In our daily lives we are involved in relationships be it at work, home, school or in general. And, when dealing with these relationships, we come across individuals with different ideas, agendas, values, personal history and personalities than our own. Because of these types of relationship differences, conflict often arises and throws off the balance of the relationship. However, how we communicate when dealing with the conflict will largely depend on whether the outcome is positive or negative. Thus, developing a best practice list to deal with conflict before it arises is a positive step in the right direction.
Conflict is inevitable, and being aware of this and having a plan to be able to deal with a conflict should be the first step to conflict management. When creating a plan, first and most important, is to understand that people have differences and one must learn to be “flexible, accepting, understanding and non-judgmental of the other person’s views, opinions or communication style” (Conner, 2009, p. 1), as often, one of the above is the root of communication difficulties. Furthermore, in conflict management planning “the ability to take a meta-conflict perspective, where you can look back on the conflicts you have experienced, analyze what you did well and what you did poorly, and learn from your mistakes” (Cahn, Abigail, 2007) will further move one in a positive direction toward the understanding of conflict resolution.
When a conflict situation does present itself, one must “adopt a mindset that embraces conflict as an opportunity while recognizing the risks involved in it” (Cahn, Abigail, 2007). “Each individual needs to be responsible for his/her actions and maintain flexibility when dealing with the conflict. Although this is a positive step in managing conflict, flexible communication does not mean the conflict itself will be settled” (Lombard, 2010, p. 2).
In addition, it is important to stay focused when dealing with the conflict. “Sometimes it’s tempting to bring up past seemingly related conflicts when dealing with current ones. Unfortunately, this often clouds the issues and makes finding mutual understanding and a solution to the current issue less likely, and makes the whole discussion more taxing and confusing” (Scott, 2007, p.1).
As important as it is to stay focused, it is just as important to be able to stop and think about what has been said before one responds. “Don’t become so upset that you start to lose control of yourself. Instead, try to calm down and cool off. Try to control you mental faculties” (Cahn, Abigail, 2007). Try not to take the conflict personally, but think about your goals and your needs, as well as the goals and needs of the other and then respond.
Once you have responded, listen carefully to what the other says. “People often think they’re listening, but are really thinking about what they’re going to say next when the other person stops talking. Truly effective communication goes both ways. While it might be difficult, try really listening to what your partner is saying. Don’t interrupt. Don’t get defensive. Just hear them and reflect back what they’re saying so they know you’ve heard. Then you’ll understand them better and they’ll be more willing to listen to you” (Scott, 2007, P. 1). Also, at this point one will be able to ascertain whether the conflict is real or imagined and communicate to the other as such.
Communication styles play a large part in the resolution of the conflict; therefore, it is important to pick the best style to fit the situation. One party can choose to avoid discussing the matter and let the conflict die, accommodate by smoothing over the issue at hand, dominate the conflict situation by forcing the other to conform to their view point, compromise so each gets some of their needs met, or collaborate and work together to end the conflict.
Collaborating is the best communication style; however, it does not work in all situations. People’s behaviors largely play a part in how the communication style will proceed and if one is choosing another option, it would be difficult to change their style.
Years ago the writer became involved in a conflict where both parties’ communication styles were not on the same playing field and as a result, a thirty year friendship went down the tubes. It is hard to think after thirty years, that the parties involved would allow this to happen, but due to personal circumstances, and years of conflicting communication styles; the end of the friendship was inevitable. Here is how it played-out.
Every Wednesday night was choir practice at the writer’s church. Instead of going home from work, the writer, Teri, would go to the house of her friend David and eat dinner. Together they would drive to choir rehearsal. Teri arrived at her friend’s house to find his mother sitting at the kitchen table. David was in another location of the house.
This particular evening, Teri was facing a problem at home. When Teri walked in, David’s mother could tell something was on her mind and asked what was wrong. Teri proceeded to tell Betty (David’s mother), that her 10-year-old son was not home and no one knew exactly where he was. Taylor, (Teri’s son) had told his grandmother he was going to a friend’s house, but didn’t leave a phone number or the friend’s name, nor did the grandmother ask for the information. Teri’s mother Ann was traveling to a town 40 miles away and was not at home. Teri’s daughter Tiffanie came from her house to watch Taylor but as of 6 p.m. he still was not home. Teri was trying to decide if she should go to choir practice or go home and try to find him. The rule of the house was when you go somewhere; you must provide a name and phone number where you can be reached. In addition, the rule was to be home by 5:00 p.m. on a school night. Neither house rule was followed.
Teri was upset that Taylor didn’t follow the rules and upset with her mother for not getting the information prior to letting him go. At this point, David walked in the room. Teri could tell by the look on his face he was not in a particularly good mood. He immediately starting yelling at Teri and telling her she shouldn’t be mad at her mother, but at her son. She tried to explain that she was upset with both and why, but he didn’t let her finish. He kept yelling and yelling.
Over the period of the thirty year relationship, Teri had often found herself on the receiving end of David’s anger. Much of the time, the anger was directed at Teri, but had nothing to do with anything she said or did. David was very controlling and wanted everyone to view things his way. Often, she would accommodate him by not making waves and just let him blow-off steam, but this night Teri wasn’t in the mood to be accommodating. When it came to her son and his well-being, she expected the rules of the house to be followed. If Taylor didn’t provide information he should have, it is the adult’s responsibility to get the information needed. And in this case, no one did what was expected of them.
