The Theory of
Conflict is inevitable, especially for leaders. Effective nurse leaders invest time understanding the causes of conflict and learn how to manage and resolve it. The first step to managing conflict is to reflect on your own experiences and understand your personal approach to conflict. After learning their own preferred style, effective leaders learn to understand the styles of others and adapt their approaches accordingly. They observe and practice de-escalating situations and coaching people toward resolution. Fortunately, managing conflict is not something to be feared; rather, it is something that can be learned and practiced. It just takes time.
The model of conflict resolution presented has been used by informal and formal nurse leaders in a variety of health care environments. This section describes the model and helps the reader understand conflict and the five different approaches to managing conflict. Each approach is then applied to hypothetical nursing situations or environments, to help the reader see the practical use of the theory in nursing. A review of the evidence concludes the chapter.
For centuries, people accepted adversarial disputes and harsh conflict as a by-product of human nature. This acceptance caused people to analyze only how conflict could be resolved, that is, how they could make it go away. In the past decade or two, many people have started to also ask, “Why is conflict resolved in that way?” and, “Might there be a better way?”
If we are to make progress toward better conflict resolution, it is imperative that we understand why conflicts arise and how people traditionally have reacted to conflict situations. When we are able to analyze more clearly the causes of disputes, we will be able to determine better what processes need to be implemented to produce a more positive outcome to the conflict.
Four Major Types of Conflict
In order to analyze how to transform destructive conflict into a dispute with a positive outcome, let us begin by exploring the four major types of conflict (categorized by cause): data conflicts, relationship conflicts, value conflicts, and structural conflicts.
Data conflicts occur when people lack the information necessary to make wise decisions, are misinformed, disagree over which data are relevant, interpret information differently, or have competing assessment procedures. This type of conflict is usually the simplest to overcome, by adopting a process to ensure both parties perceive the data in the same way.
These problems often result in what have been called unrealistic or unnecessary conflicts since they may occur even when objective pre-conditions for conflict, such as limited resources or mutually exclusive goals, are not present. They occur due to the presence of strong emotion (e.g., jealousy, mistrust, hatred) and are created from perceptions, poor communication, stereotypes, and so on. Relationship conflicts often fuel disputes, causing them to escalate.
This type of conflict is caused by perceived or actual incompatible value systems. Values are beliefs people use to give meaning to life and to explain what is good, bad, right, or wrong. Value conflicts occur only when people attempt to force one’s set of values on another or lay claim to exclusive value systems, which do not allow for divergent beliefs.
Structural conflicts are caused by oppressive patterns of human relationships. These patterns are often shaped by forces external to the people in dispute. Often, the disputants have no reason to be in conflict other than the structural problem that is imposed on their relationship. Often, these conflicts can be overcome by identifying the structural problem and working to change it. Acceptance of the status quo can perpetuate structural conflict.
It is important to understand what type of conflict (data, value, relationship, or structural) you are dealing with before you can effectively work toward a resolution. The solution for each type of conflict will be different and must suit the type of conflict you are addressing. For example, it would be unlikely that you would resolve a relationship problem with a data solution.
Data and structural conflicts have external sources of conflict and are typically easier to resolve; this is done by changing something in the external environment. Conversely, relationship and value conflicts relate to internal sources of conflict and can be much more difficult to resolve. Understanding relationship and value conflicts requires a deep internal awareness and empathy for others. Resolving relationship and value conflicts may significantly challenge an individual’s personal perspectives, which generally makes the process more difficult. Typically, when we are under stress or in an escalated conflict we reach for data or structural solutions to resolve the conflict as these solutions require less time and effort.
Dealing with Conflict—Different Approaches
Every individual or group manages conflict differently. In the 1970s, consultants Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph H. Kilmann developed a tool for analyzing the approaches to conflict resolution. This tool is called the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) (Kilmann Diagnostics, 2017).
suggest that in a conflict situation, a person’s behavior can be assessed on two factors:
- Commitment to goals or assertiveness—the extent to which an individual (or a group) attempts to satisfy his or her own concerns or goals.
- Commitment to relationships or cooperation—the extent to which an individual (or a group) attempts to satisfy the concerns of the other party, and the importance of the relationship with the other party.
Thomas and Kilmann use these factors to explain the five different approaches to dealing with conflict: avoiding, competing, accommodating, compromising, and collaborating. There is an appropriate time to use each approach in dealing with conflict. While most people will use different methods in various circumstances, we all tend to have a more dominant approach that feels most comfortable. One approach is not necessarily better than another and all approaches can be learned and utilized. To most effectively deal with conflict, it is important to analyze the situation and determine which approach is most appropriate.
