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: