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.
For
the next article in this series, take a look at Managing
Conflict using the strategies of Postponing
and Compromise.
