My name is Joe Hagerty.
I am the program coordinator for student organizations in the office of Student
Involvement.
My role specifically is to work with new student organizations and helping
them to get started, create a constitution,
and then also provide them with resources, support, and training.
And so I do this presentation,
not so much from the perspective of a student club organization,
but just in general.
You can use these practices and strategies in your everyday life to be able to
handle and manage conflict. So we'll go ahead and get started.
The first kind of thing that we'll talk about today is just overall conflict
basics.
There's lots of different factors and considerations that relate to conflicts
and we'll address some of those.
And then we'll go into the meat of the presentation where we'll talk about the
conflict management process or steps.
And then have an example that we'll go through
as I explained each of the steps to see what that might look like in real life.
And then lastly,
we'll talk about your personal conflict management style and how you can use
that style for different situations.
Since style you have is good for certain situations,
but other styles are better for others.
So we'll talk about the pros and cons of each of those and how you can kind of
flex that style depending on what kind of situation or people you're working
with. So starting off, we'll do the
conflict management assessment. If you already got the email this morning,
you probably already have downloaded it or looked at it, but if you haven't,
I have pasted the link in the chat.
I'll do that one more time just to make sure everybody's got a link to the box
folder where the assessment is at,
and you can go ahead and start looking over that as we're talking through today.
And like I said,
you'll have some time to do that since we'll discuss that towards the end.
So now we'll kick off with our conflict basics and some of those major factors
that pretty much relate to any conflict that you're going to have.
So there's a big difference between conflict management and conflict resolution.
And I bring up conflict resolution because it is actually the more negative version
of handling conflict. And if you were to talk about conflict resolution,
it's more of the idea that conflict is negative and that we don't want conflict
at all. It's actually destructive.
It doesn't actually help us to do anything and it should be avoided pretty much
at all costs. But an example to kind of illustrate that would be,
let's say you have a worker that's super, super dedicated.
Maybe he's worked at a company or maybe for an organization for a long time.
He's taken on projects for hours and does really good work.
But the boss continually gives him extra work and causes him to have to stay
later and maybe make some work on weekends.
And the worker eventually just gets so tired of that,
that he does kind of thinks “I don't get paid enough to do this kind of work.”
And kind of gets upset, but the boss comes over one day and said, “Hey,
I need you to do some extra work.” And the worker, just
doesn’t want to because they’ve been overworked. Andso he tells his boss,
“I don't get paid enough to do this for you.”
And so the boss maybe yells at him and says,
he's insubordinate and maybe demands him to do the work.
Even though he says he isn't getting paid enough, or is it feeling appreciated.
So really in a situation, conflict is, is not good.
And in the sense it could be handled in a way that the person feels overworked
or undervalued. Where conflict management is more of the positive side of things,
where the idea is that conflict can actually be a positive thing and it can
reinforce our relationships and actually build and make them stronger.
And a situation of this would be, let's say, we have two individuals,
John and Tom. And John was hurt by something that Tom said, and he asked Tom,
if he can talk to him privately. Well, John then tells Tom that, “Hey,
your comments were a little bit hurtful. It didn't,
it didn't sit well with me.” And through discussion and talking about it,
they revealed,
they just really have under- different understandings of how they communicate and
what the situation was. And Tom is kind of lighthearted and maybe fun-loving,
and John's may be more matter of fact,
and takes the comments that Tom made literally.
And so through the discussion and learning that they had different styles and
different understanding and communicate,
they actually took that conflict and it was made positive in the,
in the relationships they had restricted.
So there's a very different between conflict management and conflict resolution.
And we'll kind of talk on the rest of this presentation about management and how
we can actually handle conflict in a positive way that,
that strengthens those relationships that we have.
So this is a chart that kind of just talks about the two,
and how they're different. But once again,
resolution there's discussion that takes place,
or no discussion that takes place where management discussion does take place in
those true intentions or those feelings behind why certain things have happened
are discussed. Where in resolution what's remedied that the symptoms,
aren't actually talked about. So somebody might've got upset,
but as we learned in that example with the really dedicated worker,
it wasn't so much that he didn't want to do the work for his boss.
It was that he just felt under appreciated or undervalued.
So the symptoms aren't handled. Where, in management,
the sources of the conflict are discussed and they are managed and done so
appropriately. Once again, in resolution,
the sources of the conflict are usually undisclosed.
It's not actually talked about; whereas in management,
there's lots of misunderstandings that could happen,
but it's talked out; and people regardless of where it came from,
or how offended they are,
they're able to end in a positive and productive way. Whereas resolution
usually is a negative term.
These are just some conflict basics that most of us already know,
but it kind of sets the scene for the rest of our conversation.
But, conflict is inevitable.
It really doesn't matter what organization you're in,
what the personalities are, how mature people are; conflict is going to happen,
regardless of any of those factors. It's just, just a matter of life.
And so knowing that going in is just going to know this process,
we're going to talk about in a little bit,
is going to help us no matter where we're at.
Because conflict is inevitable. And people usually don't act vengeful on purpose.
I always talk with people and say, well, they meant to hurt my feelings,
or they meant to wrong me in this way.
And a lot of times the people don't even know that you are upset with them.
They probably are just acting out of their own personality.
And a lot of times don't realize they hurt your feelings.
So don't always take that
problem or conflict that's caused between you and that other person as something
that people purposely tried to do. People also aren't mind readers.
So once again, you can be upset with somebody, but
unless you tell them you're upset, they're not going to know.
So we've got to talk that out and also keep people in the conflict separate.
So you may have a conflict with somebody,
but once that you've had a conversation,
that doesn't mean that you have to hold that over their head
from that point on. You really can separate the conflict you had to working
with that person and still have good relationships. That might be a little hard,
but as you do that more and more,
you'll start to get into practice and it becomes easier.
And then the last kind of main piece on the basics of conflict is I always say
handle conflict sooner, rather than later,
we all know if we let that conflict kind of simmer and get worse and worse over
time, it usually ends in a blow up. Or somebody getting really angry and upset.
And if it was handled earlier, maybe that,
blow up wouldn't have happened.
And we could have prevented things from getting worse.
If we would have just talked with that person right away at the start.
So these are some barriers to effective conflict management.
And we're going to show a video after this, a quick, a little clip from a movie,
to kind of demonstrate this,
but these are some easy barriers that prevent a lot of people when they are
dealing with conflict or difficult people from being able to handle that
conflict. And one of it's just fear. People don't want to confront problems.
It's not always in our human nature to want to confront issues and problems,
especially with other people.
If we have to see them all the time like coworkers or classmates or even
friends, And also people just may not listen, or even if they listen,
they're not listening well and may misunderstand things.
And that prevents us from being able to solve conflict.
Also people aren't always willing to admit that they're part of the problem.
And even though you might've been the one wronged,
you probably still had a part in the problem or the conflict and why it happened. Maybe it
was even by accident. But usually we have a part in the problem.
Sometimes people just don't want to put the effort or energy or time into
talking with the people that they have a conflict with and trying to solve that.
But there's also consequences. Anytime you do confront a problem,
hopefully positive, but sometimes they are negative.
If a person doesn't think that they've done anything wrong,
but you've confronted them about an issue.
And so that can be one of the barriers to once again, solving conflict.
And you also have a different conflict style,
which I mentioned we'll talk about at the last section of our presentation.
And sometimes people don't always take the style that they use for managing
conflict or their instinctual style and adapt it to the situation.
Maybe the style you instinctually have,
isn't the right way to solve the problem.
You should be using a different conflict style.
And so we'll talk more about how you can use a different style in solving that.
And to use the correct one. There are benefits though,
if you can work with the other party and resolve that conflict.
And part of it is that tension and anger is just relieved.
You don't have to walk around each and every day
at the workplace or around those people and constantly always have in the back
of your head, that you're upset with that person,
and there's tension just being in the same room. Also,
it increases understanding once again of yourself and others.
You help to get on the same page and maybe even become closer with that person
and build more of a cohesive bond, because we're able to talk out your real
intentions.
And if you understand that the person didn't mean to and you learn more about
them and how they function,
that's only going to be better for you in those future interactions you have
with that person, because you won't take future comments or actions personally,
because, you know, “Oh, that's just how John works. And that's just how he operates.”
It also provides a structure for difficult conversations.
So the process will go through,
it's a lot easier to use a process than to just go into trying to talk with
somebody about a process blindly.
And so this structure that we'll talk about has seven steps in each of those
steps should be pretty easy to follow.
And you'll see the example I give in each one of those is pretty easy to follow
and see how that can play out in real life.
It also minimizes the assumptions and accusation.
Once again, you ask soon somebody is needing to do something on purpose,
or they were just being hateful, or they may have been just mean,
but that's probably not the case. They may have had a bad day.
And just talking with the person once again,
allows you to understand those assumptions and better understand what
perspective they're coming from. And lastly, you have a plan of action,
and it's not just vague assurances to do better.
When you talk with the person about the problem, you don't only just say, “Yeah,
I'll do better. I won't do that to you again.”
Or “I won't talk to you in that way.”
And you actually come up with a plan and you're able to say, “Hey,
these are the actions I want you to do.”
And so that's what this conflict management process we're going to talk about
will lead to as the end goal.
So now we are going to get into those seven steps and kind of talk about the
conflict management process and how you can actually play this out in day-to-day
life. There are seven steps. The first is invitation.
Then we have observation, then apologize,
appreciate consequences, goal formation and request.