Let’s take a closer look at each approach and when to use it.
An avoidance approach demonstrates a low commitment to both goals and relationships. This is the most common method of dealing with conflict, especially by people who view conflict negatively.
Types of avoidance include:
- Physical and/or mental withdrawal
- Blaming or minimizing
- Denial that a problem exists or changing the subject
- Postponement to a more appropriate time
- Use of emotions (tears, anger, etc.)
What may result from avoidance:
- The dispute is not resolved, or may build up and eventually explode
- Frustration over the dispute may lead to complaining, discontentment, or talking back
- Stress spreads to other parties (e.g., coworkers, family)
When might avoidance be an appropriate approach to conflict in a hospital or clinic setting?
In a hospital or clinical setting, there may be times when it is appropriate to avoid conflict. For example, on a particularly busy day in the emergency room, when a patient in life-threatening condition has just been received, the attending doctor may bark directions at the assisting nurses to get equipment. The nurses may feel offended by the doctor’s actions; however, it may be appropriate for the nurses to avoid the conflict at that moment given the emergency situation. The nurse, if he or she felt it was inappropriate behavior by the doctor, could then deal with the conflict after the patient has been stabilized.
When might avoidance be an inappropriate approach to conflict in a hospital or clinic setting?
Avoiding the conflict may be inappropriate if that same doctor continues to bark directions at the nursing staff in non-emergency situations, such as during debrief of a surgery, or when communicating non-emergency instructions. When the nurses and doctor have to continue a working relationship, avoiding the continuing conflict will no longer be appropriate.
A competing approach to conflict demonstrates a high commitment to goals and a low commitment to relationships. Individuals who use the competing approach pursue their own goals at the other party’s expense. People taking this approach will use whatever power is necessary to win. It may display as defending a position, interest, or value that you believe to be correct. Competing approaches are often supported by structures (courts, legislatures, sales quotas, etc.) and can be initiated by the actions of one party. Competition may be appropriate or inappropriate (as defined by the expectations of the relationship).
Types of competition include:
- Power of authority, position, or majority
- Power of persuasion
- Pressure techniques (e.g., threats, force, intimidation)
- Disguising the issue
What may result from competition:
- The conflict may escalate or the other party may withdraw
- Reduces the quality and durability of agreement
- Assumes no reciprocating power will come from the other side; people tend to reach for whatever power they have when threatened
- Increases the likelihood of future problems between parties
- Restricts communication and decreases trust
A completing approach to conflict may be appropriate in a hospital or clinic setting if you recognize that another nurse has made an error in how much medication to administer to a patient. You recognize this mistake prior to the nurse entering the patient’s room so you approach the nurse, take the medication out of his or her hands, and place the correct dosage. The goal of patient safety outweighs the commitment to the relationship with that nurse in this case.
When might a competing approach to conflict be inappropriate in a hospital or clinic setting?
It would be inappropriate to continue to be competitive when you debrief with the nurse about the dangers of medication errors and the system of double checking dosage amounts. The goal at this point is to enhance the learning of that nurse as well as to build trust in your relationship as colleagues. A different approach is needed.
Accommodating demonstrates a low commitment to goals and high commitment to relationship. This approach is the opposite of competing. It occurs when a person ignores or overrides their own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other party. An accommodating approach is used to establish reciprocal adaptations or adjustments. This could be a hopeful outcome for those who take an accommodating approach, but when the other party does not reciprocate, conflict can result. Others may view those who use the accommodating approach heavily as “that is the way they are” and don’t need anything in return. Accommodators typically will not ask for anything in return. Accommodators tend to get resentful when a reciprocal relationship isn’t established. Once resentment grows, people who rely on the accommodating approach often shift to a competing approach because they are tired of being “used.” This leads to confusion and conflict.
Types of accommodation:
- Playing down the conflict to maintain surface harmony
- Yielding to the other point of view
What may result from accommodation:
- Builds relationships that will allow you to be more effective in future problem solving
- Increases the chances that the other party may be more accommodating to your needs in the future
- Does not improve communication
When might accommodation be an appropriate approach to conflict in a hospital or clinic setting?
It may be appropriate to use an accommodating approach when, for example, one of the nurses on your shift has a particularly difficult patient who is taking up a lot of time and effort. Seeing that the nurse is having difficulty, you take on some of her or his tasks. This increases your workload for a period of time, but it allows your colleague the time needed to deal with the difficult patient.
