Stokes 1
Brittany J Stokes
Dr. Kelly
COMS 560
4 June 2017
Conflict Strategies
Conflict is a part of everyday life and is inevitable when dealing with others frequently
and closely. Conflict can become destructive or productive depending on the communication
process when dealing with the conflicting issue. Most individuals view conflict with a negative
perspective due to past events when dealing with conflict. However, conflict can be productive
for individuals when communication is efficient. The goal of this paper is to discuss the
characteristics of different conflict strategies.
Some of the conflict strategies are dysfunctional meaning that with using these particular
strategies the conflict will become destructive. The first strategy is avoidance and this is used
when someone essentially runs away from the conflict. The individual using this strategy does
not want to deal with the conflict so they try to avoid bringing it up. Avoidance behaviors mirror
submissive and defeated personality types. These individuals do not try to resolve the conflict so
they just pretend that it does not exist. The pros to the avoidance strategy is that it may be the
wrong place or time to address the conflict. Therefore, this allows for the person to bring up and
deal with the conflict at a later time. Avoidance can also be good in temporary situations that
will not come up in the future. For instance, maybe you get into a conflict with another shopper
at a mall, instead of creating a big scene or trying to resolve the conflict it may be easier to just
walk away. The avoidance strategy should only be used in temporary situations with someone
Stokes 2
you may never see again. Also, this still has a fine line because if someone is disrespectful it is
better to stand up for yourself rather than be submissive. In most conflicts it is better to not use
the avoidance strategy and if it is used to address the issue at the next available opportunity.
Another strategy that is similar to the avoidance strategy is the accommodation strategy.
With the accommodation strategy individuals are quick to brush the conflict off. The individual
may express what they are feeling but they will quickly give into others to prevent any further
conflict. The person who accommodates ends up suppressing their feelings and try to go on as if
everything is okay. The other individual in the conflict comes out with satisfaction and
happiness but the person who accommodated usually is still effected by the conflict. The
conflict never gets resolved in this scenario therefore, it has a chance to appear again and both
parties are unhappy which will cause stress in the relationship. The pros of this strategy is that
you can still voice your opinion and then let the issue go however, if the issue comes up again it
will be the same conflict and you will constantly feel unhappy about it. The cons to this strategy
is that you suppress your feelings to avoid further confrontation with the conflict. When
someone uses the avoidance or accommodation strategy they put off the issue and it will cause it
to worsen because it is not resolved. People who have negative perceptions of conflict are prone
to relying on one of these strategies when conflict arises. These two strategies should only be
used in temporary situations because they do not actually resolve conflicts. Overall, these two
strategies cause a lot of tension in relationships and in the future will become very difficult if
conflicting situations are not resolved.
Another dysfunctional conflict strategy is the competitive escalation cycle. This occurs
when two people are discussing a conflict and it becomes intense between the individuals. The
escalation cycle is when one person intensifies the situation and the other person reacts by
Stokes 3
adding to the escalation. Cahn and Abagail discuss the different things that can intensify a
conflict such as yelling, making verbal threats, space invasion, standing up, name calling, being
egged on by bystanders, and the list goes on for anything that will provoke the other individual.
With this cycle both individuals are so interested in winning that they do not understand what the
other individual is saying to respond in a proactive way. This cycle usually starts because
conflict is unresolved when the conflict arises again it quickly turns into escalation behaviors.
When the conflict is brought to attention the individual bringing up the conflict approaches it
with a superior mindset. Instead of trying to understand the other person they assume that they
are correct and that the other person is incorrect. The other person typically then responds with a
statement that they are correct and the individual who brought the conflict up is wrong.
Typically in these situations one person wins and the other person loses or walks away. The
conflict is left unresolved and it will continue to affect future conflicts between the individuals.
When evaluating this system there are no advantages for using the escalation cycle. Using this
cycle will not resolve the conflict and will cause more stress on the relationship. The
disadvantages to this system are that the individuals will not actively be listening to the other
individual for reason instead are trying to win the argument. There is no time when the
escalation cycle should be used because it does not promote effective communication.
