6.5 Conflict Management Strategies

As already discussed, conflict is inevitable and is not inherently negative. A key part of developing interpersonal communication competence involves being able to effectively manage the conflict you will encounter in all your relationships. One key part of handling conflict better is to notice patterns of conflict in specific relationships and to generally have an idea of what causes you to react negatively and what your reactions usually are.

Conflict Management Strategies

Many of the strategies discussed below have been previously mentioned in this book, but they warrant another mention because they can help you manage conflict in a positive manner. As an introduction, watch the video, which explores the concept of confidence in conflict.

(TEDx Talks, 2017)

Defensiveness versus Supportiveness

Jack Gibb discussed defensive and supportive communication interactions as part of his analysis of conflict management. Defensive communication is characterized by control, evaluation, and judgements, whereas supportive communication focuses on the points and not personalities. When we feel judged or criticized, our ability to listen can be diminished, and we may only hear the negative message. By choosing to focus on the message instead of the messenger, we can keep the discussion supportive and professional.

Face-Detracting and Face-Saving

Communication is not competition. Communication is the sharing of understanding and meaning, but does everyone always share equally? People struggle for control, limit access to resources and information as part of territorial displays, and otherwise use the process of communication to engage in competition. People also use communication for collaboration. Both competition and collaboration can be observed in communication interactions, but there are two concepts central to both: face-detracting and face-saving strategies.

Face-detracting strategies involve messages or statements that take away from the respect, integrity, or credibility of a person, whereas face-saving strategies protect credibility and separate the message from the messenger. For example, you might say that “Sales were down this quarter” without specifically noting who was responsible—sales were simply down. If, however, you ask, “How does the sales manager explain the decline in sales?” you have specifically connected an individual to the negative news. Although we may want to specifically connect tasks and job responsibilities to individuals and departments, in terms of language, each strategy has distinct results.

Face-detracting strategies often produce a defensive communication climate, inhibit listening, and allow for little room for collaboration. To save face is to raise the issue while preserving a supportive climate, allowing room in the conversation for constructive discussions and problem-solving. By using a face-saving strategy to shift the emphasis from the individual to the issue, we avoid power struggles and personalities, providing each other with space to save face (Donohue & Kolt, 1992).

Empathy

Communication involves not only the words we write or speak, but how and when we write or say them. The way we communicate also carries meaning, and empathy for the individual involves attending to this aspect of interaction. Empathetic listening, as discussed in previous chapters, involves listening to both the literal and implied meanings within a message. For example, the implied meaning might involve understanding what has led a person to feel this way. By paying attention to the feelings and emotions associated with content and information, we can build relationships and address conflict more constructively. In management, negotiating conflict is a common task, and empathy is one strategy to consider when attempting to resolve issues.

Managing Your Emotions

Have you ever “seen red” or perceived a situation through rage, anger, or frustration? Then you know that you cannot see or think clearly when you are experiencing strong emotions. There will be times in the work environment when emotions run high. Your awareness of them can help you clear your mind and choose to wait until the moment has passed to tackle the challenge.

“Never speak or make a decision in anger” is one common saying that holds true, but not all emotions involve fear, anger, or frustration. A job loss can be a sort of professional death for many, and the sense of loss can be profound. The loss of a colleague to a layoff while you retain your position can bring both pain and relief, as well as survivor’s guilt. Emotions can be contagious in the workplace, and fear of the unknown can influence people to act in irrational ways. The wise business communicator can recognize when emotions are on edge in themselves or others and choose to wait to communicate, problem solve, or negotiate until after the moment has passed.

Listen Without Interrupting

If you are the receiver in a communication exchange, start by listening without interruption. Interruptions can be both internal and external, and warrant further discussion. If the sender of the message starts to discuss a point, and you immediately start debating the point in your mind, you are paying attention to yourself and what you think they said or are going to say instead of the message that is actually being communicated. An internal interruption such as this gives rise to misunderstandings and may cause you to miss valuable information that you need to understand to address the issue at hand.

External interruptions may involve attempts to get a word in edgewise and may change the course of the conversation. Let the other person speak while you listen, and if you need to take notes to focus your thoughts, take clear notes of what is said, also noting points to revisit later. External interruptions can also take the form of a telephone ringing, a “text message has arrived” chime, or a co-worker dropping by in the middle of a conversation.

As an effective communicator, you know all too well the importance of considering the context and climate of a communication interaction when approaching a delicate subject such as an evaluation or criticism. Choose a time and place free from interruption. The place should be outside the common space where there may be many observers. Turn off your cellphone. Choose face-to-face communication instead of an impersonal email. By providing a space free of interruption, you are displaying respect for the individual and the information.

Determine the Speaker’s Intent

People want to know what is coming and generally dislike surprises, particularly when the context is something like an evaluation. If you are on the receiving end, you may need to ask a clarifying question if it doesn’t count as an interruption. You may also need to take notes and write down questions that come to mind so you can address them when it is your turn to speak. If you are the person giving the evaluation, be clear and positive in your opening and lead with praise. You you should be able to find one positive point, even if it is only that the employee consistently shows up to work on time, to highlight before transitioning to a performance issue.

Indicate that You Are Listening

In mainstream North American culture, eye contact is a signal that you are listening and paying attention to the person speaking. Take notes, nod your head, or lean forward to display interest and listening. Regardless of whether you are the employee receiving the criticism or the supervisor delivering it, displaying listening behaviour engenders a positive climate that helps mitigate the challenge of negative news or constructive criticism.

Paraphrase

Restate the main points to paraphrase what has been discussed. This verbal display allows for clarification and acknowledges receipt of the message. Summarize the main points and consider the steps you will take to correct the situation, if necessary. If none come to mind or if you are nervous and are having a hard time thinking clearly, state out loud the main point and ask if you can provide solution steps and strategies at a later date. You can request a follow-up meeting if appropriate or indicate that you will respond in writing via email to provide the additional information.

If you are the employer, restate the main points to ensure that the message was received because not everyone hears everything that is said or discussed the first time it is presented. Stress can impair listening, and paraphrasing the main points can help address this common response.

Learn from Experience

Every communication interaction provides an opportunity for learning if you choose to see it. Sometimes the lessons are situational and may not apply in future contexts. Other times, the lessons learned may serve you well across your professional career. Taking notes for yourself to clarify your thoughts, much like journalling, serve to document and help you see the situation more clearly.

Recognize that some aspects of communication are intentional and may communicate meaning, even if it is hard to understand. Also, know that some aspects of communication are unintentional and may not imply meaning or design. People make mistakes. They say things they should not have said. Emotions are revealed that are not always rational and are not always associated with the current context. A challenging morning at home can spill over into the workday, and someone’s bad mood may have nothing to do with you.

Try to distinguish between what you can control and what you cannot, and always choose professionalism.

Understanding Cultural Influences

As already mentioned, the strongest cultural factor that influences your conflict approach is whether you belong to an individualistic or collectivistic culture (Ting-Toomey, 2012). People raised in collectivistic cultures often view direct communication regarding conflict as a personal attack and consequently are more likely to manage conflict through avoidance or accommodation. From a collectivistic perspective, the underlying goal in a conflict is not the preservation and manifestation of individual rights and attributes, but rather the preservation of relationships. In this approach, individual rights are superseded by group interest.

The predominant perspective of individualism is to have one’s own ideas and act according to the courage of one’s convictions. Any perceived constraint on individual freedom is likely to pose immediate problems and require a response. Typically, the most appropriate response in a conflict situation involves a direct or honest expression of one’s ideas. People from individualistic cultures feel comfortable agreeing to disagree and don’t generally see such clashes as personal affronts (Ting-Toomey, 2012). They are more likely to assert their own position in a conflict, rather than seeking compromise or accommodation.

Gudykunst and Kim (2003) suggest that if you are an individualist in a dispute with a collectivist, you should consider the following:

• Recognize that collectivists may prefer to have a third party mediate the conflict so that those in conflict can manage their disagreement without direct confrontation to preserve relational harmony.
• Use more indirect verbal messages.
• Let go of the situation if the other person does not recognize that the conflict exists or does not want to deal with it.

If you are a collectivist in conflict with someone from an individualistic culture, the following guidelines may help:

• Recognize that individualists often separate conflicts from people. It’s not personal.
• Use an assertive style filled with “I” messages, and be direct by candidly stating your opinions and feelings.
• Manage conflicts even if you would rather avoid them.

Effective conflict resolution serves all parties and preserves harmony. In cross-cultural  situations, many scholars advocate the use of face negotiation techniques, as outlined below.

