CONFLICT

1. What is Conflict?
A conflict is an activity which takes place when conscious beings (individuals or groups)
wish to carry out mutually inconsistent acts concerning their wants, needs or obligations.
(Nicholson, M., 1992)
Conflict may also refer to a natural disagreement or struggle between people which may be
physical, or between conflicting ideas. It can either be within one person, or they can
involve several people or groups. It exists when they have incompatible goals and one or
more believe thatthe behavior of the other prevents them from their own goal achievement.
The word “Conflict” comes from the Latin word “conflingere” which means to come together
for a battle.

2. What are Conflict Theories?

Conflict theory states that tensions and conflicts arise when resources, status, and power
are unevenly distributed between groups in society and that these conflicts become the
engine for social change. In this context, power can be understood as control of material
resources and accumulated wealth, control of politics and the institutions that make up
society, and one's social status relative to others (determined not just by class but by race,
gender, sexuality, culture, and religion, among other things). (Crossman, 2019)
Conflict theory originated in the work of Karl Marx, who focused on the causes and
consequences of class conflict between the bourgeoisie (the owners of the means of
production and the capitalists) and the proletariat (the working class and the poor). Many
social theorists have built on Marx's conflict theory to bolster it, grow it, and refine it over
the years. Many others have drawn on conflict theory to develop other types of theory
within the social sciences, including the following:
1. Feminist theory;
2. Critical race theory;
3. Postmodern theory and postcolonial theory;
4. Queer theory;
5. Post-structural theory, and
6. Theories of globalization and world systems.
So, while initially conflict theory described class conflicts specifically, it has lent itself over
the years to studies of how other kinds of conflicts, like those premised on race, gender,
sexuality, religion, culture, and nationality, among others, are a part of contemporary social
structures, and how they affect our lives.

3. What are the Conflict Resolution Strategies?

 Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann (2015) developed five conflict resolution
strategies Thomas – Kilmann Instrument or more generally known as TKI Conflict
Strategies that people use to handle conflict, including avoiding, defeating, compromising,
accommodating, and collaborating. The Thomas-Kilmann Instrument is designed to
measure a person’s behavior in conflict situations. “Conflict situations” are those in which
the concerns of two people appear to be incompatible. In such conflict situations, an
individual’s behavior can be described along two dimensions: (1) assertiveness, the extent
to which the person attempts to satisfy his own concerns, and (2) cooperativeness, the
extent to which the person attempts to satisfy the other person’s concerns.

The following are the five (5) Conflict Resolution Strategies

a. Conflict Resolution Strategy #1: Avoiding
This is unassertive and uncooperative. The person neither pursues his own concerns nor
those of the other individual. Thus, he does not deal with the conflict. Avoiding might take
the form of diplomatically sidestepping an issue, postponing an issue until a better time, or
simply withdrawing from a threatening situation. Avoiding is when people just ignore or
withdraw from the conflict. They choose this method when the discomfort of confrontation
exceeds the potential reward of resolution of the conflict. While this might seem easy to
accommodate for the facilitator, people are not really contributing anything of value to the
conversation and may be withholding worthwhile ideas. When conflict is avoided, nothing is
resolved.
b. Conflict Resolution Strategy #2: Competing
This is assertive and uncooperative. An individual pursues his own concerns at the other
person’s expense. This is a power-oriented mode in which you use whatever power seems
appropriate to win your own position—your ability to argue, your rank, or economic
sanctions. Competing means “standing up for your rights,” defending a position which you
believe is correct, or simply trying to win. Competing is used by people who go into a
conflict planning to win. Competing might work in sports or war, but it’s rarely a good
strategy for group problem solving.
c. Conflict Resolution Strategy #3: Accommodating
This is unassertive and cooperative—the complete opposite of competing. When
accommodating, the individual neglects his own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the
other person; there is an element of self-sacrifice in this mode. Accommodating might take
the form of selfless generosity or charity, obeying another person’s order when you would
prefer not to, or yielding to another’s point of view.
Also, accommodating is a strategy where one party gives in to the wishes or demands of
another. They are being cooperative but not assertive. This may appear to be a gracious
way to give in when one figures out s/he has been wrong about an argument. It is less
helpful when one party accommodates another merely to preserve harmony or to avoid
disruption. Like avoidance, it can result in unresolved issues. Too much accommodation
can result in groups where the most assertive parties commandeer the process and take
control of most conversations.
d. Conflict Resolution Strategy #4: Collaborating
It is both assertive and cooperative—the complete opposite of avoiding. Collaborating
involves an attempt to work with others to find some solution that fully satisfies their
concerns. It means digging into an issue to pinpoint the underlying needs and wants of the
two individuals. Collaborating between two persons might take the form of exploring a
disagreement to learn from each other’s insights or trying to find a creative solution to an
interpersonal problem. A group may learn to allow each participant to contribute with the
possibility of co-creating a shared solution that everyone can support.

e. Conflict Resolution Strategy #5: Compromising

It is moderate in both assertiveness and cooperativeness. The objective is to find some
expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties. It falls
intermediate between competing and accommodating. Compromising gives up more than
competing but less than accommodating. Likewise, it addresses an issue more directly than
avoiding, but does not explore it in as much depth as collaborating. In some situations,
compromising might mean splitting the difference between the two positions, exchanging
concessions, or seeking a quick middle-ground solution. The concept of this is that
everyone gives up a little bit of what they want, and no one gets everything they want. The
perception of the best outcome when working by compromise is that which “splits the
difference.” Compromise is perceived as being fair, even if no one is particularly happy with
the outcome.