When individuals are in conflict they can use functional conflict cycles to promote
effective communication and resolve a conflict. When individuals use one of the functional
conflict cycles they are aware that both of the individuals needs are important and should try to
be met. The two functional conflict cycles are compromise and collaborating. When individuals
come to a compromise they are coming to a middle ground on their differences. This means that
neither individual totally loses or totally wins instead they give up something that would make
Stokes 4
them totally happy to come to agreement with the other individual. The individuals must
understand the needs of the other individual, determine if everyone can have a fair portion of
what they want, and divide the claim to ensure everyone gets something that they want.
Compromising can promote positivity to the conflict when both parties cannot win and instead a
middle ground is reached. However, sometimes it can also contribute in a negative way if one of
the individuals walks away feeling dissatisfied with the compromise. Chan and Abigail
discussed that “compromising is designed as a realistic attempt to seek an acceptable (but not
necessarily preferred solution of gains and losses for everyone involved (Chan and Abigail 42).
This is a great perspective because it explains how compromise is not the ideal situation but it
can work when collaboration is not available for individuals. The advantages to compromise is
that the conflict is resolved and both individuals are able to work together to find a middle
ground to agree upon. The disadvantages to compromise is that both individuals are not
completely satisfied and the reality is that one individual may end up dissatisfied with the
outcome even though compromise was gained. Compromise should be used when collaboration
is not effective because both individuals cannot be completely happy with everything they
wanted in the outcome. Overall, compromise is a healthy and functional way to solve conflict.
Collaboration conflict communication is the other functional way to solve conflict.
Collaboration involves the individuals working together to agree on a mutual outcome for the
conflict. The individuals must understand, cooperate, and work together to be effective with
collaboration. The individuals are working together for the same outcome and this is why it is a
collaboration effort. Both individuals want the other to be happy so they work together to
produce a win-win outcome. While the individuals are working together to come to a totally
satisfying outcome for both parties they must confront differences and be understanding to the
Stokes 5
other individuals hobbies, needs, and goals. This style allows for others to think in a different
view point and working on the differences will make the relationship better. When the
individuals come to a collaboration both parties are totally satisfied and the conflict is resolved.
Chan and Abagail discuss some of the differences between compromise and collaboration to give
the reader a better understanding of the difference. For instance, to alternate driving the car
would be a compromise and to go to events together would be the collaboration (Chan and
Abigail 43). The advantages to the collaboration conflict communication style is that both
parties are equally satisfied and the conflict is resolved. This allows for a positive outlook on
conflict and will allow the individuals to handle future conflicts with a functional style. Another
advantage is that the individuals and relationship will grow from the changes made with the
collaboration and the relationship will be a healthy one considering both people are willing to
effectively resolve conflicts. There are no disadvantages to the collaboration style except the fact
that the individuals may struggle to get to the final agreement. Once the individuals talk and
come to an agreement everyone is satisfied and happy with the outcome.
When individuals come into contact with conflict there are many styles that can be used
to deal with the conflict. The three dysfunctional conflict communication styles are avoidance,
accommodation, and competitive. The avoidance style occurs when the individual does not want
to confront the conflict so instead avoids bringing it up. The accommodation process is when the
individual will share their thoughts but they will become quick to give into the other person to
remain from further conflict at the moment. The competitive escalation cycle occurs when both
individuals react to escalation behaviors with additional behaviors that follow this trend. These
styles do not allow individuals to use effective communication and the conflict is left unresolved.
The functional styles to conflict communication are compromising and collaboration.
Stokes 6
Compromising allows the parties to find a middle ground where both individuals are not
completely satisfied but can come to an agreement where they are somewhat satisfied.
Collaboration is when the parties come together to find a solution that will make them equally
happy. Collaboration is the most effective way to solve conflict as it leaves the individuals
satisfied and the conflict resolved.
