Managing Conflict

Cant We All Just Get Along?
The Art and Skill of Managing Conflict
Paul R Tibbles
2008
Page 2
INTRODUCTION
Objectives
Introduction
1. Understand the nature of conflict and your individual emotional styles.

2. Understand conflict interaction and styles of resolving conflict.
3. Be able to identify and negotiate solutions satisfactory to all involved.
Organized Christian religions refer to it as temperance. The

ancient Greeks called it sophrosyne. Eastern thought symbolizes
it in the Yin-Yang. Whatever you call it or however you show it,
the idea focuses on moderation, on finding the balance between
emotional extremes, or with sophrosyne, on conducting your life
with care and intelligence.
Conflict is natural and normal; a part of everything around us, a creator and destroyer.
How we manage conflict and the corresponding emotionswith or without
temperance, sophrosyne, and balancebecomes the issue. This paper focuses on
the concept of conflict, and how to effectively negotiate and resolve conflict situations.
Significance
Anger is the mood people are worst at controlling (Tice & Baumeister, 1989).
Anger builds on anger: When we are already angry, subsequent emotions grow in
intensity (Zillman, 1989).
The Gottman Ratio: Marital partners who have an equal number of positive and
negative interactions perceive their marriage in negative terms. The Gottman ratio
suggests a ratio of five or six positive interactions for every negative interaction for a
marriage to be considered satisfying (Gottman, 1994).
For every 100 marriages in 2006 there were roughly 50 divorces (Center for Disease
Control, 2007).
Marital quality declinessinks rapidlyimmediately after the wedding (and the
decline is usually equally perceived as such by both husband and wife) (Kurdek, 1998)
Money is the one thing that people say they argue about most in marriage, followed by
children (Stanley & Markman, 1997). But, there is a lot of reason to believe that what
couples argue about is not as important as how they argue (Markman, Stanley, &
Blumberg, 1994) (Quoted from: Americans for Divorce Reform, 2008).
More than half a million American women are victims of nonfatal violence committed by
an intimate partner each year (US Bureau of Justice, 2003).
Scope/
Limitations
This paper focuses on, and is limited to verbal conflict in relationships. It does not
include physical violence in relationships.
You can avoid fighting when you plan the right strategy before the battle.
Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Page 3
BACKGROUND
Communication
Climate
Communication climate is simply the emotional tone of the relationship: Positive or

Negative. The climate begins to develop the moment of that firstinitialinteraction,
and immediately takes on a life of its own in a reciprocating pattern or selfperpetuating spiral (negative leads to more negative and vice versa, or what goes
around, comes around) (Adler and Proctor, 2007).
Gottman (1994) argues that a one-to-one ratio of positive and negative emotions
within a relationship makes for a negative relationship, and that it takes more like five
positive things to one negative for participants in a relationship to view it as positive.
Are your relationships
Relationship
Quality
Climate and
Conflict
Sunny
or Stormy?
Relational quality plays a large role in ongoing communication climate. There are five
considerations that affect the quality of a romantic or friend relationship. They are:
Equity
The level of fairness, justice, and reciprocity between the

individuals within the relationship.
Social
Exchange
Theory
In a relationship we seek the greatest amount of reward with the

least amount of cost. When costs outweigh rewards (i.e., when
the ratio of positive to negative emotions goes down), the
relationship is in trouble.
Relational
Commitment
The extent to which you want to remain in the relationship

indefinitely. Includes the level of satisfaction and trust, the equality
of influence and power, and the level of cooperation.
Relational
Dialectics
The balance of normal tensions that exist in a relationship, and

how we negotiate those. Includes the level between connection
and autonomy, the level of predictability versus novelty, and the
level of openess verus closedness.
Self
Disclosure
For a relationship to grow, or develop beyond a superficial level, it

is necessary to reveal yourself to friends/partner. Variables to the
level of disclosure include the risks and rewards, the
appropriateness of the disclosure, and the level of reciprocity from
the friend/partner.
Self-perpetuating spirals can be positive and confirm, or be negative and disconfirm

the relationship.
Escalatory conflict spirals means that continuing disconfirming messages build on and
perpetuate one another. One conflict situation leads to another.
De-escalatory conflict spirals mean the two of you lose interest, lessen dependence on
each other, withdraw, and end the relationship.
Page 4
BACKGROUND, continued
Climate,
Conflict and
Power
Power and conflict go hand in hand. Your level of power and how it is used has a
significant affect on the communication climate.
Foucault (1990) argues that power is in everything, everywhere, all the time, and that
where there is power there is simaltanious resistance to that power.
From a relational perspective, power is the ability to influence decisions, the control of
resources (i.e., money, time), and the ability to affect the others behavior.
Emotional
Skills
From work on Emotional Intelligence (EQ), the common mode of operation is to first
react to feelings, then move into rational thought.
Personal skill in EQ is being able to move into rational thought before taking any kind
of action. Social skill in EQ is being able to calm distressing emotions in others.
Emotional Brilliance is being able to effectively handle someone at the peak of rage.
This comes, in part, from being a skilled listener (Goleman, 1995).
Face
From sef-perception, self-awareness, and identity, face is our

personality; the mask, the performance we show the world.
Facework is maintaining that image.
Face threatening acts are messages from another that challenge
the image we perform or present.
Saving face is protecting that image from threats. Saving face can come from you
(defending yourself) or the other (the other can consciously protect rather than threaten
your image in a potentially negative situation).
A stormy climate, disconfirming messages, and face threatening acts, like criticism and
contempt, lead to defensiveness
Defensiveness
Defensiveness is a warning sign that the relationship is in trouble. It broadly means

that we are protecting ourself from an attack. Face threatening acts create cognitive
dissonance: A conflict in thinking about the inconsistency of multiple feelings,
messages, behavoirs, etc.
There are three classic defensive reactions:
Attacking
the Critic
Meaning to counterattack, usually through verbal aggression

