BUSINESS COMMUNICATION

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES OF COMPROMISE

1. FASTER ISSUE RESOLUTION. COMPROMISING MAY BE MORE PRACTICAL WHEN TIME IS A FACTOR. 2. CAN PROVIDE A TEMPORARY SOLUTION WHILE STILL LOOKING FOR A WIN-WIN SOLUTION 3. LOWERS THE LEVEL OF TENSION AND STRESS RESULTING FROM THE CONFLICT

EXAMPLES OF WHEN FORCING MAY BE APPROPRIATE

1. IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS WHEN ALL OTHER, LESS FORCEFUL METHODS, DON'T WORK OR ARE INEFFECTIVE. 2. WHEN YOU NEED TO STAND UP FOR YOUR OWN RIGHTS, RESIST AGGRESSION AND PRESSURE. 3. WHEN A QUICK RESOLUTION IS REQUIRED AND USING FORCE IS JUSTIFIED (IN A LIFE-THREATENING SITUATION,TO STOP AN AGGRESSION) 4. AS A LAST RESORT TO RESOLVE A LONG-LASTING CONFLICT

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES OF SMOOTHING

1. IN SOME CASES SMOOTHING WILL HELP TO PROTECT MORE IMPORTANT INTERESTS WHILE GIVING UP ON SOME LESS IMPORTANT ONES. 2.GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO REASSESS THE SITUATION FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE.

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES OF COLLABORATING

1. LEADS TO SOLVING THE ACTUAL PROBLEM 2. LEADS TO WIN-WIN OUTCOME 3. REINFORCES MUTUAL TRUST AND RESPECT 4. BUILD A FOUNDATION FOR EFFECTIVE COLLABORATION IN THE FUTURE. 5. SHARED RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OUTCOME 6. YOU EARN THE REPUTATION OF A GOOD NEGOTIATOR. 7. FOR THE INVOLVED, THE OUTCOME OF THE CONFLICT RESOLUTION IS LESS STRESSFUL (HOWEVER, THE PROCESS OF FINDING AND ESTABLISHING A WIN-WIN SOLUTION MAY BE VERY INVOLVED-

SOME CAVEATS OF WITHDRAWING

1. MAY LEAD TO WEAKENING OR LOSING YOUR POSITION; NOT ACTING MAY BE INTERPRETED AS AN AGREEMENT. USING WITHDRAWING STRATEGIES WITHOUT NEGATIVELY AFFECTING YOUR OWN POSITION REQUIRES CERTAIN SKULL AND EXPERIENCE. 2. WHEN MULTIPLE PARTIES ARE INVOLVED, WITHDRAWING MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH A PARTY THAT EXPECTS YOUR ACTION.

SOME CAVEATS OF FORCING

1. MAY NEGATIVELY AFFECT YOUR RELATIONSHI WITH THE OPPONENT IN THE LONG RUN 2.MAY CAUSE THE OPPENENT TO REACT IN THE SAME WAY, EVEN IF THE OPPONENTS DID NOT INTEND TO BE FORCEFUL ORIGINALLY 3. CANNOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE STRONG SIDES OF THE OTHER SIDE'S POSITION 4. TAKING THIS APPROACH MAY REQUIRE A LOT OF ENERGY AND BE EXHAUSTING TO SOME INDIVIDUALS

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES OF FORCING

1. MAY PROVIDE A QUICK RESOLUTION TO A CONFLICT 2. INCREASES SELF-ESTEEM AND DRAWS RESPECT WHEN FIRM RESISTANCE OR ASTION WERE A RESPONSE TO AN AGGRESSION OR HOSTILITY

SOME CAVEATS OF USING COMPROMISE

1. MAY RESULT IN A SITUATION WHEN BOTH PARTIES ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE OUTCOME ( A LOSE- LOSE SITUATION) 2. DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE TO BUILDING TRUST IN THE LONG RUN. 3. MAY REQUIRE CLOSE MONITORING AND CONTROL TO ENSURE THE AGREEMENTS ARE MET