When might accommodation be an inappropriate approach to conflict in a hospital or clinic setting?
This approach may no longer be appropriate if that same nurse expects you to continue to cover his or her tasks after the situation with the difficult patient has been resolved.
A compromising approach strikes a balance between a commitment to goals and a commitment to relationships. The objective of a compromising approach is a quick solution that will work for both parties. Usually it involves both parties giving up something and meeting in the middle. Compromising is often used in labor negotiations, as typically there are multiple issues to resolve in a short period of time.
Types of compromising:
- Splitting the difference
- Exchanging concessions
- Finding middle ground
What may result from compromising:
- Both parties may feel they lost the battle and feel the need to get even next time.
- No relationship is established although it should also not cause relationship to deteriorate.
- Danger of stalemate
- Does not explore the issue in any depth
When might compromise be an appropriate approach to conflict in a hospital or clinic setting?
You are currently on shift with another nurse that does the bare minimum and rarely likes to help his or her colleagues out. It is two hours since lunch and one of your hyperglycemic patients have not received their lunch tray. You approach your colleague and ask him or her to go look for the tray while you draw blood from a patient for them. The other nurse agrees as he or she has been having difficulty with the patient that needs a blood draw.
When might a compromise be an inappropriate approach to conflict in a hospital or clinic setting?
It would be inappropriate to continue to ask the nurse to do tasks for you that are less appealing than the tasks you take on.
Collaborating is an approach that demonstrates a high commitment to goals and also a high commitment to relationships. This approach is used in an attempt to meet concerns of all parties. Trust and willingness for risk is required for this approach to be effective.
Types of collaboration:
- Maximizing use of fixed resources
- Working to increase resources
- Listening and communicating to promote understanding of interests and values
- Learning from each other’s insight
What may result from collaboration:
- Builds relationships and improves potential for future problem solving
- Promotes creative solutions
When might collaboration be an appropriate approach to conflict in a hospital or clinic setting?
It may be appropriate to use collaboration in a hospital or clinic setting when discussing vacation cover off with team members at a team meeting. During a team meeting, time is available to discuss and focus on what is important for each member of the team.
When might collaboration be an inappropriate approach to conflict in a hospital or clinic setting?
Collaboration would be inappropriate in a discussion of a new policy that has been put in place if the team has little influence in making adjustments.
What Does Each Approach Need?
There are times when others may take an approach that is not helpful to the situation. However, the only person that you can control in a conflict is yourself. It is important to be flexible and shift your approach according to the situation and the other people with whom you are working. When someone else is taking an approach that is not beneficial to the situation, it is critical to understand what needs underlie the decision to take that approach. Here are a few examples:
- Avoiders may need to feel physically and emotionally safe. When dealing with avoiders, try taking the time to assure them that they are going to be heard and listened to.
- Competitors may need to feel that something will be accomplished in order to meet their goals. When dealing with competitors, say for example, “We will work out a solution; it may take some time for us to get there.”
- Compromisers may need to know that they will get something later. When dealing with compromisers, say for example, “We will go to this movie tonight, and next week you can pick.” (Be true to your word.)
- Accommodators may need to know that no matter what happens during the conversation, your relationship will remain intact. When dealing with accommodators, say for example, “This will not affect our relationship or how we work together.”
- Collaborators may need to know what you want before they are comfortable sharing their needs. When dealing with collaborators, say for example, “I need this, this, and this. . . . What do you need?”
All approaches to conflict can be appropriate at some times, and there are times when they can be overused. It is important to take the time to consider which approach would be most beneficial to the situation in question. Taking the wrong approach can escalate conflict, damage relationships, and reduce your ability to effectively meet goals. The right approach will build trust in relationships, accomplish goals, and de-escalate conflict.
Everyone has the capacity to use each approach to conflict and to shift from his or her natural style as needed. We react with our most dominant style when we are under stress, but other styles can be learned and applied with practice and self-awareness. When dealing with others who may not have developed their capacity to shift from their preferred style of conflict, it is important to listen for their underlying needs. By understanding the needs that exist beneath the surface of the conflict, you can work with the other person toward a common goal.
Take the self-assessment above to determine your conflict management style. Keep in mind that one style of conflict management is not necessarily better than another; each style has pros and cons, and each can be useful depending on the situation.
competitive or opposing action of incompatibles : antagonistic state or action (as of divergent ideas, interests, or persons) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conflict