(lashing out at the person rather than dealing with the issue), or
sarcasm (couching the attack in humor or wit).
Distorting
Critical
Information
Meaning to rationalize (seemingly logical explanation),

compensate (focus on other strengths to justify this issue), or
regress (playing the victim or helpless card).
Avoiding
Meaning to stay away from the person/people who deliver the

negative message (physical avoidance), or mentally block the
conflict (repression), or pretend you dont care (apathy), or take it
out on someone else (displacement).
Page 5
BACKGROUND, continued
Confirming and
Disconfirming
Communication
Confirming and disconfirming communication is an indicator of how you do or dont

value the relationship and other person in the relationship.
Confirming/Valuing Communication: 3 Levels
Recognition
The basic act of responding to the other person (responding to

phone calls, emails, text messages spending quality time
with them).
Acknowlegment
Actively listening, discussing ideas and feelings.
Endorsement
Agree with the other, supporting them and showing their

importance.
Disconfirming/De-valuing Communication: 7 Types

Impervious
Responses
Ignoring the other person (not responding).
Verbal Abuse
Direct or indirect communication that causes psychological pain

(i.e., Direct = Youre stupid, Indirect = Malicioius humor or
sarcasm: Come here, fatso).
Generalized
Complaining
Broad observations about (or imply) personality or character

faults (i.e., I wish you would be more friendly!) (Good: Specific
discussions about specific actions or behaivor).
Irrelevant
Responses
Feedback that has no relationship to the senders original

message (She: Ive had a really bad day. He: Great weather
today.).
Impersonal
Responses
Clichs and superficial feedback that avoids the specifics of the

original message (i.e., Ah yes, its a sign of the times).
Ambiguous
Responses
Messages with more than one meaning
Incongruous
Messages that deny or contradict each other (i.e., nonverbal
Responses
messages that do not support the verbal).
Adapted from Cissna & Seiberg (1995), as found in Adler & Proctor (2007)
Bad Listening Habits are also disconfirming and de-valuing. See Appendix E.
Criticism
Being criticised can be painful. It is common to take criticism as rejection and either
become defensive and use aggressive face saving strategies, or withdraw and avoid
issues and people. Since this is a learned response from childhood, it can be difficult
to change. An emotionally healthy response is to not take criticism as rejection, but as
a realization that cricism is a manifestation of the others feelings and emotions based
on your specific behaviors (and therefor, not an attack on your self seteem), and as an
opportunity to grow and develop the relationship.
How do you handle conflict situations? Are you

Constructive (cooperative, respectful, face-saving, confirming, non-defensive, thoughtful)?
or
Destructive (alianating, disrespectful, face-threatening, disconfirming, defensive, reactionary)?
Page 6
CONFLICT INTRODUCTION
Definition
Conflict takes many forms. First, it is pervasive and natural (in everything, everywhere).
Second, it is an explict disagreement (who is going to wash the dishes?). Third, it is an
act of hostility (confrontational attack). Fourth, it can be a struggle over goals and
resources (what will you do with the tax refund?) (Cupach & Canary, 1997)
While somewhat limiting, perhaps the most commonly used definition of conflict in
interpersonal communication comes from Hocker and Wilmont (1985): An expressed
struggle between at least two interdependent parties who perceive incompatible goals,
scarece resources, and interference from the other party in achieving their goals.
Levels
There are three basic levels of conflict:

Specific
Behaviors
What to watch on television, which way the toilet paper roll

rolls
Relational
Norms and
Roles
Who cooks and who cleans, how much time you spend
together, how often and how late you can go/stay out with other
friends
Personal
Characteristics
and Attitudes
Religious differences, maturity level, annoying habits
Braiker and Kelley (1979) as found in Cupach & Canary (1997)

Types of
Conflict
Exercise A
According to Deutsch (1973), there are five different types of conflict:

Parallel
An actual conflict, accurately understood by both parties (you

both agree that there is a conflict, and both agree on what the
conflict is about).
Displace
An actual conflict, but not accurately understood by one or both

parties (focusing on a sympton of a deeper issue rather than
the actual issue: he is upset because you have become
withdrawn. That is only a sympton. What is the reason you
have become withdrawn and quiet?)
Misattributed
An actual conflict, but associated with, or blamed on, the wrong

person (venting or taking it out on someone other than the
person who actually made you mad).
Latent
An actual conflict, but neither party sees it yet (common in

relationships where you each have very different values and
expectations about the relationship going into it, but either dont
see it, avoid it, or think it will change over time.
False
An error in perception, a misunderstanding usually through lack

of, or mis-communication (you make an assumption and dont
verify its accuracyor lack of accuracy).
Determine the levels and types of conflict on a series of short scenarios at the end of
this packet.
Page 7
CONFLICT INTRODUCTION, continued