SOME CAVEATS OF COLLABORATING

1. REQUIRES A COMMITMENT FROM ALL PARTIES TO LOOK FOR A MUTUALLY ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION 2. MAY REQUIRE MORE EFFORT AND MORE TIME THAN SOME OTHER METHODS. A WIN-WIN SOLUTION MAY NOT BE EVIDENT 3. FOR THE SAME REASON, COLLABORATING MAY NOT BE PRACTICAL WHEN TIMING IS CRUCIAL AND A QUICK SOLOTION OR FAST RESPONSE IS REQUIRED 4. ONCE ONE OR MORE PARTIES LOSE THEIR TRUST IN AN OPPONENT, THE RELATIONSHIP FALLS BACK TO OTHER METHODS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION. THEREFORE, ALL INVOLVED PARTIES MUST CONTINUE COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS TO MAINTAIN A COLLABORATIVE RELATIONSHIP

EXAMPLES OF WHEN COLLABORATING MAY BE APPROPRIATE

1. WHEN CONSENSUS AND COMMITMENT OF THE PARTIES IS IMPORTANT. 2. IN A COLLABORATIVE ENVIRONMENT. 3. WHEN IT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS THE INTEREST OF MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDERS 4. WHEN A HIGH LEVEL OF TRUST IS PRESENT 5. WHEN A LONG-TERM RELATIONSHIP IS IMPORTANT 6. WHEN YOU NEED TO WORK THROUGH HARD FEELINGS, ANIMOSITY, ETC 7. WHEN YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE FULL RESPONSIBILITY

EXAMPLE OF WHEN SMOOTHING MAY BE APPROPRIETE

1. WHEN IT IS IMPORTANT TO PROVIDE A TEMPORARY RELIEF FROM THE CONFLICT OR BUY TIME UNTIL YOU ARE IN A BETTER POSITION TO RESPOND/ PUSH BACK. 2. WHEN THE ISSUE IS NOT AS IMPORTANT TO YOU AS IT IS TO THE OTHER PERSON. 3. WHEN YOU ACCEPT THAT YOU ARE WRONG, 4. WHEN YOU HAVE NO CHOICE OR WHEN CONTINUED COMPETITION WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL.

EXAMPLE OF WHEN COMPROMISE MAY BE APPROPRIATE

1. WHEN THE GOALS ARE MODERATELY IMPORTANT AND NOT WORTH THE USE OF MORE ASSERTIVWHEE OF MORE INVOLVING APPROACHES, SUCH AS FORCING OF COLLABORATING. 2. TO REACH TEMPORARY SETTLEMENT ON COMPLEX ISSUSES 3. TO REACH EXPEDIENT SOLUTIONS ON IMPORTANT ISSUES. 4. AS A FIRST STEP WHEN THE INVOLVED PARTIES DO NOT KNOW EACH OTHER WELL OR HAVEN'T YET DEVELOPED A HIGH LEVEL OF MUTUAL TRUST. 5. WHEN COLLABORATION OF FORCING DO NOT WORK

EXAMPLES OF WHEN WITHDRAWING MAY BE APPROPRIATE

1. WHEN THE ISSUE IS TRIVIL AND NOT WORTH THE EFFORT. 2. WHEN MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES ARE PRESSING, AND YOU DON'T HAVE TIME TO DEAL WITH IT 3. IN SITUATIONS WHERE POSTPONING THE RESPONSE IS BENEFICIAL TO YOU, FOR EXAMPLE- WHEN IT IS NOT THE RIGHT TIME OR PLACE TO CONFRONT THE ISSUE AND WHEN YOU NEED TIME TO THINK AND COLLECT INFORMATION BEFORE YOU ACT (E.G. IF YOU ARE UNPREPARED OR TAKEN BY SUPRISE) 4. WHEN YOU SEE NO CHANCE OF GETTING YOUR CONCERN MET OR YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT FORTH UNREASONABLE EFFORTS. 5. WHEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH HOSTILITY. 6. WHEN YOU ARE UNABLE TO HANDLE THE CONFLICT ( E.G. IF YOU ARE TOO EMOTIONALLY INVOLVED OR OTHERS CAN HANDLE IT BETTER.)

POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES OF WITHDRAWING

1. WHEN THE OPPONENT IS FORCING / ATTEMPTS AGGRESSION, YOU MAY CHOOSE TO WITHDRAW AND POSTPONE YOUR RESPONE UNTIL YOU ARE IN A MORE FAVORABLE CIRCUMSTANCE FOR YOU TO PUSH BACK. 2. WITHDRAWING IS A LOW STRESS APPROACH WHEN THE CONFLICT IS SHORT. 3. GIVE THE ABILITY/TIME TO FOCUS ON MORE IMPORTANT OR MORE URGENT ISSUES INSTEAD. 4. GIVE YOU TIME TO BETTER PREPARE AND COLLECT INFORMATION BEFORE YOU ACT.

FORCING IS ALSO KNOWN AS COMPETING

AN INDIVIDUAL FIRMLY PURSUES HIS OR HER OWN CONCERN DESPITE THE RESISTANCE OF THE OTHER PERSON. THIS MAY INVOLVE PUSHING ONE VIEWPOINT AT THE EXPENSE OF ANOTHER OR MAINTAINING FIRM RESISTANCE TO ANOTHER PERSON'S ACTION

WIN-WIN ( COLLABORATING ALSO KNOWN AS PROBLEM CONFRONTING OR PROBLEM SOLVING)

COLLABORATION INVOLVES AN ATTEMPT OR WORK WITH THE OTHER PERSON TO FIND A WIN-WIN SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM I HAND-THE ONE THAT MOST SATISFIES THE CONCERNS OF BOTH PARTIES. THE WIN-WIN APPROACH SEES CONFLICT RESOLUTION AS AN APPORTUNITY TO COME TO A MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL RESULT. IT INCLUDES IDENTIFYING THE UNDERLYING CONCERNS OF THE OPPONENTS AND FINDING AN ALTERNATIVE WHICH MEETS EACH PARTY'S CONCERNS.

COMPROMISING

COMPROMISING LOOKS FOR AN EXPEDIENT AND MUTUALLY ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION WHICH PARTIALLY SATISFIES BOTH PARTIES

CONFLICT SITUATIONS ARE AN IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THE WORKPLACE. A CONFLICT IS A SITUATION WHEN THE INTERESTS, NEEDS, GOALS OR VALUE OF INVOLVED PARTIES INTERFERE WITH ONE ANOTHER. A CONFLICT IS A COMMON PHENIMENON IN THE WORKPLACE. DIFFERENT STAKEHOLD MAY HAVE DIFFERENT PRIORITIES; CONFLICT MAY INVOLVE TEAM MEMBERS, DEPARTMENTS, PROJECT, ORGANIZATION AND CLIENT, BOSS AND SUBORDINATE, ORGANIZATION NEEDS VS. PERSONAL NEEDS.

OFTEN, A CONFLICT IS A RESULT OF PERCEPTION. IS CONFLICT A BAD THING? NOT NECESSARILY. OFTEN, CONFICT PRESENTS OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT. THEREFORE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND (AND APPLY) VARIOUS CONFLICT RESOLUTION TECHNIQUES

SMOOTHING IS KNOWN AS ACCOMMODATING

SMOOTHING IS ACCOMMODATING THE CONCERN OF OTHER PEOPLE FIRST OF ALL, RATHER THAN ONE'S OWN CONCERNS.

WITHDRAWING ALSO KNOWN AS AVOIDING.

THIS IS WHEN A PERSON DOES NOT PURSUE HIS/HER OWN CONCERNS OR THOSE OF THE OPPENENT. HIS/HER DOES NOT ADDRESS THE CONFLICT, SIDESTEPS, POSTPONES OR SIMPLY WITHDRAWS.