And you'll find that when we get to six and seven,
they kind of can be hand in hand and almost be one step.
but the theory that was used for this whole presentation is an actual,
like psychology theory.
And so I kept him separate for the fact that that's how the originator of the
whole entire theory kept it. So once again, we want to increase the positive,
decrease the negative. And through this process, we should be able to do that.
So this is our scenario we're going to use as we walk through each of these
steps.
And that will allow us to give an example for each step on how this plays out in
real life. So let's say you and a coworker are often clashing at meetings.
It's gotten to the point where each of you are just itching to pounce on each
other or any mistakes that are made or things that are said.
You can barely even stand to be around each other or even see each other.
And you actually have gone so far as to avoid being around each other in the
same room. This has been going on for a while.
So for step one, how we would try to handle this type of conflict
would be an invitation. You really need to talk with the person,
say, “Let's set a time to find – and
a place where we can meet and talk about this conflict or, or disagreement.”
And the place you choose needs to be a place where neither you or the other
individual is going to feel rushed, distracted, or disturbed by others,
or even when you might feel tired.
Maybe an early morning conversation is not a good idea,
or even the end of the day would not be a good idea since both of you,
your head might not be in the situation. And so setting that time in place,
be specific and telling the person where exactly you're going to meet and what
time, and invite the person in person.
So don't try to send an email or a text message or an instant message asking the
party you're wanting to have that conversation with,
over digital communication.
Sometimes that is a way to get misunderstood or,
the person not respond or ignore you. Whereas if you talk to them in person,
you're going to be able to have that face-to-face conversation and be able to
see some of those non-verbal type of communication cues.
And then don't always have to state the purpose of it.
You don't always have to tell the person, “Hey,
we're going to meet because I'm upset with the way you talked to me last
meeting, or the way that you treated me at the last
party that we were at.” So the person may refuse. We hope not,
but if they do try again to ask them to have a conversation at a future time.
And an example of what that might look like in real life would be say, “John,
I'd really like to talk to you.
Do you have a half hour sometime today we could meet meeting room B?” Very simple,
not very long.
That's all you'd have to say to somebody to get them into a place where
you both can discuss the conflict. So that's step number one, pretty simple,
pretty easy. We'll move on to step number two: observation.
This is where we get into the meat of actually discussing with the person once
we're face-to-face. And you're going to want to identify a neutral,
specific and objective terms.
What we mean by that is you're going to actually need to state what’s actually
happened. What, what are you personally doing?
And what is the other person doing in terms of what's making you upset?
What are you doing in response to the things that're making you upset?
And then when is it happening or how often is it happening?
We really have to make sure that these are objective and not subjective because
the next tip that I mentioned is we don't want to say “always.” If we say,
“You always talk down at me,”
or “You always make snide remarks during my presentation,” or whatever that might be
the word “always” is very difficult for the party that you're talking to, to really
understand when they've done something.
But if we're able to bring up specific instances where these hurtful behaviors
happen, it's much easier to then talk about how we can solve them,
but also for the person to be reminded. “Oh,
I actually did do that when at this date.” And so the other tip would be,
you want to seek agreement throughout the whole rest of the conflict management
process from step two to step seven.
Because if the person doesn't agree with the things that they have done to hurt
you or the other factors you're mentioning,
there's probably no way to proceed in the, in the whole entire process.
And you might be wasting your breath.
So how to seek a agreement in all of the conversations you’re having.
And here's an example of how this would all play out. “John,
I've noticed that in our project meetings,
we get very critical of each other's ideas. For instance,
at Tuesday staff meeting,
you suggested reviewing our project model and I jumped on you for suggesting it,
even though it was a necessary step.
I've noticed that we've ended up doing this,
the last three meetings and almost every meeting in the last few months.
It also seems to be getting worse. Would you agree with the situation?”
So once again,
they asked for agreement at the end and they didn't mention “always,”
they mentioned a specific time that it's happened in a specific instance during
that. So that's the basics of step two.
We'll move on to step three. This might be the hardest step for,
for both you and the other party.
Apologizing. You've gone into the situation. You've told them what's happening.
And now it's your turn to apologize for your part in the conflict.
And this may seem hard because you're upset with the other person and think
they've done wrong, but there's always something that you've done
in that situation to cause whatever's happening. And even if you don't think so,
almost find something to apologize because what it does is it evens out that
power differential between people.
They don't think that you're coming just to nitpick on them or get mad at them.
And we,
a lot of times as humans don't want to admit that we're wrong. And
because it appears that we're weak and don't have power over the other person
when we admit failure. But it really does allow you to,
even out that power differential between you and that other person.
And they're way more receptive to what you're going to say next.
And be humble and sincere. So once again,
even if you don't think that you did a whole lot to cause the person to treat
you that way, you probably did by accident. So just be humble and sincere.