Stages of
Conflict
There are five stages of conflict. The Distal and Proximal Context lead up to the
conflict episode, then the actual episode interaction, followed by the proximal and
distal outcomes after the episode.
Distal Context is about your personality and experiences, Proximal Context are events,
behaviors, attitudes, and immediate emotions that lead up to the conflict. Proximal
outcomes are the immediate, perhaps emotional aftermath of the episode. Distal
outcomes relate to the long term effects of the conflict. Below is a table of the stages
with a brief list of items that go into or apply to that stage.
Distal
Context
Culture/ Social
Construction
Your
Personality/
Dispositions
Relationship
History
Prior Conflict
Outcomes
Proximal
Context
Conflict
Interaction
Your Goals
Tactics
Relational
Norms/ Roles
Strategies
Emotional
States
Attributions
(Attribution
Errors)
Styles
Patterns
Proximal
Outcomes
Personal
Satisfaction
Relational
Development
Relational
Satisfaction
Mental Health
Emotional
States
Attributions
(Attribution
Errors)
Knowledge
& Skill
Other Factors
that Influence
Conflict
Interaction
Distal
Outcomes
Physical
Health (Stress,
Blood
Pressure)
Cultural/Social
Norms
Knowledge
& Skill
Cupach & Canary (1997)
Level of Argumentativeness: How strongly you verbally attack the positions, behaviors,
and attitudes of others.
Taking It Personally: How strongly you feel personally threatened, devalued,
persecuted, damaged and more from conflict interaction.
Attribution Errors/Locus of Control: External locus says success and failure is due to
chance, fate, or actions of others. Internal locus says success and failure is due to
your own effort, knowledge, and skill. A Defensive External locus says we take credit
for success and blame failures on chance, fate, or others actions.
Emotional Intelligence: Level of skill in managing emotions.
Relational quality: Equity, social exchange, commitment, dialectics, self disclosure.
Level of Intimacy: The more intimate you are, the more interdependent you become,
which means that more coordination is needed and more knowledge of each other, and
therefore the potential exists for more conflict.
Communication Style: Calm and rational, nagging, the silent treatment, hold a knock
down-drag out argument
Gender: Masculine stereotypes are to be aggressive and competitive while the
feminine stereotypes are to be nurturing and cooperative.
Page 8
CONFLICT INTRODUCTION, continued

Control Drama
Control dramas are ingrained defensive behaviors, originating in our learned

personality development as children, through experimenting to find what worked best
in responding to our parents, other authority figures, and friends, and thus part of the
Distal Context stage. These dramas are used to defend and protect, or to create and
maintain a specific impression. As we found the behaviors that worked to our
advantage, we reused them until they become a natural part of our personality.
There are several ways to view control dramas. The originating work came from
psychiatrist Eric Berne in the 1950s, out of which came the psychiatric practice of
Transactional Analysis and his best selling book Games People Play. These were
adapted by psychiatrist James Redfield in his fiction novel The Celestine Prophecy as
being Aloof, the Interrogator, the Intimidator, and Poor Me (see Appendix A) (Redfield,
1993).
Psychotherapist Virginia Satir, in work on Family Therapy during the 1960s suggested
that there are modes we operate under to control a stressful situation and protect or
face. The Satir modes are Blamer, Placater, the Computer, Distracter, and Leveler
(see Appendix B) (Satir, 1964).
Hidden agendas are another way to look at control drama. For example, you have
been going through a very rough breakup with your romantic partner, with lots of
conflict. Do you complain to your other friends about how bad the partner is (Im Good
but youre not)? Do you relate this to previous breakups and ask why this always
happens to you (Im helpless)? Perhaps you act like you dont care (Im tough). These
are three of eight basic hidden agendas (see Appendix C) (McKay, Davis, & Fanning,
1983).
Control drama can be easy to miss. We unintentionally fall into the trap, or for a short
time some of them can seem charming or appealing. For example the victim/poor me
tends to get our emotional supportfor awhile. When perpetually applied, however,
we can grow wary of them and the drama becomes irritating.
Satir (1964) has several meta principles related to her modes. They are:
1. Anything you feed will grow (escalating spirals: validating the behavior causes
the behavior to continue).
2. Anything you starve, smother, or neglect will fester or die (by not buying into
the drama, it will go away).
3. Every language interaction is an interactive feedback loop (we mutually
influence each other).
4. The only meaning an utterance has in the real world is the meaning the
listener understands it to have.
Page 9
CONFLICT INTERACTION EPISODES

Exercise B
Complete the Putnam/Wilson Conflict Behavior Scale at the end of this packet.
Topics of
Conflict
What doesnt have the potential to cause a fight or make you upset? Conflict can
come from anything, anywhere, at anytime.
Kurdek (1994) has organized topics into six general areas. They are:
1. Power (being overly critical, lack of equity in the relationship)
2. Social Issues (politics, personal values)
3. Personal Flaws (driving style, drug/alcohol addiction)
4. Distrust (lying, jealousy)
5. Intimacy (sex, lack of intimacy, emotional distance)
6. Personal Distance (absence due to outside commitments)
In Kurdeks work, the levels of conflict related to power and intimacy were the strongest
indicators of level of relational satisfaction.
Conflict
Interaction
Episodes
In an actual conflict episode, according to Cupach and Canary (1997), there are four
levels of interaction. Each level will be discussed in detail, below. The levels are:
1. Tactics: Specific actions in a specific moment during the episode
2. Strategies: Combining tactics in a coherent game plan over the course of the
episode
3. Styles: Habitual methods, tendencies, and preferences for handling conflict
4. Patterns: How we influence each other in a conflict episode
Tactics
There are two dimensions to tactics. The first dimension is disagreeableness: how
unpleasant and straining or how pleasant and relaxed the tactic is. The second
dimension is activeness: How responsive and direct or passive and indirect the tactic is
(Assertive or Passive Aggressive?).
As with the infinitive number of topics that can cause conflict, there are countless
tactics that can be used. Sillars (1980) classifies tactics from denial through nonconfrontational to confrontational, to conciliatory. The classifications are found in
Appendix D.
Strategies
There are three general strategies to handling conflict.

