Page 202 - Becoming a Successful Manager

Resolving Confl icts 193

I deserve. Would you please ‘unconfuse’ me?” In this way,
you force that person to take responsibility for resolving your
problem.
Another tack might be, “If what you’re saying is true, then
please help me understand why my last two phone calls were not
returned?” Facts can be useful in bringing antagonists closer
to concurrence.

• Be fl exible. In the interest of ensuring confl icting parties
achieve their mutual objectives, both will have to give a little—
but not grudgingly. Giving is not the same as giving up. When
you give, it’s a voluntary gesture of goodwill, whereas giving up
is an admission of weakness or failure. Giving up is usually done

with resentment, while giving reflects a caring attitude. You can
demonstrate this by taking small, nonthreatening steps, agree-
able to both parties, that will lead to a desirable outcome.

• Define the components of a confl ict. A frequently voiced

complaint between confl icting parties is, “I can’t work with that
person because we have a personality confl ict.” This comment
is meaningless until the specific objection is made clear. What

does it mean when two people have a “personality confl ict”?
What are the components of that confl ict? Only when the con-
fl ict is defi ned in terms of what the parties need that they’re not
getting from each other can they settle it.

• Focus on mutual objectives, not on personalities. To move
in a productive direction, answer this question: What specifi -
cally do we need when we get to the other side of this confl ict?
More than likely, it is not to abuse the other person. Stick to
understanding and resolving the difference without making it
personal.