David sat down at the table and stared at her. He told her she should have sent her son (who has severe ADHD) to a special school. He continued saying that Taylor would never amount to anything and that he ran the household. At this point, Teri asked David if he was trying to start a fight. He said that he was not, and continued by telling her that she needed to listen to him because she didn’t know what was best. Furthermore, he told her if she listened to him, her life would change for the better. What? By getting rid of her son? Teri responded quickly that it was her life and her family and she had the right to be upset. And, on top of that, she told him she knew what was best for her family and how to raise Taylor. Well, that didn’t go over well. He could see for the first time that Teri wasn’t just listening to what he said without reacting. Because of this, he started yelling again, but this time he decided to throw in a few jabs at Teri’s mental health condition, which cut her like a knife. She literally started shaking, and his response was to diagnosis her, which is when it involves reading into a person’s behavior (Uebergang, 2009, p. 1). He leaned right into her and said, “You’re sick, do you need to see your therapist now?” in a very condescending way to which she replied in a matter-of–fact manner, No! Teri was caught off guard by the viciousness of his attack and froze. Slowly she stood up and said she was leaving. At that moment, David’s voice changed. He softly said, “You don’t have to leave. I just wish you would listen to me. You never listen to me. If you did, you wouldn’t be in the mess your in.” Teri looked at him and said that of all the old friendships he had, she was the only one that hadn’t walked away, and before she could say anymore… David immediately changed his tone and growled; “Now you’ve gone far enough. Get out of my house.” Teri turned to the door and left.
That night at choir practice neither of them said a word to the other. Over the course of the next few weeks at practice, David would say a few words to Teri and she would reply, but she knew the friendship was over. How could she ever tell someone her deep, dark secrets if they were going to attack her mental state? Teri eventually stopped going to choir practice due to other commitments, and she and David no longer spoke. She saw him approximately one month after the incident. It was Christmas Eve. He ignored her. The next time she saw him was in a casket 1 ½ years later. David had died suddenly of a massive heart attack at the age of 56.
One thing that was obvious in the above relationship is that David and Teri had different communication styles that had previously worked for them, but for whatever reason, did not work on that cold, November evening. Teri accommodated David for thirty years and both were comfortable with that arrangement. It didn’t mean she didn’t understand there was a conflict, she just felt it wasn’t big enough to end a friendship. This particular evening, she changed her comfort zone and decided to be a bit more competitive and try to get him to see her point. Because his comfort zone was to win the arguments, or at least think he did, it threw him off too. Teri was always the one to apologize because she didn’t like conflict, but this time she felt he was in the wrong for attacking her in the manner in which he did. David never apologized. He didn’t have to because his friends were always first to do so. But when the person dealing with the conflict didn’t apologize to him as expected, the friendship ended.
Perhaps had both dealt with the conflict in a more positive manner and listened to one another without emotion getting in the way, the friendship may have survived and taken a more positive conflict resolution direction. But the conflict management failed due to the harmful conflict climate, which consisted of an “imbalance of power, distrust, and defensiveness, which foster(ed) accommodation (chilling effect) or competition (meeting force with force)” (Cahn, Abigail, 2007). Teri’s stress over her son, as well as David’s anger created an environment, which turned out be one of a lose-lose situation.
People as a whole fear conflict, but conflict in itself is natural and isn’t the problem. It is how individuals cope and deal with the conflict that is the problem. Some of the problems that arose in Teri and David’s conflicted situation created barriers to the effective communication process.
One barrier was David’s criticizing of Teri and her son. He told her that her life was a mess and that her son would not amount to anything. Instead of addressing both of these comments immediately, Teri merely asked if David was trying to start a fight. Then when David had softened, Teri made a remark that only escalated the situation. Both had their own agendas and ideas of how to handle the situation, which turned out negative for both of them. One or the other should have walked away and calmed down before resuming the conversation, but neither did so. And, neither had a plan on how to deal with conflict in a positive manner. They were both trapped in their comfort zone of how to deal with conflict, which was unfortunate because David was a Professor of Communications at a local college, and Teri had an Associate’s degree in Communications.
Unfortunately, because of Teri and David’s relationship differences, conflict arose and threw off the balance of the relationship. However, how they communicated when dealing with the conflict largely depended on whether the outcome was a positive or negative. In this case, it was negative. Thus, developing a best practice list to deal with conflict before it arises is a positive step in conflict management and resolution.
Cahn, D. D. & Abigail, R. A. (2007). Managing conflict through communication (3rd ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Conner, T. (2007, February 3). Common Communication Barriers. Retrieved August 10, 2010,
Lombard, T. (2010, August 9). Effective Conflict Management. Ashford University COM325.
Scott, E. (2007, December 5). Communicate: Improve Your Relationships with Effective
Communication Skills. About.com Guide. P. 1-3. Retrieved August 10, 2010 from
Uebergang, J. (n.d.). 12 Barriers to Effective Communication – Beware of These Relationship
Killers. In Tower of Power. Retrieved August 3, 2010 from
http://www.articlesbase.com/relationships-articles/12-barriers-to-effective-communication- beware-of-
these-relationship-killers-752778.html#ixzz0wgW3bFJH
these-relationship-killers-752778.html#ixzz0wgW3bFJH
No comments:
Post a Comment