Integration means working and cooperating with the other party to find common
ground. Tactics in this strategy include seeking more information, mutually defining the
issue, finding areas of commonality, and negotiating fair solutions.
Distribution means working against the other party through competition. Tactics
include threats, demands, intimidation, sarcasm, and personal attacks.
Avoidance means not dealing with the issue. Tactics include denying the conflict,
withdrawing from the interaction, and withholding complaints.
Page 10
CONFLICT INTERACTION EPISODES, continued

Styles
There are several variations on views of style; our habitual methods for dealing with
conflict. An early version uses the terms aggressive, assertive, and passive (McKay,
Davis, & Fanning; 1983). More recently, the terms confrontational, non-confrontational,
and cooperative have become popular (Beebe, Beebe, & Ivy; 2007).
In a different view of styles, Hocker & Wilmont (1985) use a grid to look at five types of
style. The X-Axis is the level of concern for self (the extent to which you wish to satisfy
your own goals), the Y-Axis is the level of concern for the other person (the extent to
which you are willing to satisfy the other persons goals). From this, there are five
styles of conflict management:
1. Avoiding (low concern for self, low concern for the other): withhold complaints
and withdraw from conflict situations.
2. Dominating (high concern for self, low concern for other): competitive and
power oriented; win-lose mentality.
3. Obliging (low concern for self, high concern for other): accommodating the
other at the expense of your own goals
4. Compromising (mid level concern for both): finding middle ground
5. Integrating/Collaborating (high concern for self, high concern for other):
problem solving; win-win mentality
While compromise generally gets seen as a positive style, by its nature it means that
each party has given up something to achieve that agreement. So on one level it is a
win-win style, but at the same time you both lose something. Hocker and Wilmont
argue that integrating and collaborating has the highest rewards. This win-win style
would be both a product and promoter of a quality, satisfying relationship.
Page 11
CONFLICT INTERACTION EPISODES, continued
Patterns
Patterns relate to how we influence each other in an interaction. There are three basic
patterns.
Reciprocal/Symmetrical: We mirror the behaviors of the other. If this is a conscious
choice, it can be used to control and change the direction of tactics, strategies, and
styles (pacing is one form of this). More often, it is unconscious. In this event, we
match emotion for emotion, tactic for tactic, which then escalates in intensity (anger
breeds even more anger), becoming negative and disconfirming the relationship.
Complementary: We perform the opposite behavior of the other. Depending on the
emotion and tactic this may or may not be positive. If one attacks, the other defends.
If one demands, the other gives in.
Topical Continuity: This has to do with the number of different issues raised in a single
conflict interaction. Meaning, you get into an argument over one thing and all of a
sudden a number of old issues get added to it. This distracts from the current issue
and is indicative of more fundamental relational issues.
Conflict Rituals
Related to patterns is the idea that our conflicts, from proximal influences through the
interaction episode to the proximal outcomes become ritualistic, repetitive patterns of
interaction: a common, regular trigger (money, kids, cleaning) of conflict occurs and
we respond the same way every time, and our partner then responds to us in the same
way every time (escalating spirals).
Adler & Proctor (2007)
Intimacy and
Aggression in
Styles and
Patterns
Another way to look at styles and patterns is in the amount of relational intimacy and
aggression in the interaction. There are four relational scenarios, and are very
revealing to the overall quality of the relationship:
Nonintimate-Aggressive: Argue frequently in a self-serving manner (Im not going to
that stupid party). Conflict does not resolve issues and is destructive to the
relationship.
Nonintimate-Nonaggressive: Avoid conflict at all costs. Issues go unresolved and while
the avoidance can make for a stable, calm relationship, the parties in the relationship
feel unsatisfied.
Intimate-Aggressive: Argue intensely and passionately. All else being positive
(cooperative, respectful, face-saving, confirming, non-defensive, thoughtful) this style
can be effective and appropiate. Making up afterward has the potential for being just
as intense.
Intimate-Nonaggressive: The parties in the relationship are able to confront each other
on isses in a positive, constructive manner without negatively affecting the relationship.
Adler & Proctor (2007)
Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory.
Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.
Page 12
CONFLICT COMMUNICATION
Overview
There are broad communication skills that cover most if not all conflict and non-conflict
situations. This includes language, nonverbal skills, active listening, and whole
messages. Of course, before these skills can be applied, you must have a desire to
handle conflict constructively rather than destructively.
Clarifying
Language
The basics of verbal communication include issues surrounding the abstraction level of
words, the directness of a given message, and the connotative level of a word or
message. From these come a variety of language errors, and clarifying tools for
ensuring that the message you have received, or are sending, is accurate and
complete.
Nonverbal
Skills
Error
Example and Clarifying Question
Deletion
Im disgusted (About what or whom?)
Vague Verbs
She made me lose (How did she make you lose?)
Vague
Pronouns
They say a housing shortage is coming (Who are they?)
Nominalizations
The marriage is empty (What makes you feel empty?)
Imposed Limits
You cant succeed (What or who would stop me?)
Absolutes
Im always left out (Always? Youve never been included in

anything?)
Imposed Values
Conservatives are idiots (To whom are their beliefs idiotic?)
Cause and
Effect Errors
Youve made me very unhappy (What have I done to make

you unhappy?)
Mind Reading
I can tell that she is jealous of me (How can you tell?)
Presuppositions
If you were a more efficient worker, you wouldnt have been

fired (Specifically how am I an inefficient worker?)
McKay, Davis, & Fanning (1983)
What we saythe words we useonly accounts for about 7% of an overall message

(Mehrabian, 1970). The receiver puts much more value and believability on how you
say it (what your voice sounds like: 38%) and the face and body movements when you
deliver that message (what you look like: 55%). In any communication it is important to
be sure the nonverbal and verbal match.
Nonverbal messages show how involved you are in the interaction. A soft, slow voice
and minimal gestures indicate a focus on content. A loud, fast voice and animated
gestures can mean the sender is more focused on emotional reactions. Facing each
other directly, open posture (arms NOT crossed) and facially animated shows concern
and support for the other. Crossed arms, blank stares, and a flat vocal tone suggest a
lack of involvement and support for the other.
Nonverbal messages also reinforce conflict strategies: Avoidance is seen in lack of eye
contact and a closed posture. Integration is seen in more eye contact, faster response,
and longer messages. Distributive strategies are seen in a faster rate of speech.
CONFLICT COMMUNICATION, continued
Active
Listening
Page 13
A key method of effectively managing conflict is to effectively

