The three conflict strategies covered in the last article (Abandoning, Avoiding, and Dominating) were low collaboration strategies. You don't need agreement from your opponent to walk away from a conflict or to hide from it. You don't need much to take control of a conflict either, unless you are seriously short on power, in which case you probably shouldn't be trying to dominate in the first place. This Seminar moves up the collaboration scale and looks at three strategies that require more involvement on the part of the other person: Obliging, Getting Help, and Using Humor

Obliging
Obliging is used to deliberately elevate the other person, making him feel better about the situation. By obliging, you play down the differences between yourself and your opponent. It's a way of seeking common ground. Obliging requires that you give away power, which, if you have plenty to spare, can build trust and confidence. If you are secure in your position, obliging becomes almost a form of delegation.

What to say:
Sit back, relax and confidently hand over the reins, making it clear that this is something you want to do, not something you have to do. For example, say: I'm not an expert in this area. What do you think we should do?—or—I'm swamped with other demands right now, but I think this issue is very important. I'd trust you to come up withh some workable alternatives.

Cautions:

• When used effectively, obliging enhances relationships and creates good will. When used ineffectively, it signals insecurity, passiveness, or (depending on what you do next), passive-aggression. Don't smile and say, "Have it your way," and then try to sink the ship. And don't choose this strategy from a relatively weak position. You'll only get—and look— weaker.

• When the other party in a conflict is obliging toward you, take advantage of the additional power, while determining the person's motivation. Is she in a strong position and seeking to share power? Is she buying time to build a case while involving you in pointless "busy-work?" Is she frequently obliging toward others (a style) because of feelings of insecurity that go beyond the issue at hand? Identifying your opponent's motives will help prepare you for the next stage of the conflict.

Getting Help
Also called "seeking intervention" this strategy involves bringing in a third party to act as a conflict mediator. Sometimes a conflict can't be resolved by disputants acting alone. If big skill differences put either of you at a distinct disadvantage, if emotions are highly charged, if there's a language barrier, or if your opponent is blatantly uncooperative, you probably need to get help. Mediation is always needed if your opponent threatens in any way to retaliate against you. Depending on the seriousness of the conflict and the potential impact of the resolution, the person doing the intervention can be anyone from a skillful communicator to a professional mediator, just as long as he or she is unbiased and respectful of both (or all) parties involved in the conflict.

What to say:
Since you can't hide a mediator in your briefcase, a straightforward, assertive approach is best. Say something like: I think we should ask a third party to sit in with us and help resolve this issue—or—I've asked Donna to join us today, because I think she can help sort this thing out. Is that all right with you?

Cautions:
When your opponent suggests bringing in a third party, don't overlook the possibility that he may be attempting to form a faction. Even a rigorously neutral interventionist will have the effect of increasing the power of the weaker disputant by facilitating communication and equalizing input between parties. When anyone less than neutral enters the relationship, that person will tend to form a closer bond with one disputant compared to the other. One of the most natural tendencies of any triad is to subdivide into a dyad plus one. Be aware.

Using Humor
Using humor to defuse a conflict can be particularly effective if you and your opponent are peers, or if the conflict is not terribly serious. Being humorous may involve looking at the situation in a comical way, poking fun at yourself for a style of reacting that frequently gets you into trouble, or generally making light of the situation.

What to say:
Don't tell random jokes. Humor that isn't relevant to the situation could easily antagonize the other person, the opposite effect from what you want. Also, make sure the laugh is on you: Do you think I should dial 911 before we start, just to save time?—or—Don't feel bad, I torture all my friends.

Cautions:

• The use of humor is inadvisable when the other person is very upset, or when you clearly have the power in the situation.

• When the other person responds consistently with jokes, teasing, sarcasm, or humorous self-deprecation, he or she is displaying a style -- probably one of avoidance. The jokester's unconscious purpose may be to distract people from serious issues, to avoid the work of negotiation and collaboration, or to gain power by monopolizing time and energy. The best response is no response. Ignoring the clowning will eventually extinguish it.

See WomensMedia Conflict Management Series: