File Name: conflict management and resolution .zip
Conflict resolution is conceptualized as the methods and processes involved in facilitating the peaceful ending of conflict and retribution.
How to publish with Brill. Fonts, Scripts and Unicode. Brill MyBook. Ordering from Brill.
Conflict resolution is conceptualized as the methods and processes involved in facilitating the peaceful ending of conflict and retribution. Committed group members attempt to resolve group conflicts by actively communicating information about their conflicting motives or ideologies to the rest of group e.
Cognitive resolution is the way disputants understand and view the conflict, with beliefs, perspectives, understandings and attitudes. Emotional resolution is in the way disputants feel about a conflict, the emotional energy. Behavioral resolution is reflective of how the disputants act, their behavior. The term conflict resolution may also be used interchangeably with dispute resolution , where arbitration and litigation processes are critically involved. The concept of conflict resolution can be thought to encompass the use of nonviolent resistance measures by conflicted parties in an attempt to promote effective resolution.
There are a plethora of different theories and models linked to the concept of conflict resolution. A few of them are described below. There are many examples of conflict resolution in history, and there has been a debate about the ways to conflict resolution: whether it should be forced or peaceful.
Conflict resolution by peaceful means is generally perceived to be a better option. The conflict resolution curve derived from an analytical model that offers a peaceful solution by motivating conflicting entities. Conflict resolution curve CRC separates conflict styles into two separate domains: domain of competing entities and domain of accommodating entities. There is a sort of agreement between targets and aggressors on this curve. Their judgements of badness compared to goodness of each other are analogous on CRC.
So, arrival of conflicting entities to some negotiable points on CRC is important before peace building. CRC does not exist i. Under such circumstances it might lead to apocalypse with mutual destruction. The curve explains why nonviolent struggles ultimately toppled repressive regimes and sometimes forced leaders to change the nature of governance.
Also, this methodology has been applied to capture conflict styles on the Korean Peninsula and dynamics of negotiation processes. The dual concern model of conflict resolution is a conceptual perspective that assumes individuals' preferred method of dealing with conflict is based on two underlying themes or dimensions: concern for self assertiveness and concern for others empathy.
According to the model, group members balance their concern for satisfying personal needs and interests with their concern for satisfying the needs and interests of others in different ways. The intersection of these two dimensions ultimately leads individuals towards exhibiting different styles of conflict resolution.
Relational dialectics theory RDT , introduced by Leslie Baxter and Barbara Matgomery , explores the ways in which people in relationships use verbal communication to manage conflict and contradiction as opposed to psychology.
This concept focuses on maintaining a relationship even through contradictions that arise and how relationships are managed through coordinated talk. RDT assumes that relationships are composed of opposing tendencies, are constantly changing, and tensions arises from intimate relationships. Strategy of conflict, by Thomas Schelling , is the study of negotiation during conflict and strategic behavior that results in the development of "conflict behavior".
This idea is based largely on game theory. In "A Reorientation of Game Theory", Schelling discusses ways in which one can redirect the focus of a conflict in order to gain advantage over an opponent. Within peace and conflict studies a definition of conflict resolution is presented in Peter Wallensteen's book Understanding Conflict Resolution :.
The "conflicting parties" concerned in this definition are formally or informally organized groups engaged in intrastate or interstate conflict. One theory discussed within the field of peace and conflict studies is conflict resolution mechanisms: independent procedures in which the conflicting parties can have confidence.
They can be formal or informal arrangements with the intention of resolving the conflict. Coser , Johan Galtung and Thomas Schelling , and presents seven distinct theoretical mechanisms for conflict resolutions: . According to conflict database Uppsala Conflict Data Program 's definition war may occur between parties who contest an incompatibility.
The nature of an incompatibility can be territorial or governmental , but a warring party must be a "government of a state or any opposition organization or alliance of organizations that uses armed force to promote its position in the incompatibility in an intrastate or an interstate armed conflict".
Peacekeeping measures may be deployed to avoid violence in solving such incompatibilities. Conflict resolution is an expanding field of professional practice, both in the U. The escalating costs of conflict have increased use of third parties who may serve as a conflict specialists to resolve conflicts. In fact, relief and development organizations have added peace-building specialists to their teams.