listen from both a discriminative and empathic or active style.
There are three parts to active listening. They are
understanding, probing, and supporting.
(McKay, Davis, & Fanning, 1983)
Understanding
Understanding in this sense means to check perceptions and

comprehension, by Paraphrasing: State in your own words what
the speaker said: "What I hear you saying is" Or "In other
words, you" Paraphrasing helps keep the listener focused on
the speaker (other focused).
Understanding also requires that you be open and not
judgmental: Listen from the speakers point of view, respect
differences, beware of personal biases, avoid judgments,
comparing, and finding fault. Be interested, focus on the
speaker.
Probing
Probing means to seek more information. There are three

simple ways to probe:
Encourage the speaker: "It doesnt sound like you felt you had
any other choice."
Clarify the message: "Can you give me an example of what you
mean?"
Explore the meaning: "Can you think of some ways to deal with
the problem?"
Supporting
Support means to acknowledge the speaker, their message, and

the meanings that get produced in the interaction. This includes:
Paying attention to both the verbal and nonverbal statements.
Be empathetic; Validate the person, but do not give advice: "I
can see how much that bothers you." NOT "You really need to
get over it." "What do you think you should do?" NOT "You
should just do it."
Give feedback - share what the speaker and message did for
you (Your reaction to the message - what you thought, felt,
sensed - without being judgmental or evaluative): "I" statements:
"I get the feeling there might be more to the problem." Or "I'm
not sure I understand, is this what you mean?
Support helps the speaker understand the effect of the
message, verifies accuracy of meaning, and eliminates
miscommunication.
Bad Listening Habits: When a friend comes to you with a problem do you immediately
give them advice? Is that active listening? When a friend shares a personal story do
you immediately relate that to your own experience? Is that active listening? Appendix
E is a list of our common bad habits in active listening. Which one do you use the
most?
CONFLICT COMMUNICATION, continued

Whole
Messages
Page 14
A whole message works on a variety of communication levels from the simple

exchange of information to the most heated argument. In fact, it should make the most
heated argument less heated, because it builds a constructive atmosphere to conflict
management. There are four parts to a whole message. Whole Messages require all
4 categories. Contaminated messagesmessages missing one or more partsare
left open to connotation, interpretation, assumptions, and confusion.
Observations
Objective Facts: You threw your socks on the floor again
Thoughts
Subjective Conclusions, Inferences, Value Judgments: When

you do that I think you are a slob.
Feelings
Emotions: Its irritating to me to have to step over them.
Needs
Your wants: Can you please put them in the hamper when you
take them off!
Rules for effective expression:

Messages must begin with I statements (I feel or I think). Taking ownership
and responsibility for your thoughts and feelings reduces defensiveness.
Messages should be direct (dont assume receiver knows what you think or want
know when something needs to be said)
Classic problem: you dont express yourself, suffer in silence, and get resentful
in the process in spite of the fact that they dont have a clue.
Messages should be immediate (with consideration to time and place appropriateness,
the longer you wait, the more the emotion builds, and leads to passive-aggressiveness
or a gunnysacked blow up).
Messages should be clear (whole message, direct, concrete)
Dont ask questions when you need to make a statement
Keep messages congruent (verbal, vocal, body all say the same thing)
Avoid double messages (saying 2 contradictory things at onceI want to take
you to the conference but youll be bored)
Be clear about what you want (dont hint or beat around the bushthis only
causes confusionget to underlying need)
Distinguish between observations and thoughts
Focus on one thing at a time
Messages should be open and direct (no hidden agendas, no disguised intentions--tell
the truth)
Messages should be supportive (avoid win/lose, right/wrong, sarcasm, judgmental
you messages, comparisons, labels)
"All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer,
but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved."
Page 15
BASIC CONFLICT SKILLS

Overview
With communication skills, effective conflict management also requires managing your
own emotions, following a process to ensure conflicts remain constructive, and
following rules for negotiation. These foundational skills are anchored by a desire to
fight fairly as part of constructive, positive, relationship.
Emotional
Skills
From Emotional Intelligence (EQ), the first step in managing conflict is to not act until
youve moved from the initial reaction of feelings to rational thought.
There are eight personal skills in EQ:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Identifying and labeling your feelings

Expressing feelings effectively
Assessing the intensity of feelings
Managing feelings effectively
Delaying gratification (choosing the
right time and place to express
emotions)
6. Controlling impulses (thinking first, then
reacting)
7. Reducing stress
8. Knowing the difference between
feelings and actions
Goleman (1995)
Basic Conflict
Management
Process
Constructive conflict (cooperative, respectful, face-saving, confirming, non-defensive,

thoughtful) means both or all parties win in an integrating, collaborative (not
compromise) way. The steps to ensure this happens are:
1. Identify your problem/issue/situation and corresponding unmet needs (in detail
do this on your own).
2. Find an appropriate time and place to discuss your needs with the other party.
3. Describe your problem and needs (Take ownership of your feelings: use I
statements).
4. Actively listen to the other party (and especially avoid bad listening habits).
5. Seriously consider the other partys response and needs.
6. Combine those needs and resources in a free-flow exchange of information.
7. Negotiate a resolution (sometimes there is no resolution. It is okay to agree to
disagree as a last resort).
8. Follow up on that resolution (test the resolution for awhile and check back in
with each other to determine effectiveness).
Constructive conflict includes taking a non-violent, non-aggressive stance. Once this is
broken, anger only breeds more intense anger. If the conflict can not be handled
constructively, it is better to walk away and try again later than have the conflict
become destructive.
Adapted from Adler & Proctor (2007) and Cupach & Canary (1997)
Page 16
BASIC CONFLICT SKILLS, continued

