Nell Towne Personal Conflict Styles

3. 4/4 I usually try to “split the difference” in order to resolve an issue.

How many interpersonal conflicts have you been in today, this week, or even this month? Do you even know which conflict styles you normally use when faced with a disagreement? Furthermore, this analysis shall reflect on my particular conflict styles, with an in-depth look at possible benefits of knowing the conflict styles I tend to incorporate, and how behaviors change based on a relationship and the environment.

Hocker, J. and Wilmot, W. (2014). Interpersonal conflict (9thed). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Conflict is inevitable in any personal relationship or among members of any group. While we encounter many types of conflict in our lifetime, we often look for ways to avoid conflict. So, why do we run away from dealing with our conflict? It is often because many of us fear the conflict will escalate into a situation we will not be able to sustain. “As conflicts escalate, they go through certain incremental transformations. Although these transformations occur separately on each side, they affect the conflict as a whole because they are usually mirrored by the other side. As a result of these transformations, the conflict is intensified in ways that are sometimes exceedingly difficult to undo” (Pruitt, and Kim 89). We

In a dispute, it's often easier to describe how others respond then to how we respond. Each of us has a predominant conflict style that we use to meet our own needs. By examining conflict styles and the consequences of those behaviors, we can gain a better understanding of the impact that our personal conflict style has on other people. With a better understanding, you then can make a conscious choice on how to respond to others in a conflict situation to help reduce work conflict and stress.

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) was originally developed by Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph H. Kilmann in 1974 (Kilmann, 2013). The TKI assesses a person’s behavior when they are confronted with a conflict situation. For their work Thomas & Kilmann define conflict as any situation when the concerns of two people appear to be incompatible (Thomas & Kilmann, 1974). According to the TKI when a person is in a conflict situation their behavior will go along two dimensions. The first dimension, on the y axis, is assertiveness, a person’s attempt to

The topic that I have chosen to discuss throughout this paper is Managing and Resolving Conflicts in a Relationship. This topic is very important to me simply because, I personally see a lot of relationships failing, including some of mines due to lack of resolving and managing conflicts correctly. By the end of this paper I hope that I have helped the reader understand and eliminate any conflicts that confront their everyday lives.

Communication in conflict can be both constructive and destructive. Those who communicate constructively, or productively, emphasize both themselves and

Confronting without offending is a methodology that is often attempted but rarely achieved. The reason why it is rarely achieved can be linked to several different reasons, which were illustrated by an inspiring author by the name of Deborah Smith Pegues. The author says, “Every offense has the potential to cause a permanent breach in a relationship.” That’s why there is confrontation, which she defines as simply “the act of coming together face-to-face to resolve an issue” (Pegues, 2009). What made her different then a lot of other authors; through her writing and experiences she provides us with the right tools to reconstruct conflict. Not to mention she graciously revealed to us effective method to use face-to-face confrontation to build

Avoiding typically leads to unsatisfying relationships, while avoiding isn’t always an atrocious idea. Accommodating is a lose-win it occurs when you allow others to have their way rather than asserting your point of view. If accommodation is a genuine act of kindness, generosity, or love, then the chances are favorable leading to enhancing the relationship. People from high-context, or collectivist backgrounds are likely to regard avoidance and accommodating as face-saving. Competing is a win-lose, and appears when there is a high level of self concern, and a low level of concern for others. Direct aggression arises when a communicator expresses a criticism or demand that threatens the face of another. Passive aggression occurs when a communicator expresses hostility in an obscure or manipulative way. Compromising is a lose-lose, and presents both parties a minimal fix of what they desire, although they both sacrifice part of their goals. Compromising actually negotiates a solution where both lose something, while leaving both parties

The guide described my conflict style very well. I do prefer to state my needs and my wants in clear language, in face to face meetings. The booklet doesn't go into why the direct style prefers face to face, but I know why I prefer face to face interaction. When in conflict, it is simply because inflection, and tone of voice would be hard to convey though mediators or though writing. The phone would give me the voice but not the personal presence, and when tensions are high I think it is helpful to pay attention to expressions

More common behavior in avoidant men rather than women is the ability to reduce emotions so that anger or hostility is not present in conflict. This is because they are emotionally non-supportive. With anger and hostility there is a sense of involvement which needs support. This is where ambivalent types are shown. When dealing with a major problem they tend to show much more emotion and passion; greater anger, stress, and anxiety. After the conflict they see their relationship and partner less positive in terms of commitment, openness with each other, and supportiveness. (Simpson et al., 1996)

Participants were asked how they managed disagreements with their dating partners over the four months preceding the study. The psychological aggression subscale included 8 items, including items such as ‘‘I insulted or swore at my partner.’’ The physical assault subscale consisted of 12 items. Physical aggression included items like ‘‘I pushed, grabbed, or hit my partner.’’ Participants were also asked to indicate the frequency of these actions for themselves and their partners. Reliability of these two subscales ranged from .69 to 80. The modified version of the CTS is a widely used instrument with good construct validity (Archer, 1999; Shook, Gerrity, Jurich, & Segrist, 2000; Straus, 1990; Straus, 1995). In this study, frequency scores were used to create composite variables as suggested by the scoring manual developed by Strauss (2004). More specifically, physical assault and verbal aggression measure the aggression toward another for each participant, computed by averaging the self and partner reports on the frequency of each action. Higher scores indicated higher frequency of the aggressive

Often times when we feel stressed, uneasy, upset, or any other challenging emotion, we become frustrated and take our anger out on those around us, maybe because we feel safe with them no matter what we do or because we assume they will understand. These forms of communication are classified as either, listening, verbal, nonverbal, and electronic written communication, disclosure or even a variety. In the text we learn that in marriages, couples often express contempt, belligerence, or defensiveness because of feeling as if they have not been heard, are being blamed, or even feel ignored. Often times in todays world people get upset and use negative forms of communication due to the manifested assumptions of what they think people mean when

disrupt relationships in situations where silence is perceived as avoidance, dissent or dissatisfaction. This negative connotation can be exacerbated especially when speaking out is perceived a futile or risky (Argyris, 1977).