Don't be superficial when you're mentioning what you might've done wrong because
they'll see right through it. And once again, the other,
person's not going to be receptive at that point. And mentioned the negative
effects of your behaviors. So because of what has happened or what you've done,
what has that caused to have happened?
And if you know how the other person's feeling, mention that.
But you don't want to guess. So if you think that the person was angry,
mentioned, they were angry. If you think that it made them feel sad,
mentioned that they felt sad. But if you don't know,
don't mention a feeling that they might be experiencing. Because once again,
you're going to have a lot of trouble
if the person's not able to track with you and understand why you've mentioned
them. So example of how step three plays out.
“John, I want to apologize for snapping at you at the meetings.
It's had a bad effect on our mood and of our meetings,
and I can see that it makes you angry.
Is there anything that I've done to cause this angst between us?
Because I apologize.” So once again,
the person who may not have known specifically what maybe has caused them to
attack each other,
but they did apologize and say that they were sorry for doing that since they
realized they were wrong. So once again,
that evens out that playing field and differential power and probably is going
to make the person more receptive for step four,
which we're going to talk about next.
So appreciate. You've apologized.
And now you move on to saying that, “Hey,
even though you've done something to maybe make me upset,
I want you to know your value.” And that's what appreciate really means.
And you're going to try to state specific things that, that person's done.
Maybe not directly just to you,
but maybe even for your company or the organization or your friend group,
whatever it might be,
state something that the person's done to benefit you or that other group of
people that you're around. Because once again,
it's not that you're coming at that person, like, “Hey,
you need to change and you've done - what you did - wrong,
and you need to apologize.” You're saying to the person, “Hey,
I know that you've done something to make me upset,
but I want you to know I'm not coming to you out of the state of only pointing
out that you've done something wrong.
I really do appreciate some of the things you do as well.”
And even if it's something small do mention that,
but just don't make it something so trivial that they would just think that
you're being fake about the whole situation, just to come up with something.
And it can be difficult, especially if you have had somebody hurt you in a,
in a really, really strong way. And if time has passed,
it might be even more difficult to confront that conversation because you've let
the anger build for a certain amount of time.
and you haven't wanted to deal with it and made it worse because you've allowed
yourself to think about it so much.
But if you can't find anything to compliment the other person about,
you might not even be ready to do this conflict management process.
And you might just need to let a little more time passed before you confront the
situation. Because once again,
you're going to need to be open and honest with this person and also be willing
to kind of accept part of the fault, which if you can't do once again,
you may not be ready for the process.
So here's an example of how this plays out in real life.
“I don't always see eye to eye with you and we have very different personalities,
but I want you to know that I really appreciate your contribution to the project.
Without you never would have gotten this far in the same amount of time.
As you communicate with our clients,
your ability to find out what they really want is second to none.
And you really boost our project.” So you can see once again, it's mentioned,
we don't see eye to eye,
but you really are appreciated by me and the organization.
So step five: stating the consequences.
This is where you're really going to want to mention why solving this problem
would be beneficial, not for just you, but for the other person as well.
And even beyond that for the company or the other group of people that you're around,
where this conflict might be happening. And why we'd want to do that once again,
conflict does affect we- us as people, even if we're the party that was wrong,
because we're less productive because we're thinking about the conflict all the
time, we might be angry.
When we see the person that's made us mad,
we have unhealthy confrontations or just upset, or maybe agitated with them.
And then we also,
aren't able to always utilize our skills fully because we're totally thinking
about that problem day to day, hour by hour.
And then the other person that's involved with the conflict,
they might be avoiding you,
and you may need to work with them specifically on projects or tasks,
or you might not be able to ask them questions
you need to ask them because you're both upset and just are avoiding each other
at all costs. Also the other people see what the conflict is,
then they feel uncomfortable as well because they see how there's so much angst
between you and that other person. There's also a lot of distrust.
Whenever we have these conflicts that continue going on,
people are in bad moods and they’re - they're less productive.
So here's an example of stating the consequences and mentioning why it's
beneficial for you and that offended party to solve that conflict.
“I don't like the situation we have now.
It's making me anxious before meetings and it's making the meetings way less
productive.
I also think that some of the other project members are starting to wonder what
it's all about. Jane asked me the other day,
‘why are the two of us never able to agree on anything?’
I think this is actually harming the project and causing people to walk on
eggshells.
Coming to an agreement will help both of us and let us be less stressed,
more effective, and it will also put people at ease in the office.
Would you agree?” Once again,
it's stated why it's mutually beneficial and it's sought for agreement at the
very end. So that's step five, pretty, pretty straightforward.
Six. This is where we're going to start solving this issue.
This is where we're going to state what would be a good outcome regarding the
situation? How are we going to work together to solve this problem?