Furthermore, this expansion has resulted in the need for conflict resolution practitioners to work in a variety of settings such as in businesses, court systems, government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and educational institutions throughout the world. According to the Cambridge dictionary, a basic definition of conflict is: "an active disagreement between people with opposing opinions or principles.
The type of conflict and its severity may vary both in content and degree of seriousness; however, it is impossible to completely avoid it. Actually, conflict in itself is not necessarily a negative thing. When handled constructively it can help people to stand up for themselves and others, to evolve and learn how to work together to achieve a mutually satisfactory solution. But if conflict is handled poorly it can cause anger, hurt, divisiveness and more serious problems. If it is impossible to completely avoid conflict as it was said, the possibilities to experience it are usually higher particularly in complex social contexts in which important diversities are at stake.
Specially because of this reason, speaking about conflict resolution becomes fundamental in ethnically diverse and multicultural work environments, in which not only "regular" work disagreements may occur but in which also different languages, worldviews, lifestyles and ultimately value differences may diverge. Conflict resolution is the process by which two or more parties engaged in a disagreement, dispute or debate reach an agreement resolving it.
It involves a series of stages, involved actors, models and approaches that may depend on the kind of confrontation at stake and the surrounded social and cultural context. However, there are some general actions and personal skills that may be very useful when facing a conflict to solve independently of its nature , e. Sources of conflict may be so many, depending on the particular situation and the specific context, but some of the most common include:.
Personal differences such as values, ethics, personalities, age, education, gender, socioeconomic status, cultural background, temperament, health, religion, political beliefs, etc.
Thus, almost any social category that serves to differentiate people may become an object of conflict when it does negatively diverge with people who do not share it. Conflict occurs when people does not share common goals, or common ways to reach a particular objective e. Conflict occurs also when there is direct or indirect competition between people or when someone may feel excluded from a particular activity or by some people within the company.
Lack of communication or poor communication are also significant reasons to start a conflict, to misunderstand a particular situation and to create potentially explosive interactions. Although different conflicts may require different ways to handle them, this is a list of fundamental strategies that may be implemented when handling a conflictive situation: . A conflict is a common phenomenon in the workplace; as mentioned before, it can occur because of the most different grounds of diversity and under very different circumstances.
However, it is usually a matter of interests, needs, priorities, goals or values interfering with each other; and, often, a result of different perceptions more than actual differences. Conflicts may involve team members, departments, projects, organization and client, boss and subordinate, organization needs vs. There are, nevertheless, some main approaches that may be applied when trying to solve a conflict that may lead to very different outcomes to be valued according to the particular situation and the available negotiation resources:.
When one of the conflict's parts firmly pursues his or her own concerns despite the resistance of the other s. This may involve pushing one viewpoint at the expense of another or maintaining firm resistance to the counterpart's actions; it is also commonly known as "competing". It may be also considered a suitable option when a quick resolution is required and using force is justified e. However, forcing may also negatively affect the relationship with the opponent in the long run; may intensified the conflict if the opponent decides to react in the same way even if it was not the original intention ; it does not allow to take advantage in a productive way of the other side's position and, last but not least, taking this approach may require a lot of energy and be exhausting to some individuals.
Collaboration involves an attempt to work with the other part involved in the conflict to find a win-win solution to the problem in hand, or at least to find a solution that most satisfies the concerns of both parties. The win-win approach sees conflict resolution as an opportunity to come to a mutually beneficial result; and it includes identifying the underlying concerns of the opponents and finding an alternative which meets each party's concerns. From that point of view, it is the most desirable outcome when trying to solve a problem for all partners.
Collaborating may be the best solution when consensus and commitment of other parties is important; when the conflict occurs in a collaborative, trustworthy environment and when it is required to address the interests of multiple stakeholders. But more specially, it is the most desirable outcome when a long-term relationship is important so that people can continue to collaborate in a productive way; collaborating is in few words, sharing responsibilities and mutual commitment.
For parties involved, the outcome of the conflict resolution is less stressful; however, the process of finding and establishing a win-win solution may be longer and should be very involving. It may require more effort and more time than some other methods; for the same reason, collaborating may not be practical when timing is crucial and a quick solution or fast response is required. Different from the win-win solution, in this outcome the conflict parties find a mutually acceptable solution which partially satisfies both parties.