Face Negotiation Theory

Face negotiation theory, already discussed in this chapter, states that people in all cultures share the need to maintain and negotiate face. Some cultures—and individuals—tend to be more concerned with self-face, which is often associated with individualism. Individualistic cultures prefer a direct way of addressing conflicts, a dominating style, or, optimally, a collaborating approach. Addressing a conflict directly is something that particular cultures or people may prefer to avoid. Conflict resolution, in this case, may become confrontational, potentially leading to a loss of face for the other party. Collectivists—cultures or individuals—tend to be more concerned with other-face and may prefer an indirect approach, using subtle or unspoken means of dealing with conflict (avoiding, withdrawing, compromising) so as not to challenge the face of the other.

Conflict face negotiation theory recommends a four-skills approach to managing conflict across cultures:

1. Mindful listening: Pay special attention to the cultural and personal assumptions being expressed in the conflict interaction. Paraphrase verbal and nonverbal content and the emotional meaning of the other party’s message to check for accurate interpretation.
2. Mindful reframing: This is another face-honouring skill that requires the creation of alternative contexts to shape our understanding of the conflict behaviour.
3. Collaborative dialogue: This is an exchange of dialogue that is oriented fully in the present moment and builds on mindful listening and mindful reframing to practise communicating with different linguistic or contextual resources.
4. Culture-based conflict resolution steps: This seven-step conflict resolution model guides conflicting groups to identify the background of a problem, analyze the cultural assumptions and underlying values of a person in a conflict situation, and promotes ways to achieve harmony and share a common goal.The process entails asking yourself the following questions:

• • What is my cultural and personal assessment of the problem?
  • Why did I form this assessment and what is the source of this assessment?
  • What are the underlying assumptions or values that drive my assessment?
  • How do I know my assumptions are relative or valid in this conflict context?
  • What reasons might I have for maintaining or changing my underlying conflict premise?
  • How should I change my cultural or personal premises into a direction that promotes deeper intercultural understanding?
  • How should I adapt on both verbal and nonverbal conflict style levels in order to display facework-sensitive behaviours and to facilitate a productive common-interest outcome?

(Ting-Toomey, 2012; Fisher-Yoshida, 2005; Mezirow, 2000)

 Assertive Communication

When we communicate assertively, we are stating our interpersonal needs clearly and directly while respecting the other person’s needs in the relationship (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). As such, this an effective conflict management strategy that we can use. However, there is a clear distinction between aggressive communication and assertive communication. While both types are focused on the self and one’s own needs, only assertive communication is also focused on the others’ needs (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). Assertive communication is not easy, and balancing needs in relationships is not easy. Assertive communication is a key component when talking about conflict within relationships because it allows us to better meet the relational needs of both partners and strengthen our relationships. Strategies to help you build assertive communication skills are outlined below (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

Ways to Assert Yourself

“I” Statements – Owning your Voice

We have already discussed the use of “I” statements; however, they are also an integral part of handling and decreasing, conflict (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). “I” statements directly express your thoughts, needs, feelings, and experiences to the people around you and allow your to take responsibility for your experiences.

Table 6.2. “I” Statements vs. “You” Statements

Watch out for those fake “I” statements that so regularly sneak into our conversations—“I feel you …” and “I think you …” are actually hidden “You” statements. They place blame on the other person in the relationship and avoid responsibility for thoughts, feelings, and actions (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

Asking Great Questions

The key to asking really great questions is being a really great listener (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). If you are actively listening, you will recognize what information you are missing or what you need clarification for. Some basic types of questions you should understand and master are discussed below (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

There is a general distinction made between open-ended questions, questions that likely require some thought and more than a yes or no answer, and close-ended questions, questions that only require a specific answer or a yes or no answer (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). This is an important distinction to understand and remember. In the context of managing conflict, open-ended questions are used to gather information, and close-ended questions are used to clarify the concepts or ideas you have heard (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

Watch out for leading questions, which provide a direction or answer for someone to agree or disagree with (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). An example would be, “So, you are going to vote for _____ for president, aren’t you?” or “What they did is unbelievable, don’t you agree?” These questions can easily be turned into information gathering questions: “Who are you going to vote for this year?” or “What do you think about their behaviour?”