And both parties in the conflict have to have some responsibility towards
achieving the goal. It's only one sided and it's me
that's bringing the conflict to the person who offended me and only I am doing
something to make it better; it's not going to stick and it's not going to last.
You've got to put some responsibility on the other person and ask them to do
something also to achieve that goal. And you both have to agree on the goal.
It can't be a flippant, just like, “Oh yeah, I'll do that.”
It's gotta be a really sincere agreement that we're going to both pursue the
same thing. And it will help us to once again,
be stronger in our relationship if we both agree.
And here's an example of that playing out. “I would like to -
for us to listen more and appreciate each other's ideas.
You have some great ideas, even if I don't always agree with it, though,
I can listen and make constructive suggestions.
Would you be willing to work with me to achieve this?” And you can see in this,
it's not a super specific outline of what you want to do, but more of a -
it's still a goal,
but a little more vague where we're going to get into the meat of what we want
the other person to do in step seven. But once again,
six and seven can guide in kind of go hand in hand since they're very similar
steps. But once again, that's step six formatting - formulating the goal.
And step seven is where we're really asking for those,
observable or actionable or specific things you want that other person to do and
asking for them to change their behavior.
And you don't want to wait for them to change their behavior.
You really want to mention, “Hey, let's change our behavior now,
because if we wait,
all this conversation we're having now is gonna be done at vain.
We need to make this change immediately.” And once again,
it's going to help us in the future. And it's a two-way street. Once again,
like we mentioned, step six, not just you doing something,
but the other person is responsible for doing something as well for it to stick and
for it to actually be accomplished. So an example,
“I would suggest that we introduce a new rule at meetings when one of us suggests
that something - something that the other person disagrees with,
we need to start out by saying,
what's good about the idea and then saying how it might be better. Also,
if we start attacking each other at meetings,
I suggest that we both excuse ourselves and then talk about it in a private room
instead of in front of the entire team. Also,
what do you say about having a short talk after our next project meeting to
evaluate how it went? How does that sound?” You can see once again,
there's more specifics than what we had in step six and it actually asks the
person to do something and the person who's bringing up the conversation to do
something as well. And then lastly, we mentioned in each step,
we want to have agreement. And they did that by saying, “Hey, how does this?”
So those are the seven steps of handling conflict,
and you can pretty much use this in any type of conflict you have.
But everybody has a different style, a conflict management style.
And that's what we'll talk about next,
because that process is all well and dandy.
But if you have a personality that doesn't always follow this pattern,
it might be kind of difficult.
So we'll talk about now how you can take your personal style and,
change that and adapt it to the different situations.
But first out, the conflict management style, just a little introduction,
and then I'll have, if,
if anybody is willing to share based on their assessment,
what conflict style they are,
then I kind of speak specifically more to those specifics.
If anybody has those. But in general, the style,
what it is - is the, behavior that one exhibits when conflict is -
exists and it shapes how,
one's personality and the time of place where the conflict happens.
So it's once again, their instinctual style of how they react to conflict.
but they don't even really think about it.
It just happens because that's their personality and that's what shapes that
conflict style. And each style is, once again, different,
it's not one that's better than another,
but each has pros and cons and in different situations,
or maybe even with different people that you're having a conflict with,
it would be better to use a different style or even the goal.
Sometimes the goal is not to solve the problem or the conflict.
Sometimes it's better to just let the problem continue and not to solve that.
So we'll talk more about that specific,
situation and when that might happen. And you just naturally will have to fight
that style that you have,
if you have to adapt to a situation and use a different style. Because it's
instinctual and it just happens pretty much automatically.
So if anybody's willing, to share what's -
what's your instinctual conflict style?
If anybody finished that assessment,
I'll let you unmute and go ahead and state that if you, if you have done so.
[Participant]: I have a Teddy bear. [Joe]: You’re Teddy bear. Very cool.
[Participant]: I'm an owl.
[Joe]: Okay, very good! Thank you, Shanie and Bethany. Rose,
did you have a chance to take a look at the assessment? It's okay if you didn't,
but yeah.
[Participant]: Yes, I did. I think I'm an “Accommodating.”
[Joe]: Okay, cool! We have, uh, we have two Teddy bears then, and then we have an owl,
so even better. Great.
So we'll go ahead and talk about each of those styles real quick,
and then we'll have some kind of discussion questions at the end to end our
time. But, thanks for letting me know.
So I can kind of adapt the rest of the presentation specifically to those styles
that you all mentioned.
So before we dig into the specifics of each,
this chart kind of outlines the kind of basic tenants of each of the styles.
So if you can see there's two axes, one on X and one of the Y,
and what it means is if you're going vertically,
that means you're either more assertive or less assertive. And so
what that more or less means is if you're more assertive,
you're going to be attempting to satisfy your own concerns
or things that you want.
