Hopefully a short post. As always opinions are mine.

I always figured dealing with conflict was something you just…did. You know, no need for fancy theories or structured approaches. Recently I was asked what my conflict resolution style is and how it matches to style of other people. So I did a bit of research, I mean, in a lazy way:

Andriy: > Give brief list of conflict resolution styles as bullet points:
Gemini: > Absolutely! Here’s a brief list of the most common conflict resolution styles:

  • Accommodating: Prioritizing the needs of others over your own and seeking to maintain harmony.
  • Avoiding: Sidestepping or postponing dealing with the conflict.
  • Compromising: Finding a middle ground; each party gives up something to find a solution.
  • Competing: Focused on winning and advancing your own needs above all else.
  • Collaborating: Working together to find a solution that fully satisfies everyone’s needs as much as possible.

Andriy: > What’s the origin of these conflict resolution styles?
Gemini: > The primary origin of the framework for these conflict resolution styles comes from the work of Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann in the 1970s.

Ok. That kind of makes sense and I have a hunch I have read about those at some point in my life. Now I have an exercise for you, which I’m doing myself along the way as well. I promise it will get more interesting:

  • Determine your own conflict resolution style by either taking a quiz online or by just thinking through those. I’m kind of combination of Collaborating, Compromizing, and a bit of Competing with complete intolerance to Avoiding style.
  • Now try to determine the styles of people you have to deal with, say collegues at work or people in your personal life. For myself, I created kind of a map of few of the stakeholders at work.
  • Now try to think of pros and cons of each of the styles and how they might impact you, other person, or what would be the best situation to use a style. Yeah, internet has lots of these, and I generated some stuff below, but it is more interesting to think about this while having context of yourself or others you know. Think of maybe 2-3 people, not to overwhelm yourself.
  • Now the fun part: mix and match yourself to these people and recall how your interactions where with them. For myself I found that:
    • We spend to much time in “analysis-paralysis” when another person is collaborating as much as I am.
    • There is a lot more compromizing on my side when dealing with a competing or avoiding person, which is probably detremental for me and leaves a bit of resentment.
    • Things get solved very quickly with an accomodating person, but then do I lose some of my credit with them just because they haven’t spoken?
    • … and many more…

Andriy: > Add one pro, one con, and one recommendation under each conflict resolution style bullet point.
Gemini: > Absolutely! Here’s the list expanded with a pro, con, and recommendation for each style:

  • Accommodating:
    • Pro: Maintains relationships and reduces tension.
    • Con: Can lead to neglecting your own needs.
    • Recommendation: Use strategically in low-stakes situations or when preserving harmony is crucial.
  • Avoiding:
    • Pro: Allows time to cool down and gather your thoughts.
    • Con: Doesn’t actually resolve the conflict, which can build resentment.
    • Recommendation: Employ only as a temporary measure, ensuring you return to address the issue later.
  • Compromising:
    • Pro: Can lead to finding a quick and somewhat fair solution.
    • Con: May limit creativity and not fully address everyone’s concerns.
    • Recommendation: Best when finding a temporary fix or when issues are of moderate importance.
  • Competing:
    • Pro: Can be useful when immediate, decisive action is needed.
    • Con: Damages relationships and may not lead to the best long-term solution.
    • Recommendation: Reserve for emergencies or when power dynamics are heavily imbalanced.
  • Collaborating:
    • Pro: Leads to solutions that genuinely satisfy everyone involved.
    • Con: Can be time-consuming and requires everyone to be fully invested.
    • Recommendation: Aim for this style whenever possible, especially for high-stakes conflicts or building deep trust.

This self-invented exercise helped me realize I need to be more mindful of the situation when handling conflict. I should explore styles that feel less natural, like strategically using avoidance when emotions are high – as long as I remember to revisit the issue later or that occasionally I need to compromize less in favor of achieveing better quality.

What are your thoughts?