Negotiation
Rules
Negotiating is part of the conflict management process. There are several

considerations in negotiating a resolution to issues.
First, make sure the focus is on the problem and not the person. Conflict is not the
person, and you can not change a person, but you can influence behaviors.
From this, negotiation means going into an interaction with an open mind and having or
being open to alternative solutions (going into a conflict interaction having a hard, fast
demand is all about aggression, not assertiveness).
Using active listening skills well (paraphrase, probe, and support) will naturally bring
out the feelings and needs of the other; validate them in the process and open up the
discussion for stronger alternatives and solutions.
There are always common interests in a conflict situation, otherwise the conflict would
not exist. By uncovering the other persons interests behind a demand (get to causes
under the surface), you open up the interaction to discussing the shared and opposing
interests and finding common ground that is mutually acceptable to both of you. This
also constructively puts the focus on future rather than dredging up past issues.
Finally, negotiation also includes brainstorming to come up with acceptable
alternatives. If you do this together, you actually strengthen the relationship along with
the resolving the conflict in a positive, constructive way.
Fair Fighting
If conflict is natural and normal, then fighting is a legitimate, common

part of communication. With that, fighting fairly becomes a skill that
keeps conflict constructive. There are several rules for fighting fairly.
Set a time: It is always best to resolve conflict immediately, but the
immediate time and place may not always be appropriate. For example, in the middle
of an upscale restaurant during dinner. It is also important to hold off until you are
emotionally less reactionary and more thoughtful. When something happens, the fair
thing to do is schedule a private time and place to have a constructive discussion.
Hit above the belt (the Achilles Heel): We all have a tolerance level for how much we
can emotionally deal with. Hitting below the belt means to purposely cross that level of
tolerance to cause pain and hurt. This is destructive conflict.
Fight often: Gunnysacking is holding things in, avoiding conflict until there are so many
things built up that you blow up. This hurts the relationship more than dealing with
things when they occur. Of course, too muchtoo frequentfighting can also hurt the
relationship, so there is a dialectical balance that needs to be found. Along with
fighting often, is to takeand accepttime outs when necessary to keep from
escalating conflict.
Be clear and specific: Use whole messages, focus on behavior (not the person), focus
on the here and now (dont bring in other issues or dredge up stuff from the past), and
keep it personal (dont displace your anger toward something on the wrong person).
Take it with style: Finally, be able to gracefully receive criticism as well as give it.
Page 17
THE ART AND SKILL OF MANAGING CONFLICT

Overview
The art and skill of conflict management includes saving face, responding assertively,
and responding non-defensively. The key of all three of these skills is not just taking
care of your own, but in an effort to promote constructive, positive interaction, also
support the other by not threatening their face, acknowledging their assertiveness, and
communicating in a way that keeps them from feeling defensive.
Responding
NonDefensively
Defensive communication included attacking the critic, distorting critical information,

and avoiding the conflict or other person altogether. To respond non-defensively
requires managing your emotions and being assertive, not just about the issue, but
also about the process. It can be difficult to not get caught up in a downward spiral of
attack and defend if it starts, but when it does start, it is up to you to stop it.
You can also proactively work to keep defensiveness from entering the conflict, and
thus stop the potential for a destructive downward spiral before it has a chance to start.
This is accomplished by managing your own communication in such a way that it
keeps the other from getting defensive.
The best known work for non-defensive communication comes from Gibb (1961) in
which he highlights both defensive and supportive behaviors. Defensive behaviors
include being judgmental, forcing your needs on the other, and acting superior, while
supportive behaviors include being descriptive instead of judgmental, mutually looking
for solutions, and working from a position of equality.
Appendix F details the categories for both defensive and supportive behaviors.
Saving Face
In conflict, the immediate urge is to save ones own face. Losing face naturally builds
defensiveness and anger (as well as guilt and embarrassment). It is important to
realize that this works both ways (interaction is always mutually influenced); therefore it
is just as important to save the other persons face as it is your own.
Two key considerations for saving the others face are Validation and politeness.
Validation is about accepting the other persons needs as valid even if you disagree
with them, and empathizing with their feelings and position (accepting and empathizing
are not the same as agreeing). For example, if you hear the other say repeatedly I
have a valid point! and vocal nonverbal has escalated in intensity each time, it is
pretty clear that you are in a highly defensive mode and denying or not acknowledging
their feelings. They are not being/feeling validated. The first steps to stopping the
downward spiral is to stop being defensive and acknowledge their feelings.
Again, because it is key to constructive conflict: accepting is not the same as agreeing.
You can accept and empathize with their feelings without agreeing with them: You
sound pretty upset about this, So, you are concerned about. This validates their
feelings and allows them to move forward to find agreement and resolution.
Politeness includes avoiding zingers (snide, rude, smart-assed comments), avoiding
being a psychopest (disguising criticism as insight into the others behavior: i.e., Do
you know you are being anal retentive about the plans?), and avoiding all of the bad
listening habits. Politeness, on the positive side, includes actively listening and
speaking for yourself (I statements).
Page 18
THE ART AND SKILL OF MANAGING CONFLICT, continued

Responding
Assertively
Assertiveness, as compared to passiveness and aggressiveness, is standing up for

your needs while still constructively supporting the other. Being passive generally
means you subordinate your needs to those of the other, while being aggressive
indicates you force your own needs with no regard for the needs of the other.
Assertiveness relates to integrative styles and strategies, and intimatenonaggressive of intimacy and aggression. Responding assertively focuses on using
whole messages with clear language to stand up for your needs, and using active
listening skills to support the other. Through this process you enhance the constructive
side of conflict and find collaborative, integrative solutions to problems.
There are several ways to assertively respond to criticism. Here are two:
Acknowledgement: If the other person is accurate, accept the feedback (nondefensive, confirming) without making excuses or apologizing (Passive), and dont
counter with criticism of your own (Aggressive). Take it with grace and style.
Clouding: Use clouding when the other is being destructive in anyway. Clouding
means to find something in the complaint that you can agree with and ignore the rest
(dont respond to it). This is a pacing technique that can move the destructive
behavior into a more constructive style without compromising your needs.
Restate/modify the negative criticism in a positive way, and find somethingeven if
smallthat you can agree with.
For both responses, by finding somethingeven if only a small partthat you can
agree with, and do so, you immediately stop the potential for escalating, destructive
interaction. With active listening the potentially negative criticism becomes a positive
discussion, and you are able to assert your needs effectively in the process.
A leader leads by example, not by force.
EMOTIONAL BRILLIANCE IN MANAGING CONFLICT