Whereas if you are not as assertive,
maybe you're going to be less concerned about getting your own goals or things
accomplished. And once again,
that also applies to the other axis where if you're more cooperative,
you're going to be somebody who is more willing to not maybe give in,
but work with the other person to come to a solution.
And that your goals are maybe not as important as it is to just solve the
conflict. So we have two Teddy bears accommodating they're very cooperative,
but maybe not as assertive.
Whereas we had an owl, who was very cooperative and also very assertive.
So we'll talk about each of these,
but hopefully that axis X and Y helps to kind of explain where you are and,
and you probably see just by looking at that, you probably see, “Oh,
that is really my personality. and very, very,
unique to me and does really show, how I act or, or who I am.”
So we'll go ahead and start with the avoiding turtle.
The turtle that they view the conflict as they're unconcerned with their own
needs or wants, or their goals. And they really just want to satisfy the,
the goals of the other person, or just avoid that conflict altogether.
They - just to get away from conflict - would rather withdraw.
They would rather not handle it, not discuss it.
We don't want to do anything related to it. Just -
just get out of it no matter what. You could see, kind of hides in a shell,
same kind of idea with somebody that's an avoiding turtle and know,
just accept the default decision or what other people want.
So there's no controversy there. Once again, they're not assertive,
not very confident.
And really the main reason they are that way they don't want to hurt other
people's feelings or even harm the relationships that they might have with those
other people.
When you use this would be when, even though you have an instinctual style,
maybe you’re an owl, like we talked about where your Teddy bear,
like the other two of you mentioned,
you might want to use the turtle in some cases when victory’s impossible.
So let's say you're in a situation where like,
you're arguing with a friend about something and it's like, “This is stupid.
There's no reason to even argue about this,” but it starting to get heated.
So you just kind of give in and let the other person have their way, or,
or let their opinion be known. And it,
because it's kind of a trivial thing. And somebody might also be in a better
position or a higher position of power. So in that case,
sometimes better to say, “You know what? You can have this one, you - you can win.”
So that's kind of the avoiding turtle. But when you do use this style,
a lot of times it can be really ineffective and it can just cause problems to
get worse because we don't talk about it.
And our own needs are kind of suppressed whenever we don't discuss.
So that's the avoiding turtle. None of you are that style,
but that would be one to use. And in a situation when you might want to use it.
Whereas the shark, this is another style that neither three of you have,
but could also be used.
And the way a lot of people that are sharks view conflict is that they just want
to achieve their own goals.
They really could care less about what the relationships they have is and,
and the way they handle conflict, what the results of handling conflict in -
in a very aggressive way that satisfies their own goals.
They're not really worried about what the relationship is,
and I'm sure you can all think about somebody you know,
that's very much so like this. They're bold in the sense of stating their
opinions and not really caring what other people think about them.
They're very forceful.
and they usually solve conflict by just overpowering or over talking the other person.
And many times that's because they are in a higher position of power because
they're either your boss or maybe they're just a friend that's more energetic or
outgoing,
or maybe they're just very persuasive and are just really good at talking and
can convince other people to take their side.
But the one thing that stays the same,
no matter what is somebody who's a shark is just very assertive and very
uncooperative. So on that axis,
they're really high on one end in the sense of that they're very assertive,
but they're really low on the other end,
meaning they're not willing to work with other people or even hear the other
person out. Their values and their goals are what reign supreme.
Once again,
their personal goals are also valued over the relationships they have with other
people. But there are times that even if you're a Teddy bear,
or even if you are a turtle, there is times you might want to use this.
And that would be an emergency situation when you need to make a decision fast.
So let's say,
there's a tornado and you need to get people inside and you know where the
shelter is. And you're going to say, “Hey guys, we need to do this.
And we need to go now.” And maybe people aren't agreeing with it or thinking, “Oh,
we're not in danger,” but you tell them, “We have to absolutely get to cover.”
That would be a time when you could use the shark. Or maybe unpopular decisions
need to be made, whether it's a group project and you're choosing a route to go,
or maybe it's a work project.
And you're choosing how to pitch a sales presentation to a client
that's very out of the normal. You would - then,
if you're the leader of that project, maybe you would know best.
And the other people aren't as knowledgeable about the client you're going to be
presenting to. And they may not like the style of your choosing,
but you have to go with that style, because you know, it's going to do best.
But also if you're defending somebody else, who's getting exploited,
maybe somebody being really mean or hateful to another person.
That's when a shark can be very helpful in standing up for another person.
But a lot of times not used correctly,
it could leave a person feeling bruised or unsatisfied or even resentful because
they're used in un-urgent situation.
So that's the shark and the main way that that can be.
Now we mentioned the Teddy bear, two of you or the Teddy bear.
So this specifically will relate to you.
