Running Head: CONFLICT STYLES 1

Conflict Styles

Student’s name

Institution Affiliation

Date of Submission
CONFLICT STYLES 2

Conflict Styles

In life, conflict is inevitable as we live in a society dominated by social interactions. In

most cases, conflict can be best understood by comprehensively examining the consequences of

various behaviors in time. These individual behaviors can be usefully categorized according to

the conflict styles where a style is usually understood as a preferred way of behaving (Wilmot &

Hocker, 2001). Indeed, conflict can arise in different settings but the way we settle and react to

these conflicts depends on our conflict style. Apparently, there are numerous ways of resolving

and responding to conflict situations. According to Wilmot and Hocker (2001), some of conflict

styles comprehensively involve considerate or even corporative approach while others may go to

a point of involving a competitive or a very passive approach. Hocker and Wilmot note that most

of the conflict are interpersonal and there also critical factors that contribute to these conflicts.

The two authors pay more attention to the communication behavior of the conflicting parties.

According to Wilson, there are five different styles of resolving a conflict which acts as the

ultimate means of meeting one’s need in a particular dispute, but each specific styles impacts

people very different. Depending on the impacts of a certain conflict style, Wilson categorizes

these styles into five perspectives: competing, collaborative, accommodating, avoiding

compromising. In this case, Rahim and Margner came up with an explicit scale that can be used

by an individual to measure his or her style of resolving a conflict. The scale gives an individual

score on each of the five styles of avoiding, obliging, dominating, integrating and compromising.

In this case, I shall make use of this case to measure by conflict resolution styles in different

contexts. In my two contexts (A and B), I have chosen my husband as a person who I live with

and my coworker as a work associate. Throughout this exercise, I will focus more on my reaction
CONFLICT STYLES 3

in cases where I have encountered conflict, disagreement, argument or even disappoint with

them.

My general perception of my conflict style is integrating. I have a strong concern for

those that are close and much far from me. My personal assertiveness is neither left out. I value

my ego too. According to Gelfand (2008), it is always a prudent idea to have an amicable

approach to conflict resolution putting into mind that everyone matters, and it is always a good

practice to put their interests into consideration whenever some friction arises. My most intimate

people in my, for instance, my husband perceive my conflict style to be more of collaborating. I

will actually be involved in an argument but will ensure that the resultant decision is reached

amicably among the parties. This perfectly works for me since I don’t like hurting those I hold

close to my heart. The people around more so my friends and acquaintances view my conflict

resolution style to be a bit dominating. On certain instances, I am required to make decisions that

may as well save the situation depending on the prevailing situations. Being in an organization

whereby it is my role to make decisions that may impact greatly on the firm I need to be wise

and make sound judgments.

People around me do not get the real picture of who I depend on the environment I

operate in. Robbins, S. P. (1974) argues that different contexts may call for engagement to

conflict or chose to avoid it. For instance, in a home setup I have my lover, husband, and I really

our relationship so much. I may sometimes interject a joke when I sense a disagreement

approaching. This is my best tactic in avoiding a conflict that may cause tension and heat in the

house. This makes my husband have his way on some occasion, but deep inside I feel I have

done something noble that guarantees good will amongst us. The misconception may arise in the

workplace when decisions I make have some adverse effects. I chose actually to engage in the
CONFLICT STYLES 4

real issues actively by maybe pointing out faults in the other parties’ arguments and convincing

them to at least change their attitude and behavior towards a particular subject. People within

such a context will view me differently from my actual character.

Conflicts among the organization mainly may be a powerful tool that may be used to

embrace admirable changes in a firm. My competitive approach in an organization set up can

bore fruits since managers can embrace these decisions that assist in formulating an organization

policies and goals. Everyone in the organization may not have the privilege of implementing the

deliberations reached at particular instances thus the firm has to rely on heads of particular

departments to come up with decisions to streamline daily operations. Persistent conflicts may

point weaknesses to the management within the firm thus may lead to a reshuffle of the

administration still for better service delivery. According to Wilson and Putnam (2001), being

too competitive in decision making always leaves some quarters within the firm unsatisfied, and

this consequently brings about infighting that may cause a change of the administration. Having

people have their say in the event of a conflict is a sure approach to foster unity among the

different parties. Collaboration as a tactic to avoid conflict saves a lot of time and resources that

can be used in a more productive way. On the contrary, collaboration may give the perceived

favored party a limelight to make unsound decisions during conflicts that may ruin the peaceful

co-existence.

Through a critical analysis of my conflict style results, I have been able to note that

despite the fact that I am more integrating, my conflict resolution styles are relatively inflexible

indeed. This means that there is no much difference between the way I resolve conflict with

people who I live with, and who I associate with in my workplace. Reasonably, my inflexibility

in counteracting with different kinds conflict is actually the main reason as to why some of the
CONFLICT STYLES 5

people whom am very close to and live with such as my lovely husband think that I am more

collaborative. Focusing on the scores, I noted that I tend to be avoiding both my husband and

coworker with an equal score of 13. This is why I never care for my goals of my relationship

with my husband or coworkers. This is my best strategy when I notice that a certain situation can

lead to violence either at my home or in the workplace.

Inflexibility in my conflict style is also evident in the obliging style scores (A=14

B=14).In regardless of the environment and the nature of the relationship, I usually give in to

others, just to end the conflict. I hate being engaged in an argument or conflict and avoiding this,

I usually give in. This means that I place very high values on others (husband and coworkers)

and very small value on myself. Despite the fact that it makes me humble, it is not an appropriate

conflict management style. While managing conflict, I do not consider the kind of the

relationship with the counterpart, and I give in regardless whether am right or wrong.

The way I integrate into the processes of managing conflict is an implication that I am

inflexible in resolving a conflict. This is reflected by a score of A=24 B=20.Relatively, the level

of flexibility is quite lower with a difference of only four scores. I usually give more concern to

other people and myself when in a conflict. Reasonably, I usually work to ensure there is fair

justice in any situation. I usually make use of this method cause have more time with both my

husband and coworkers. This is because I have more time to debate and work towards a positive

solution that will have mutual benefits for my husband and coworkers. However, when being in

conflict with my husband, I integrate more for the sake of family stability.

I have acquired these conflict styles, especially, from the external environment. Both

the internal and the external have been equally important in defining my approach to conflict

resolutions. The family and close friends have molded my behavior as well as acquaintances and
CONFLICT STYLES 6

coworkers. Acquisition of these values and characters is a continuous cycle, and every conflict

instances offer a platform for new approach and style to handle the situation. With continued co-

existence, I can gain insight and know how on dealing with a variety of struggles within different

parties and reach a solution. Training in the work has played a great role in shaping the approach

to organizational and personal disagreements.

In conclusion, just as Hocker and Williams notes, conflict resolution sometimes is a

complex task that requires quite informed and sensitive approach. While resolving conflict, one

has to consider several factors as well as the affairs of his or her counterpart. Echoing Hocker

and Williams, some of conflict styles comprehensively involve considerate or even corporative

approach while others may go to a point of involving a competitive or a very passive approach.

The conflict scale is very critical is measuring individual’s style of resolving a conflict. In this

case, I have been in a position to note that, my best conflict resolution styles is integration. This

means that I usually give more concern to other people as well as myself when in a conflict.
CONFLICT STYLES 7

References
Gelfand, M. J. (2008). Psychology of Conflict and Conflict Management in Organization. New

York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Putnam, L.L., & Wilson, C.E. (1982). Communication strategies in organizational conflicts:

Reliability and validity of a measurement scale . In M. Burgoon (Ed.),

Communication Yearbook 6 (pp. 629-652). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Robbins, S. P. (1974). Managing organizational conflict: A nontraditional approach. Englewood

Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.

Wilmot, W. W., & Hocker, J. L. (2001). Interpersonal conflict. New York: McGraw-Hill.