Examine your top three scores and reflect on them in relation to the descriptions provided below. For instance, if your highest scores are in Avoidance, Smoothing, and Compromise, you would be characterized as having a “left of center” preference for handling conflict.

This indicates a focus on addressing the social, emotional, and relational needs of those involved. Conversely, if you scored higher in Problem-Solving, Authoritative Command, and Compromise, your approach may be more analytical, and you might be inclined to assert your authority and impose a solution when conflicts arise.

Smoothing Soften harshness, Arousal, and issues to maintain peace and harmony.	HIGH	Problem Solving Issues are uncovered, conversation encouraged and conflict is resolved.
LOW		HIGH
Avoidance Withdrawal, ignoring, hiding issues that would contribute to conflict.	LOW	Authoritative Solutions are imposed, power struggles ensue. Issues are decided through arbitration or by a manager

The conflict grid shows how each style demonstrates high or low emotional intelligence and commitment to the people involved, and low to high concern for the production targets within any area of responsibility.

You will see that only the problem-solving style scores high on both continuums: people and production. This illustrates that to achieve real conflict resolution, it takes problem-solving strategies. Problem-solving is an attempt to identify and work through the causes of conflict, not merely to suppress them temporarily.

Advantages and disadvantages of different conflict management styles.

Avoidance

Pros:

• Easy to do
• Requires no special effort at communicating

Cons:

• If you use this continually, resentment may build up
• Can be hard on your self-esteem

Use:

• When an issue is trivial, or more important issues are pressing
• When you perceive no chance of satisfying your concerns
• When potential disruption outweighs the benefits of resolution
• To let people cool down and regain perspective
• When others can resolve the conflict more effectively

Competitive/Authoritative Command

Pros:

• Good short-term resolution
• Good in emergencies
• Makes you feel powerful

Cons:

• Makes you unpopular or feared if it is used too often
• Leaves you no alternatives once you have used this strategy (if no resolution is reached)

Use:

• When quick, decisive action is vital (such as emergencies)
• On important issues where unpopular actions (such as cost-cutting, enforcing unpopular rules, and discipline) need implementing
• On issues vital to company welfare when you know you are right

Accommodating/Smoothing

Pros:

• Can be a diplomatic move that others appreciate
• Takes some skill but can create an atmosphere of further discussion
• May also mean you must constantly charm people with flattery

Cons:

• Does not move you forward to resolution
• Can show a willingness to wait until all the facts are known

Use:

• When you find you are wrong
• To allow a better position to be heard, to learn, and to show your reasonableness
• When issues are more important to others than to yourself
• To satisfy others and maintain cooperation
• To build social credits for later issues
• To maintain loss when you are outmatched and losing
• When harmony and stability are especially important

Compromising

Pros:

• Can move a discussion toward resolution if used as part of the negotiating process
• Can break a deadlock

Cons:

• Nobody is satisfied
• Does not necessarily lead to resolution
• You may feel you have sold out for nothing

Use:

• When goals are important, but not worth the effort or potential
• When opponents with equal power are committed to mutually exclusive goals
• To achieve temporary settlements to complex issues
• To arrive at expedient solutions under time pressure
• As a backup when problem-solving or authoritative command is unsuccessful

Collaborative/Problem-Solving

Pros:

• Requires some skill and an open mind
• Can move you to a satisfactory resolution

Cons:

• Can be a longer process
• Not always worth the effort

Use:

• To find an integrative solution when both sets of concerns are too important to be compromised
• When your objective is to learn
• To merge insights from people with different perspectives
• To gain commitment by incorporating concerns into a consensus
• To work through feelings that have interfered with a relationship