A lot of times you're not as concerned about your own personal goals,
but you're really concerned about other people and wanting their goals or
concerns to be expressed or to be achieved.
And the Teddy bear really just wants to smooth things over and prevent damage of
relationships. And that's not a bad thing. I just need you to have a very high,
ability to want to
promote unity in relationships because you're very cooperative. You're just not,
not as assertive. And that's okay.
That's just your style and your personality. And the Teddy bear, once again,
a lot of times wants to be liked by other people. And because of that,
they sometimes will surrender their position in the conflict.
Even when it's not warranted,
they'll just kind of give in or allow the other person to get their way to just
end the conflict and allow everything to be even keel and smooth things out.
So the relationships not damaged.
The relationship once again, is valued over their own personal goals,
but there are times that even if you're not a Teddy bear and you're an owl,
this could be helpful.
And this could be when issues matter more to the other party.
Maybe you're not as concerned, and it's once again,
a conflict that you don't really care who wins. You can just say, “Yep,
you can have your way. We'll go your way.” Maybe it's over
a situation and you and your friends want to choose where to go to eat that
night. And you have a very strong
distaste towards one of the restaurants that was suggested,
but you'll go there just so there's not an argument. And you'll say, ”Yep,
we'll go to Taco Bell. I don't like it, but we'll go.”
This piece is more valuable than winning. And you once again
want to be in a position to collect favor in the future.
So if you give in or maybe allow somebody to get their way,
you kind of assume in the back of your head, “Hey, if I give in now,
then they'll have to repay the favor in the future.”
But a lot of times that doesn't happen and people end up feeling hurt because
that favor is usually not returned.
And then we've got the Fox and this is the compromising Fox.
Our second to last one.
They view the calm conflict as something that can be compromised on. That
both sides can give up a little bit to find a middle ground and make sure that
my - a little bit of my concerns or my needs are satisfied,
or part of my goals are achieved in part of your goals are achieved.
There's once again, not a perfect fit to this where,
my way and your way isn't fully, able to be achieved.
But at least part of what we wanted are achieved.
This is somebody who is assertive and somewhat cooperative.
So not fully one way,
we're kind of middle ground in that chart that we just looked at
but they do have a little bit of both of those aspects or characteristics.
But they are moderately concerned about their own values and their relationships
along with the other person's values or concerns in relationships. And so once again,
you may not be the style, but when, when can I use this? Well,
because the cost of the conflict is higher than the cost of losing ground.
So once again, if the cost and you don't want to have to deal with it,
and it would be a way worse to just fully give in,
because there's something that still needs to be done and you can't fully give
up everything.
This is when you're still would maybe want to be a little bit more assertive and
make sure that part of what you want is done.
So maybe that's a group project and you know that if we don't absolutely do
certain things this way or format it that way,
we're going to get a terrible grade because the teacher said
we have to do this. Even if the other group members say, “No,
we don't need to do that.”
But also equal strength of opponents are at a standstill.
So a lot of times you're at a deadlock and you can't agree on something.
So the best way to handle that conflict maybe is to both give in a little bit,
to allow you to get away from that deadlock and remove that standstill.
And or when a deadline is looming and you have to get something done,
you may both need to just give in a little bit to allow you to reach that deadline.
So once again, both parties may resent to giving up part of their goals,
but at least the conflict is managed and the common good is achieved when you
use this stuff. And then lastly, our owl,
we come to the last couple of slides here.
The owl is the last one that we mention.
And they really view conflict as a positive thing.
And there's going to be something to where we can both achieve our goals.
And we can also seek a solution that improves our relationship and also reduces
the tensions that we might have.
And the way that this person would go about solving conflict would be first to,
start with identifying conflict as a problem, right?
They would then say that, “Hey,
we need to resolve this so that our relationships could become better.
And if we do that, it's going to end up better for both of us.”
That's the style or their mindset and that situation.
But the person usually has to be pretty assertive and cooperative.
So they want to state their goals or what they think needs to happen,
but also be willing to work with the other person to make sure their goals and
objectives are satisfied as well. And once again,
they value goals and relationships,
and this is going to be used when you need to bring multiple viewpoints
together, to come up with the best solution.
And there's no way that you can give in on something.
You both need to just come to a agreement on something,
even if that means choosing a different maybe viewpoint or process in the,
problem-solving process, maybe you need to choose something different,
but if you can both agree on it, that's the best way.
And people are going to end up being the most happy,
because there's not really a trade-off; it's
you both are working towards the same thing and agree.
So that's really what the owl is and how that happens.
So we're going to now turn it over to do some discussion and then we'll kind of
end our time together. And
if you're willing once again to contribute and kind of give me an answer for one
of these, we have two questions.
I'd love to just kind of get some conversation and see what you guys think about
what you've learned and how you might use these strategies in the future. So,
first question is, now that you're armed with this knowledge,
how will you handle conflicts differently?