Overview
A belligerent drunk is threatening people on a bus. At first you are just as scared and
nervous as everyone else, until it gets to be too much and you decide to take action.
What do you do? Physically confront and threaten him? Try to talk him down
logically? Emotional brilliance suggests, like Sun Tzu, that the best way to win is to not
fight all.
Establishing
Rapport
Rapport is about building trust and credibility with others. It is a relationship marked by
agreement with, affinity for, being in alignment with, and building harmony between
sender and receiver. From this trust comes a stronger commitment to developing
understanding and shared meaning in the conflict communication process.
Meeting their
Needs
To be effective in any relationship the first thing we have to do is accept (validate) the
other person where they are in that moment (i.e., happy, mad, calm, stressed, hurt).
The second thing we have to do, if we want to build rapport, trust, and effectively
manage conflict, is find out what that person needs and help provide it for them (other
focused rather than self focused).
Page 19
EMOTIONAL BRILLIANCE IN MANAGING CONFLICT, continued

Requisite
Variety
Requisite Variety means that we must have a larger number of options available to us
than the otherand be able to adaptnot to win or control, but to ensure an
assertive, collaborative solution. This means we can not be limited to our one way in
order to resolve conflict effectively.
Pacing
Pacing is a skill that originated in hypnosis, and has expanded into other areas
including building rapport. Pacing involves:
Meeting the other person where they are in that moment
Reflecting on what they know or assume to be true
Matching some part of their experience
Pacing can include, for example, matching their mood, mirroring their body language,
matching their speech patterns (rate, volume, word usage), finding common ground in
beliefs and opinions. The key to pacing is to match them, then guide or lead the
communication to a more effective, mindful place.
An example: You are in an argument that has become hostile, very loud, and lots of
inappropriate language. Pacing says to mirror the other person then purposely calm
down, slow down, quite down, change the language to lead the other person to a more
effective discussion. Note pacing must be subtle and sincere to work and be
appropriate. If pacing is done poorly or for the wrong, unethical reasons, then it is
nothing but manipulation.
The Aiki Dance
In Japanese, Aikido is three separate words: Ai = Harmony, Ki = Energy or

Spirit, Do = the way. Thus Aikido translates as the way of harmony with
universal energy.
When confronted by an attack, our immediate tendency is to strike back, run,
or dodge out of the way. With the martial art Aikido, instead of charging into
the attack, or running away, or jumping out of the way, the way of harmony is
to blend into the attack as if it were a dance. Physically, you would join the
flow of energy, so that you are moving withcentered in the same physical
directionas the attack and redirect that flow of energythe punch, kick, shove,
tackleinto a harmless direction. Blendingthe dancemeans to move forward into
the attack, but slightly off the line of attack and turn so that you end up facing the same
direction as the attacker, standing next to them. Thus the target and focus of attack
youare gone; theres nothing to hit and no one gets hurt in the process.
Aiki has come to be referred to as the non-physical manifestation of Aikido. When we
are verbally attacked, our tendency is to counter-attack with our own accusations, or
deny the claim, or play the victim. With Aiki, we verbally blend with the attack. This
means we take the attack as a gift, and say Thank you for that This verbal validation
and acceptance is the blendingmoving next to them facing the same directionand
removing the target and focus. From there we acknowledge our own immediate
feelings, then center ourselves in the energy and use it in a positive way without
hurting the other. By mastering the concepts in the Art and Skill of Managing Conflict
section and Emotional Brilliance in Managing Conflict section, we are practicing Aiki.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting
Page 20
SPECIFIC TECHNIQUES FOR MANAGING CONFLICT

Overview
Youre trying to get someone to do something and get told no, or youve just been hit
with a verbal assault: a personal attack from your partner. What are you going to do?
How are you going to handle it? Here are a few techniques for specific situations.
Dealing with
Resistance
Otherwise known as getting to yes, resistance is being told no or being disagreed

with in one form or another. The method is to reframe negatives into positives, and
redirect resistance into finding solutions. As with any conflict resolution, getting
defensive and arguing against their resistance only escalates the negative spiral and
the resistor will only dig in their heels and resist more (they are not being validated).
For example: You are leading a special project at work and someone says this is a
stupid waste of time, nothing will come out of it. The wrong response: Well, this is
what management wants, so we have to do it, so deal with it. The right response:
Interesting, what makes you feel that way? Then continue with more probing and
clarifying question with each response.
So, the positive, effective way to handle this type of conflict, like most conflict, begins
with accepting their resistance (validating, pacing, building rapport, using clouding),
then asking probing and clarifying questions, not to get your way
(aggressive/dominate), but to collaboratively find a solution (assertive/integrative).
Here are a few more examples:
They say
You ask
Its too expensive
Compared to what?
Its impossible
What would it take to make it possible?
This is the only way to do it
Yes, thats an option. What else could we

consider?
It will never work
What would it take to make it work?
You cant do that
What would happen if we did?
I wont...
What would make you willing?

