went on to say that we can conceive conflict in
terms of two models. The first is the cancer model, which portrays
conflict as an insidious and incessantly expanding element which if left
to itself will inevitably overwhelm and destroy a group. If we accept
this model, conflict must either be prevented, if possible, or
extirpated if it does manage to take root.
In the friction model,
by contrast, conflict is seen as a natural by-product of human
relations. Any machine generates waste heat simply through the
interaction of its component parts, and this heat seldom threatens to
halt the actions of the machine as long as people conduct preventive and
ongoing maintenance - adding oil, greasing joints, and so forth.
Likewise, according to this model, groups inevitably produce conflict
through the interaction of their members and need not fear that it will
destroy them as long as they handle it wisely. Saul Alinsky, a prominent
20th-century community organizer, wrote these words in support of the
friction model of conflict: "Change means movement. Movement means
friction. Only in the frictionless vacuum of a nonexistent abstract
world can movement or change occur without that abrasive friction of
conflict".
Benefits of Healthy Conflict
Without
conflict, life in general can easily become stagnant and tedious. When
conflict is absent in a group, it often means that people are silencing
themselves and holding back their opinions. If group discussions are
significant, rather than merely routine, then varying opinions about the
best course of action should be expected to arise. If people suppress
their opinions, on the other hand, groupthink may spread and the final
result may not be the best solution.
One favorable feature of
healthy conflict is that people engaged in it point out difficulties or
weaknesses in proposed alternatives and work together to solve them. As
noted in another section, a key to keeping conflict healthy is to make
sure that discussion remains focused on the task rather than upon
people's personalities.
If it is properly guided and not allowed
to deteriorate into damaging forms, conflict can benefit a group in
several ways. Besides broadening the range of ideas which group members
take into consideration, it can help people clarify their own views and
those of others so that they have a better chance of sharing a common
understanding of issues. It can also help group members unearth
erroneous assumptions about one another. Finally, it can actually make a
group more cohesive as members realize they are surmounting
difficulties together. In short, conflict is indeed normal.
Key Takeaway
- Conflict may be viewed as a pernicious and destructive element of group interaction, but considering it as a normal by-product of human relationships is a more accurate perspective.
Exercises
-
An adage says, "If you want an omelet, you have to break some eggs".
To what degree do you subscribe to this folk saying? What reservations,
if any, do you have about how it has been or might be used with respect
to social change?
- Some conflict throughout history has spread
perniciously, as the cancer model might suggest. Have you personally
experienced such enlargement of conflict in a group? If so, what factors
do you believe contributed to the situation? At what point did normal
friction among the group's members turn into a more harmful form of
conflict?
- Describe a situation in which you gained increased
important understanding as a result of conflict in a group you were part
of.