So if anybody be willing to share that, now that you have this knowledge,
what might you do differently in handling conflict in the future?
[Participant]: I think that like,
sometimes it is important to realize that you can adopt like the other styles of
conflict management. Because I am more like assertive,
like I am cooperative, but I do like to just get things done,
but sometimes I need to realize that it's better to just let them have it this
time and it'll work out better.
[Joe]: Yeah, absolutely. Great example. Thank you for sharing Bethany.
[Participant]: I also have something to say.
I think that after this presentation,
what I learned most importantly is how we can approach the person that we're
having a conflict with. So usually we just stay quiet and say, okay,
this will pass or something like that. [Joe]: Yup.
But I think there is a positive side to how you can go talk to that person
and set up a meeting or set up a meetup or whatever. [Joe]: Absolutely.
And that could benefit so much better than just keeping quiet. [Joe]: Yeah.
And Rose, maybe
you agree with the statement that we mentioned a little bit earlier in the
presentation, but the benefits of using this, uh,
processes you're not going in and trying to figure out, “Gosh,
how am I going to talk to this person?” But Hey,
we actually have some steps that could be followed and it makes it much easier
to confront the person or talk with them about that. Do you agree with that?
Yeah. Awesome. Great. Shanie,
do you have anything you'd like to add to anything that Bethany or Rose said?
[Participant]: I was going to kind of say the same thing that Rose said.
I think like after this, it's going to be,
I don't want to say easier for me to kind of see it from other people's
viewpoints and other people's personalities,
but I think it will be better manageable.
And having those difficult conversations. [Joe]: Yeah, absolutely.
Great. Thanks for sharing! One more question, and then, like I said,
I'll let you all go,
but I appreciate you guys contributing at the end here and also at the
beginning. But what styles
or what style would you say that you could maybe implement at work or school or
your personal life now that you know about it?
Maybe if you have a specific example of maybe you're naturally a Teddy bear,
but I'm going to use the owl in this situation, or maybe I'm normally a shark,
but I'm now going to use the turtle in this situation.
So if you have an example maybe at work or school or your personal life,
that you'd be willing to fear now that you know about these styles
you can go ahead and, and kind of share that. [Participant]: I think, like I said,
I'm a Teddy bear, so I'm kind of like the peacemaker.
I just kind of want to make everyone else happy and not really worry about my
own needs. [Joe]: Sure. [Participant]: But I think like in my own personal relationships,
I think that,
like I mentioned before that my needs aren't always met and it kind of just
builds up time, you know, as I let time pass.
And so taking that into consideration in my personal relationships,
I think will make a big difference. [Joe]: Cool. Thank you. Thank you for sharing.
[Participant]: For me, although I'm a Teddy bear, I think,
now that I know the different kinds of styles that are associated with these
personalities, at the workplace,
I've worked for two years and I think being an owl or a turtle would be really
beneficial because I've mostly worked with
more senior people than me. [Joe]: Sure.
And those kind of discussions would be very beneficial approaching with the owl
or the turtle personality. And again, I think for my personal relationships,
it would not hurt to be a shark sometimes. (chuckles) I mean,
it's okay to be assertive with your friends and family, [Joe]: Absolutely!
because it would take less offense even if I would be more assertive with them.
So yeah, I think those kinds of personalities would be fun to sit around with.
Yeah. [Joe]: Awesome. Well, thanks for sharing and yeah, you've made a great point.
Sometimes it's not always the personality you have,
but the people you're around,
so you can be maybe more of a shark or maybe more of a
a Fox and compromise a little more based on the people that you're around
because your personal family is different than your boss at work. So, yeah.
Great, great point Rose. Thank you. [Participant]: Thanks
[Participant]: For me. I think in my job where I might be more of an owl,
like in my personal life, and I do use that in my job,
but it's definitely more of like a Teddy bear situation because my main concern
is accommodating like the customer's needs or like the patrons need.
And like,
it's not always about getting my way it's about doing what's best for them.
[Joe]: Sure, absolutely. Yep. Great point. Well,
thank you all for sharing,
that pretty much brings us to the end of our time.
This is the three kind of things we talked about was: once again,
the basics of conflict management.
We talked about the processes and use an example of how each of those steps can
be played out in real life. And then lastly addressed the styles,
which we just ended up finishing our conversation with.
So I'm going to leave us now that if you have any questions you can unmute and
ask, but, otherwise you're free to kind of leave our Zoom meeting,
but I appreciate you all coming and contributing.
I hope you gained something from today's presentation and that you can take this
and use some of the strategies going forward, both in your personal,
your work and maybe school relationships with other people.
So thanks again for coming in and you have any questions, feel free to unmute,
and I'd be glad to answer anything that anybody might have.