Framing and Reframing

In communication, framing is essentially the act of intentionally setting the stage for the conversation you want to have (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). To frame a conversation, you express why you want to engage in the topic, what your intent is, and what you hope the outcome might be for resolving the conflict, as well as the impact or importance of your relationship. When you frame a conversation, you remove the need for the other person to assume what your intentions and motives are or why you are bringing the topic up right now (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

There are many ways to frame a conversation; here are a few ideas for how to frame a conversation effectively:

• Ask about timing:
  • “I have been wanting to connect with you to discuss _____.  Would now be a good time?” (If the answer is no, take a minute to schedule a better time to talk.)
• Share why’s, concerns, and intentions:
  • “I’m bringing this up because I want us and this project to be successful, and I’m concerned that we are missing something.”
  • “My intention is to share my thoughts with you, but I don’t have any expectations that you do anything about them.”
• Frame a boundary:
  • “I can see this isn’t a good time to talk, so I’d like to set up a time that works better.”
  • “I appreciate you thinking of me for this project. I’m currently working on _____, which means, unfortunately, I can’t do both and have to say no to your request.”

(Maricopa Community College District, 2016)

Framing sets the stage for the rest of the conversation to unfold. A little bit of framing goes a long way in helping conversations be more productive and helping to manage some of the conflicts that can happen when people have to make assumptions about “why” and conversation or conflict is happening (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

Framing happens at the beginning of a conversation, whereas reframing happens when things get off track and you need to bring a conversation back on topic (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). In a conversation, reframing helps us see more of what is going on, helps us focus on the larger picture or our end goals, and helps to defuse tense situations (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

Reframing can be used in the following ways to manage conflict:

• To defuse inflammatory language
• To recast negative statements into neutral or positive ones
• To refocus attention
• To acknowledge strong emotions in a productive manner
• To translate communication so that it is more likely to be heard and acknowledged by other parties
• To re-contextualize the dispute and provide a broader perspective

(Maricopa Community College District, 2016)

Table 6.3. Examples of Reframing Statements

(Maricopa Community College District, 2016)

Developing Assertive Messages

Boundaries

When we speak about being assertive, we often talk about drawing or holding our boundaries (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). In a physical space, boundaries are easy to identify, such as a fence, stop signs, or a door. Boundaries in our social experiences are not as easy to identify but are just as real and important as physical boundaries. Fences and doors tell us where it is safe to go and how to behave. The same is true when we assert our social boundaries. You can think of them as the invisible fences or doors we create in our lives. Asserting our social boundaries tells those around us what is and is not acceptable in our interaction—they are the guidelines and rules we give people around us for how we want our relationship with them to look (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

A basic act of being assertive is simply saying no. Saying no without using little white lies or justifying why you are saying it takes some practice (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). Have you ever been invited out with friends but didn’t want to go? Did you make something up, saying, “I’m busy,” when really you just don’t want to go out? Being assertive in that situation looks like “I really appreciate the offer, and I hope you invite me in the future, but now I just need some ‘me’ time.”

Decreasing Defensiveness

One of the ways we can decrease the possibility of the receiver becoming defensive and instead demonstrating support is to focus on describing our feelings rather than evaluating the people causing the problem we have (Maricopa Community College District, 2016). When we describe our feelings, we begin by giving our relational partner insight into the specific emotion we are experiencing. Then we tell them which specific behaviour is causing us to feel the way we do. Next, we provide two possible reasons or interpretations of why they might be exhibiting the behaviour we do not like. Finally, we conclude by explaining the consequences that their behaviour will have on our relationship if it continues. Throughout your communication of “I” messages, you must be sure you are helping your partner, friend, or family member maintain their positive and negative face. We do not want to threaten either one during our interaction (Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

The following four-part “I” statement formula can help you decrease defensiveness and help the other person maintain face:

1. Feeling: Clearly explain your feelings using the construction “I feel _____.” This must be a feeling. Stating “I feel you are lazy” will not have the intended effect. Refer back to the Feelings Wheel in Chapter 5 for examples.
2. Observed behaviour: Describe the other person’s behaviour using the construction “ … when you _____.” This is not a blaming statement. “I feel angry when you are a jerk” is not helpful. The purpose of this part of the formula is to state an observation. State what you actually observed with no judgement.
3. Interpretations: Give TWO possible interpretations of why the other person may have behaved the way they did. Maybe they don’t realize what they are doing? Maybe they are just tired? Maybe they are too focused on their own problems? Remember that we like our positive and  negative faces to remain unthreatened. Stating two interpretations is key so you don’t appear as though you know what motivates another person. You aren’t a mind reader, so don’t pretend to be. Try using the construction: “I’m not sure if you _____ or ______.”
4. Consequences: When another person’s behaviour starts to negatively affect you, you might notice that the behaviour of others does, in fact, have consequences for you and your relationship. In this last part of your “I” statements, explain how the other person’s behaviour is impacting you and how it might change your relationship. Are you going to have to change the way you interact with them, or will you have to use protective strategies to maintain your sanity? Use these constructions to communicate the consequences: “If this keeps happening, I might need to _____” OR “I might have to start _____ to feel  better about our relationship” OR “I think I should _____ from now on.”

(Maricopa Community College District, 2016)

Consider this—maybe you’ve asked your romantic partner to pick their socks up from the floor, but they still leave their socks all over the house. You don’t want to be aggressive and shout at them, but you are feeling overwhelmed and frustrated. You can use “I” statements during these times.

Here is a possible four-part series of “I” statements to use with your relational partner who can’t seem to get their socks into the hamper (or laundry basket):

I feel frustrated (feeling) when I see your socks all over our room (observed behaviour). I’m not sure whether you are tired or just think I have time to pick them up (interpretations). If this keeps happening, I would like to you do your own laundry (consequences).

(Maricopa Community College District, 2016).

The Six-Step Assertion Process­­

Imagine that you know it’s time to draw a boundary with someone close to you—you’ve thought long and hard about what is important to you, and you know what you want to say. So, what do you do now? The six-step assertion process is a good way to handle it.

Robert Bolton (1979) gives us the following process for delivering our assertion:

1. Preparation: In the preparation stage, you spend time before you enter into a conversation with the other person reflecting on what is important for you to convey. Consider the contextual elements of the communication situation, develop your message, and prepare yourself for the process and for active listening.
2. Deliver the message: Share your assertive message.
3. Silence: Allow the other person time to process what you have just said. Sometimes after we assert ourselves, we want to justify ourselves or jump in when there is silence because it can be awkward and uncomfortable. Take a deep breath while they consider what you have just said; they may have not considered the topic before this very moment.
4. Active listening: Once the person responds to your assertion, your job is to reflect back on what their response is.  This response could be defensive, it could be off track from your original topic, or they could shut down. Actively listening to the other person will likely be the last thing you want to do, so make sure to prepare for this part of the process as much as you can in the preparation step.
5. Recycle steps 2 to 4 as necessary: You will likely have to reassert yourself, provide more silence, and actively listen a few times before you can move into the final step in the process. This part of the process allows you and the other person to really understand each other and to be on the same page.
6. Focus on a solution: In conflict, we often jump to this step without taking the time to go through steps 1 to 5. Only focus on a solution after you have understood the other person, they have understood you, and you are both ready and capable of focusing on a solution.

(Maricopa Community College District, 2016)

References

Bolton, R. (1979). People skills: How to assert yourself, listen to others, and resolve conflicts. Touchstone.

Donohue, W. A., & Kolt, R. (1992). Managing interpersonal conflict. Sage.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483325873

Fisher-Yoshida, B. (2005). Reframing conflict: Intercultural conflict as potential transformation. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 8(1), 1–16.

Gudykunst, W. B., & Kim, Y. Y. (2003). Communicating with strangers: An approach to intercultural communication (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Maricopa Community College District. (2016). Exploring relationship dynamics. Maricopa Open Digital Press. https://open.maricopa.edu/com110/, licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformation theory. In J. Mezirow (Ed.), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress (pp. 3–33). Jossey-Bass.

TEDx Talks. (2017, December 11). Finding confidence in conflict | Kwame Christian | TEDxDayton [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6Zg65eK9XU

Ting-Toomey, S. (2012). Understanding intercultural conflict competence: multiple theoretical insights. In J. Jackson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and intercultural communication (pp. 279–295). Routledge.

Image Credits (images are listed in order of appearance)

Shimer College Susan Henking listening 2013 cropped by Shimer College, CC BY 2.0

International Women’s Day in Egypt – Flickr – Al Jazeera English (53) by Al Jazeera English, CC BY-SA 2.0

A mock-up Picture frame by Amanda Elizabeth, Public domain