Conflict Resolution

ConflictResolution

ConflictResolution

Itis natural for people to hold different views, but any type ofconflict should be addressed using the most convenient and effectivestrategy. Conflict is a term used to describe a situation in whichparties support different views. The term conflict resolution refersto a process through which the parties involved in a disagreement tryto find a solution to the cause of the differences in their opinions(Wani, 2011). In other words, conflict resolution involves enteringinto an agreement where the parties can reduce theirincompatibilities. In this paper, different strategies that can beapplied in conflict resolution will be discussed.

TechniquesUsed in

Collaboration

Thistechnique requires the parties involved in a given conflict to joinhands and discuss the best ways that they can address the underlyingissue. It is a technique that requires the conflicting parties tostart listening to their opponents. They hold a discussion that leadsto the identification of goals and agreements (Byadgi &amp Yadav,2011). The aim of collaboration is to ensure that the partiesunderstand the views of each other before they can find a solution totheir conflicts. Critical thinking helps the parties resolve theissue without concessions. Although collaboration may lead to asolution that is accepted by all parties, it prolongs the duration ofresolving the conflicts.

Compromise

Thistechnique requires the parties to identify a common ground. Acompromise is reached when individuals involved a given conflictagrees to forego some of their claims and support part of thearguments raised by their opponents (Byadgi &amp Yadav, 2011). Theprocess leading to a compromise involves the application ofaggressive-passive techniques (Byadgi &amp Yadav, 2011). Thecompromise technique is preferred because it expedites the process ofconflict resolution. In addition, the resolution that is foundthrough the compromise techniques is accepted by both parties.

Avoidance

Avoidanceis also classified as a conflict resolution approach, in spite of thefact that it does not lead to the identification of a particularsolution. People who chose to apply this technique assume that theconflict did not happen and it does not exist (Wani, 2011).Alternatively, individuals involved in the conflict may acknowledgethe existence of the conflicts, but choose to wait for it to resolveitself. This approach is associated with people who have no courageto face difficulties. Additionally, the fact that it does not lead toa particular solution reduces its significance.

Givingin or Standing one’s Ground

Aresolution may also be found when one of the parties chooses to givein. A party that chooses to give in collaborates and accommodates theviews held by the opponent (Byadgi &amp Yadav, 2011). A party thatstands its ground is considered to be inconsiderate. Although thisstrategy reduces the time taken to resolve a conflict, it does notlead to a viable outcome that is acceptable to all parties. Giving indoes not imply that the other party is in agreement with the viewsadvanced by the opponent.

HealthyAlternatives through which Conflicts can be Resolved

Thereare many alternatives that can lead to a healthy resolution ofconflicts, but six of them can be applied in all types ofdisagreement. First, the parties need to study and comprehend alldimensions of the conflict. This involves the identification of theactual causes of the disagreement in order to reduce the risk ofwasting time while addressing its symptoms (Virani, 2015).

Secondly,individuals involved in a disagreement should identify the rightplace and time when it is more convenient to address the issue. Forexample, the process of resolving the disagreement can be postponed,in case tension and emotions are high (Virani, 2015).

Third,it is important for both parties to listen and consider the otherside of a disagreement. This enhances the level of objectivity in theprocess of identifying a viable solution (Virani, 2015). It alsoensures that the parties are not guided by selfish interests. Thelack of selfishness is attributed to the fact the parties take timeto study why their opponents think the way they do.

Fourth,parties should avoid emotions and the risk of overreacting to theunderlying issues. In most cases, disagreements arouse emotions ofthe affected parties (Virani, 2015). However, people should avoidbeing influenced by feelings when finding solutions.

Firth,parties need to demonstrate firmness, but remain gentle. Balancingthe two aspects help individuals support their views, accommodatetheir opponents, and reduce the risk of giving in for the sake ofresolving the conflict (Virani, 2015).

Lastly,all individuals who are involved in a given disagreement shoulddemonstrate that they are working towards a solution. They shouldshow a positive attitude and willingness to listen to their rivals.

APersonal Instance when I Found Myself in a Conflict

Oneof the memorable conflicts that I experienced involved a situation inwhich my caseworker terminated my benefits by alleging that I hadfailed to comply with the requirements set by the organization. Itstarted when I received a letter informing me that I should contactthe caseworker to get more information about the reason for thetermination of my monthly benefits. I contacted the caseworkerimmediately, but the only response I received is that I had failed tocomply and supply the caseworker with the necessary documents. Thecaseworker disconnected the call rudely. I decided to visit hisoffice, but he failed to listen to my argument. Eventually I chose toreport the case worker to his supervisor, who listened to me andordered the caseworker to restore my benefits.

Initially,I chose to address the conflict using the collaboration strategy, butthe caseworker was not willing to listen to my point of view.Eventually, I chose to give in first and look for the intervention ofa third party, the supervisor. I chose to handle the conflict throughcollaboration because I believe that I viable solution should takeaccount the views of both parties. When the first method failed, Ichose to apply the “give in” alternative because it was evidentthat the supervisor was determined not to listen to me. Therefore,pressuring him could throw the conflict out of proportion and prolongthe resolution process. A decision to give in and seek for theintervention of the third party resulted in a positive outcome. I wasable to have my benefits back, which was an achievement.

Althoughthe resolution process gave me a positive outcome, there is one thingthat I would do differently. I believe that I should not have calledthe caseworker immediately after receiving the letter. The caseworkersounded quite emotional on a phone call and when I visited hisoffice. I should have used a healthy strategy that involves lookingfor the right time and place to address the conflict. For example, Iwould have given him a chance to relieve his emotions and allow me toexpress my opinion by visiting him the following day. This would haveresulted in a positive outcome without involving the third party.

Conclusion

Conflictsare common occurrences and they can take place in all areas,including the workplace, social, and family settings. The partiesinvolved in a given disagreement have the responsibility of resolvingit in the healthiest way possible. However, the outcome of resolutiondepends on the type of the strategy that they choose to apply. Any ofthe available strategies (including compromise, collaboration, givingin, and avoidance) can lead to a positive outcome. The process ofselecting the appropriate strategy should be guided by the nature ofthe conflict.

References

Byadgi,T. &amp Yadav, V. (2011). Conflict resolution strategies amongworking couples. Journalof Humanities and Social Science,14 (4), 31-37.

Virani,F. (2015). The art and science of re-framing in conflict resolution.InternationalJournal of Recent Research Aspects,2 (4), 35-37.

Wani,H. (2011). Understanding conflict resolution. InternationalJournal of Humanities and Social Science,1 (2), 104-111.