Negotiation class

The Thomas-Kilmann model was developed by two psychologists, Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Killmann which is provides option that individuals involved in a conflict. The model is composed of two dimensions; the first dimension is the vertical axis which is concerned with conflict responses based on individuals’ effort to get what they want. According to Thomas and Kilmann, this is called the assertiveness option. The second dimension is the horizontal axis which is concerned with responses that are based on helping other people achieve what they want which Thomas and Kilmann called the cooperativeness option. The Thomas-Kilmann model is composed of 5 types of response which include: avoidance, collaborating, accommodating, compromise and competition (Rout & Omiko, 2007).

I choose to use collaborating strategy when handling a conflict. The strategy involves the effort to jointly work with others to develop solution that fully satisfies the wishes of the individuals involved in a conflict. the party to the conflict usually explore the disagreement and learn from each other’s point of view or try to come up with creative solution to the problem they faces. While using this strategy, I can be able to openly express my concerns and work with the other person to find a mutually beneficial solution to resolve a conflict. The outcome of the conflict is often beneficial in that it leads to creative problem-solving and having respect to each other. Collaboration strategy helps in finding the root of the problem such as personal differences and deals with the situation in the least confrontational way than any other conflict-management style (Rout & Omiko, 2007).

Alternatively, I could use the compromising strategy which entails coming to a mutually acceptable solution which partially satisfies the needs of both parties. This strategy addresses the issue more directly than avoidance strategy but does not explore the issue in depth like collaborating strategy (Rout & Omiko, 2007). Using compromising strategy to resolve a conflict can bring about positive outcomes as it involves splitting the differences between two positions or seeking a common-ground resolution to a conflict.

The four bargaining tactics include self-enhancement, coalition, threat to leave, and conflict avoidance. In self-enhancement, the negotiators makes strong commitment of not giving in or do not accept the issue in the agenda of the negotiations that is important to the other party. The second one is the coalition where both party aims at blocking a compromise and there is less likelihood of arriving at a common ground. The third is the treat to leave where implies that one party does not want to comply with the other party’s wishes which may lead to bias outcomes. The finally tactic is conflict avoidance where the party choose to avoid disagreement and focus on other pressing issues. This tactic may leads to creation of bigger problem if the issues are not address properly (Schneider & Honeyman, 2006).

The use of accommodating strategy means that the issue at hand is much more important to the other party than it is to you and you wish to maintain a cooperative relationship as a goodwill gesture. It is used when the parties wishes to build a social connection to accommodate room for later issues that are important to the parties. In this case more competition would only results in damaging the relationship between both parties. Avoidance is used when the issue is unimportant and the parties to the conflict have more pressing issues to address. The strategy aims at reducing the tension between the parties and maintain a relationship and in regaining perspective

Collaborating strategy involves giving up room to view the other party’s ideas and the need to seek an integrative solution. It is used when both parties wishes to work out hard feelings that interferes with their relationships. The objective is to learn merge the insights in order to have a consensual decision. Compromise strategy is used as a back when collaborating or competition becomes ineffective which involves parties partially giving up their ideas in order to reach a common ground. Competition style tends to view a conflict as a contest between the involved parties as they strive to win these contests. Maintaining the relationship between the parties in a conflict is of less important and the aim is to advance their position which results to consistent disagreements.

References

Rout, E. L., & Omiko, N. (2007). Corporate conflict management: Concepts and skills. PHI

Learning Pvt. Ltd.

Schneider, A. K., & In Honeyman, C. (2006). The negotiator's fieldbook: The desk reference for

the experienced negotiator. Washington, DC: ABA Section of Dispute Resolution.