Conflict Management

It is natural for two people to have a disagreement, and managing these disagreements is called conflict management. These disagreements arise because people are different and have different opinions, thoughts, feelings, ideas, and histories, thus respond differently to the same events.  

To resolve these disagreements, there are numerous methods people use. Let's look at what works best for what situations, and the problems that may arise with each option. Various options are shown below with the suggested use, along with the Pros and Cons of each. 

Suggested Use:  When both parties have healthy communication skills and want to resolve the issue as well as build and deepen the relationship.

Soon after the incident, in private if possible, the offended person tells the other that their words/actions were upsetting, and maybe why. The offending party listens, maybe explains their side, apologizes, and agrees to change in the future.

Pros:

The offended person benefits by --

     standing up for themself, thus building self-esteem

     seeing that the other person cares enough to apologize and change, thus building the relationship

     being given a chance to accept the apology

The offending person benefits by --

     being given the opportunity right after it happened to ask questions so they can fully understand the issue

     being given the chance to apologize and set things right, thus building self-esteem

     seeing that the other person cares enough to address this issue, thus building the relationship

They both benefit --

     because the discussion will often involve each sharing more about themselves, thus deepening their understanding of each other and the relationship

     because the issue gets resolved and is less likely to keep coming up again

     because the encounter is kept between just those, thus building trust in each other

Cons:

If used with unhealthy persons, the information shared may later be used against the other.

If one of the persons is intentionally destroying the relationship, this attempt to build may cause them to do more to disrupt the relationship.

Suggested Use:  When offended by this same person in the past and confronting them resulted in them blowing up, attacking, or other unwanted behaviors.

After an upsetting incident, neither mentions it again, and no conversation ensure.

Pros:

Neither has to risk a negative encounter. 

Cons:

The offended person never gets --

     to build their self esteem by standing up for self

     to find out that the other person may not have meant to be offensive and does want to change for the sake of the relationship

     find out more about the other person via the ensuing conversation

     to accept the others' apology

     the chance to build the relationship and trust in the other

     to resolve this issue so that it doesn't build internal, or external, resentment toward the other

The offending person never gets --

     to learn that the other person cares enough to bring up this conversation

     to learn more about the other person via the ensuing conversation

     to apologize and make amends

     the chance to build the relationship and trust in the other

     the chance to build self esteem by repairing the relationship

They both may risk  -- 

     the relationship continuing to erode with each similar encounter that is ignored

     both blaming the other for the problems that continue to arise

     decreasing their self esteem and social skills

Suggested Use: Never.

The person who was offended does not confront the other directly, but instead tells one or many others about what happened.

Pros:   

Neither has to risk a possible negative encounter currently. 

The offended person may temporarily feel they are ‘right’ by getting others to verbally join in on complaining about the other

Cons:   

The offended person --

     never gets the chance to increase their confronting skills

     never gets to hear an apology

     risks further destroying the relationship by talking about the other person behind their back

     may lose the friends he is gossiping to if they don't want relationships with people who gossip

     risks a much worse confrontation later if the offending person finds out about the gossip

The offending person --

     never learns to be more careful with their words

     never gets the chance to apologize

They both never get --

     the chance to get to know and understand the other better

     the chance to build trust in the relationship

     the chance to build their self esteem

Suggested Use: When the offended one feels they need extra support in confronting this person. Also in a work setting where supervisor intervention may be expected.

The offended person goes to a 3rd Party and ask them to address it with the person who upset them. 

The 3rd Party wisely tells the offended person to address it with the person who upset them first, and then if there is no resolution to return -- or the 3rd party agrees to Confront the offending person, but only with the offended person present.

Pros and Cons:

similar to Option A above.  

Suggested Use:  If the offending person is known to do this behavior with everyone, and is not likely to listen to those they offended, but the 3rd Party has some authority, e.g., respected by offending party or maybe a work supervisor.

The offended person goes to a 3rd party and ask them to address it with the other person while keeping the offended person's identify anonymous.

Pros:

The offended party avoids the risk of a possible negative encounter

The offending person may realize they need to stop doing this behavior with everyone

Cons:

The offending person --

     never receives an apology

The offending person --

     may forget or even doubt the accusations (especially if some time has passed)

     may feel they are being unjustly accused or asked to change for no reason

     never gets to apologize directly

     may start questioning and doubting themselves in their encounters with everyone since they do not know what encounter was addressed, thus may damage self esteem

     may start to feel like others are talking about them behind their backs (because, well, they are)

     may make them start to feel less confident in their encounters with everyone, knowing someone was not okay talking to them directly

They both may risk losing --
    the chance to find out the other cares and wants a better relationship

     the chance to build trust and the relationship

But what if you are practicing Healthy Conflict Management Skills, and the other person does not participate like you wanted, but you want or need to have this relationship? Consider these possibilities:

Do you need to have a discussion with them about their goals in the relationship?

Do you need to have a discussion with them about your frustrations in this area?

Do they need to be taught these skills?

Are they benefiting in some way by upsetting you?

Are they holding a grudge against you from something else that needs to be addressed first?

Do they have deeper issues and need to do some self-exploration about why they do or say what they do?

Would individual counseling help them?

Would a counseling session with both of you be helpful?

If someone has a history of unhealthy confrontations with others, they may have past  trauma(s) and they may be getting “triggered” in the current discussion. They may start talking about, or emotionally reacting to, a past event. This becomes clear when what is said is discussed at an emotional level considerably out of line with the current event, or if what is said just doesn’t make sense. If this is the case, the current issue does not get resolved, but usually comes up again and again. 

To resolve this, at the point either party gets triggered, either party should call a time out and walk away, tabling the discussion for later. Once both parties are calm, and both are able to clearly state what they want from the other in the future, try again.

If either party gets triggered over and over and the current issue never gets resolved but the relationship is slowly eroding, one or both parties need to figure out what is getting triggered, and how to keep the discussion on the current subject and discussed in a calm manner. If this is not possible, one or both parties may need to see a counselor to resolve the past trauma(s).

If we are forced - by work or other circumstances - to be in a relationship with someone who does not cooperate with any of our healthy attempts to resolve disagreements, other options must be considered. 

Have I really tried my best to do Healthy Conflict Management Skills with them?

Should I try again, being careful with my wording to not come across as attacking?

Are my own issues also preventing healthy resolution?

Can I accept this person and/or their behavior and still manage whatever I must do?

Have I done my best to set healthy boundaries? Are they 1) firm 2) fair 3) friendly? 

Once I have set the boundaries with them, do I enforce them? Consistently?

Is there a supervisor or 3rd party who might be helpful?

Do I need to talk to Human Resources or a lawyer?

Do I need to reconsider this job or other circumstance that brings me into encounters with this person?

Do I need to get counseling to get support and help in managing this relationship?

Do you think you always need to win a discussion?

Do you think you always are right?

Are you frequently told that you don’t listen when others try to talk?

Can you not admit fault?

Do you make it a point to never apologize?

Or never apologize first?

Do you feel like you get too upset when talking about current issues?

Do people in your life remind you of upsetting people or events from the past and it's hard not to react negatively?

If you notice these things about yourself, you may need to do some exploration on our own, or in counseling, about what interferes with your ability to peacefully resolve things with people you care about.

 Back to Top