Compromising may be an optimal solution when the goals are moderately important and not worth the use of more assertive or more involving approaches. It may be useful when reaching temporary settlement on complex issues and as a first step when the involved parties do not know each other well or have not yet developed a high level of mutual trust.
Compromising may be a faster way to solve things when time is a factor. The level of tensions can be lower as well, but the result of the conflict may be also less satisfactory. If this method is not well managed, and the factor time becomes the most important one, the situation may result in both parties being not satisfied with the outcome i.
Moreover, it does not contribute to building trust in the long run and it may require a closer monitoring of the kind of partially satisfactory compromises acquired. This technique consists on not addressing the conflict, postpone it or simply withdrawing; for that reason, it is also known as Avoiding.
This outcome is suitable when the issue is trivial and not worth the effort or when more important issues are pressing, and one or both the parties do not have time to deal with it. Withdrawing may be also a strategic response when it is not the right time or place to confront the issue, when more time is needed to think and collect information before acting or when not responding may bring still some winnings for at least some of the involves parties.
Moreover, withdrawing may be also employed when someone know that the other party is totally engaged with hostility and does not want can not to invest further unreasonable efforts. Withdrawing may give the possibility to see things from a different perspective while gaining time and collecting further information, and specially is a low stress approach particularly when the conflict is a short time one.
However, not acting may be interpreted as an agreement and therefore it may lead to weakening or losing a previously gained position with one or more parties involved.
Furthermore, when using withdrawing as a strategy more time, skills and experiences together with other actions may need to be implemented. Smoothing is accommodating the concerns of others first of all, rather than one's own concerns. This kind of strategy may be applied when the issue of the conflict is much more important for the counterparts whereas for the other is not particularly relevant. Just as withdrawing, smoothing may be an option to find at least a temporal solution or obtain more time and information, however, it is not an option when priority interests are at stake.
There is a high risk of being abused when choosing the smoothing option. Therefore, it is important to keep the right balance and to not give up one own interests and necessities. Otherwise, confidence in one's ability, mainly with an aggressive opponent, may be seriously damaged, together with credibility by the other parties involved.
Needed to say, in these cases a transition to a Win-Win solution in the future becomes particularly more difficult when someone. Relationships between organizations, such as strategic alliances , buyer-supplier partnerships, organizational networks, or joint ventures are prone to conflict. They have related the forms of conflict e. Negative feelings such as annoyance, anger and discomfort can interfere with understanding exactly what is wrong in situations of confrontation and how to set things right again.
Gaining a bit of distance from negative feelings is exactly what such moments call for, especially on the part of the person with presumably the greatest maturity. Problem ownership is defined as deciding who should take ownership of the behavior or conflict in the issue Gordon,
Conflict resolution is the process by which two or more parties reach a peaceful resolution to a dispute. In the workplace, there can be a variety of types of conflict:. But some conflicts reflect real disagreements about how an organization should function. A supervisor might take the initiative to convene a meeting between two employees who have engaged in a public dispute. An employee might seek out a person with whom they're having conflict to suggest working together to find ways to co-exist more peacefully. A mediator might encourage empathy by asking employees in conflict to each describe how the other might be feeling and thinking, and how the situation might look to the other party. Managers of rival departments might facilitate a joint brainstorming session with their teams to generate solutions to ongoing points of conflict.
Whether at the international or interpersonal level, terms like conflict management and conflict resolution are often used synonymously, even though both actually have different definitions. Lesser known but equally important is the concept of conflict transformation, which also holds its own unique definition apart from its conflict management and conflict resolution cousins. Considering that each of these concepts holds their own identity, the question must be asked: What are the differences between these three fundamental concepts? For workplace peacebuilders, there is an even more crucial question to consider: How do we differentiate between these concepts and know when to apply each pragmatically in the workplace? In order for peacebuilders to be effective in handling conflicts, understanding the difference between these three concepts is key.
PDF | This paper is a review of conflict management styles and conflict resolution from the managers and supervisors' point of view. Conflict is an | Find, read.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *