1. Pseudo conflicts:
A pseudo conflict is where two people are arguing on the same thing only because of their own misunderstandings and misperceptions of what the other person is saying they are arguing on the same side without realizing. In truth they are arguing for the same side they just can’t realize it because of their own misconceptions. A pseudo conflict can be easily resolved by people just understanding one another better.
2. Fact conflicts:
Fact conflicts are caused by being misinformed, not having enough information to make good decisions and determining what data is relevant. Conflict can also arise when there is disagreement on information collection and communication.
3. Ego conflicts:
An ego conflict is where one person goes around picking on and teasing everyone else. They think that they are better than them in every way shape or form, these conflicts can easily be avoided by not thinking your better than everyone else. Everyone is equal whether they like it or not. No one is better than anyone else. It just happens that some people think they are better than other people and so ego conflicts arise.
4. Value conflicts:
Value conflicts arise from two different people or groups with different views on something, Such as world views. Or a common one is two groups with
different views on good and bad. One group may be stricter than the other on what’s good and what’s bad, it will then clash with the other group who is less strict.
5. Need conflicts:
A need conflict arises when someone starts acting so that they can get one need and it is contradictory to how they need to act to get another need and it presents a major conflict. This conflict can be resolved by getting both needs one at a time but humans by nature want all needs at once and this makes a conflict.
Part 2: The Five Conflict Management Styles
Describe each of the five conflict management styles and explain the strengths and weaknesses of each. Use paragraph form.
The avoider style of managing is not actually thought as a management style at all by many but it reality it is. It arises when someone runs from a conflict or ignores it. Someone may use the avoider style out of outright fear or sometimes many other concerns that can come from an unresolved conflict. With the avoider style it doesn’t solve anything and very often makes things worse the people do not understand why the avoider refuses to face the conflict at hand and the avoider cannot understand the problem or the other side’s views.
The Accommodator is much the same as the avoiders only slightly different in the way that he just agrees to everything, avoids solving the actual problem to placate the other side. If forced to face the problem an accommodator will back off and just follow in the footsteps dictated by the other side, they will be in total denial of any personal needs in favor of meeting the other sides personal desires. The unfortunate downfall of this solution is that problems continue or grow worse or new problems may arise from it. Imagine a mother who gives her daughter whatever she wants whenever she
wants simply to keep conflicts from arising. Yes it stops her daughter from whining and complaining.
The very opposite of an accommodator would be a forcers also known as the competitor. With the forcer they drive to win the argument/battle at all costs even if it means ending a relationship. The competition style can be healthy when it is focused solely on the issue at hand and not on the people around the issue. Such as when someone starts in on each other it can be friendly banter until someone’s mother is brought into it. Fights between two people often happen during the forcers style but never is it healthy.
With the compromiser style it is used to try and meet some of the demands of both sides. Unfortunately with this style everyone wins a little but also they lose a little. Like with two teenagers fighting over the remote to a TV the mother comes in and takes away the remote all together. It resolves the situation but no one is happy with it. It leaves the solution gone but no one happy. People who use compromise are actually making a lazy halfhearted attempt at collaboration.
With the collaborating style it gets all parties in the conflict together to come up with a peaceful solution that leaves each party happy. In this type everyone is heard, everyone is happy, and above all relationships are preserved, whether they are relationships between a man and a woman or a relationship between friends or business people. The collaborative style takes a while to plan and execute. While the problem may become worse as time goes on it always leaves everyone happy.
Part 3: Collaborative Communication
List two methods of collaborative communication and describe how using them can help you avoid conflicts.
Two methods of collaboration communication are Boards and Huddles. With Boards it’s good to have something for the all to see besides hand out’s when you have the group all together. That is where white boards or chalk boards come in major handy. That way you can right now main ideas and topics for all to see. This will help stop conflicts because everyone is seeing the same thing so they can’t say that their not or say that some are getting more details then they are.
The second method is called huddles. Huddles means when you get your group together to brainstorm or think about something make it small little focused groups. Having it in small focused groups will cut down on misunderstandings and confusion which will then help you prosper and fewer arguments may break out.