(Examples taken from Conflict Resolution Network, 2004)
Note, none of the responses ask Why? Why, by its connotative nature, suggests
evaluative judgment and increases the potential for the resistor to get defensive and
uncooperative.
In any situation that may potentially lead to, or cause conflict (proximal context, latent
conflict) and especially in a conflict episode, why should always be replaced with a
variation on what: For what reason or What makes you believe to avoid the
feeling of being judged or interrogated (face threatening).
Page 21
SPECIFIC TECHNIQUES FOR MANAGING CONFLICT, continued

Diffusing
Hostility
There are many techniques for dealing with hostility and attacks,
depending on the situation. Following are a few popular tools, based
on the assumption that you want to resolve conflict in a positive,
constructive style. All of these techniques revolve around variations
on probing, clarifying questions, and using whole messages.
The When
Question
When attacked or accused of something, instead of attacking

back or denying (typical negative spiral responses), ask When
did you start thinking/feeling (restate the accusation). The
accuser does not expect this (you are using Requisite Variety)
and the question shifts the conflict from leading into a negative
downward spiral into an effective discussion.
Computer Mode
From several sources, including The Gentle Art of Verbal Self

Defense (Elgin, 1985), computer mode is about being very
unemotional and blandly neutral in your response. The goal is
to avoid anything personal (only escalates the conflict, and feeds
into their negative power), and talk in vague generalities.
For example: Your attacker yells Why cant I ever find anything
around here? Do you hide stuff just to be annoying or what?
The obvious response, as with most attacks, is to defend or
deny. To not feed the flames of conflict, the computer mode
response would be: People do get irritated when they cant find
things or Nothing is more distressing than having to hunt for
things.
In this scenario the attacker is making you a victim. By using
computer mode repeatedly in the whole interaction, they will
eventually give up and you can have a productive discussion.
The Boring
Baroque
Response
Also from The Gentle Art of Verbal Self Defense the Boring
Baroque Response is a response to Why questions: Why do
you always? Why do you never? Instead of denying or
counter-attacking (counter attacks in this case only lead to a tugof-war laundry list of complaints being shot at each other), the
way to stop the escalation is to buy into the accusation by
describing in great detail how you got to be that way.
For example: Your attacker pointedly asks Why do you eat so
much junk food? The Boring Baroque Response is You know, I
think its because of something that happened too me when I
was really young. My parents used to give me crackers, no wait
a minute, it couldnt have been crackers, because I knew they
were crackers when I put them in my soup. It must have been
bread. Yes, thats it. Bread. My parents used to give me bread
when I was really little and tell me it was ice cream. I think they
were trying to trick me into believing that healthy food was fun to
eat, or maybe they were And on and on and on for as long
as it takes.
This response blatantly tells the attacker that you know they are
there to pick a fight and you are not going to play their game.
They will stop victimizing you in a hurry.
Continued
Page 22

Diffusing
Hostility,
continued
Topic Grab
When someone is complaining and going on and on, ad

nauseam, the key is to stop the persons tirade and bring the
control back to you to get to productive resolution.
For example: A customer is complaining to you, the clerk or
manager on duty, about prices going up and somewhere in it say
how am I supposed to feed my kids? You guys are screwing up
my life Your response becomes, oh, how old are your kids?
This totally unexpected response (requisite variety) breaks the
tirade and gets them focused again.
Content-toProcess Shift
When a more positive, constructive conversation about a conflict

issue feels like it is getting off track, or the other person brings in
a second issue, or the constructiveness starts to move into
destructive territory, then shift from the content of the discussion
to meta-communication about the process: We seem to have
drifted away from what the issue is now to talking about old
issues
This meta-communication usually requires more self disclosure,
and acknowledging your feelings and needs. Therefore, whole
messages are key to making this work.
Momentary
Delay
In the heat of an argument, thoughts, feelings, accusations, and

more can move pretty fast. Momentary delays let you take a
breath and refocus your thoughts and make sure you
understand what is being said so you can respond appropriately.
These delay tactics also break the emotional cycle and bring
control back to you. Here are a few examples:
Let me make sure I understand, you are saying
That seems important; would you repeat it, please?
Slow down! Let me catch up. You are saying
Like most of these techniques, the tactics focus on probing,
clarifying questions, and in this case, paraphrasing more.
Time Out
Time outs, just like disciplining your kids, are a way to take a
break from an interaction that is too passive or too aggressive,
or when you just need time to think. Here are a few scenarios:
You are being or feeling pressured to do something youre not
sure you want to do. The time out: Let me sleep on it, or I
want to talk it over with ________ before I make a decision.
You are feeling threatened (facework), maybe on the verge of
tears or rage. The time out: Time out! I am really upset right
now and need a break. Lets continue this.
You are on the receiving end of a major, highly destructive,
verbal assault. Chances are, they will not accept a time out. If
they do, great. If not, it is appropriate to physically remove
yourself from that scene and get out of reach (Remember, you
can not make them shut up or leave. You have to be the one to
do it). Later, schedule a time to finish the discussion.
Page 23

Dealing with
Control Drama
Satir Modes
From the Satir Modes comes the Verbal Attack Patterns (VAPS)
where the attacker is looking to have power over you and
purposely evoke a highly emotional response. A highly unfair
fighting technique where it seems having conflict is more
important than finding a resolution. VAPS have two parts: A
bait to get your attention and thus control, and a
presupposition or assumption, usually emotional.
For example: If you REALLY loved me, You wouldnt WASTE
money! (do whatever). Wasting money is the bait, if you really
love me is the presupposition.
Bad Response: Take the bait and argue that you dont waste
money (a denial). This is buying into the control drama, and
entering the negative spiral of escalating emotion (anger breeds
anger).
Good Solution: Skip the bait and focus on the emotion, without
getting emotional yourself (low pitch, slow rate of vocalics, open
body language). Use probing questions that keep you and the
attacker from getting defensive: When did you start thinking I
didnt love you? This also brings the control back to you, and
stops the emotional escalation dead in its tracks (realize it will
probably take several exchanges like this before the attacker
gives up).
Games People
Play
The Redfield The Celestine Prophecy insight identifies Dramas

as Aloof, Interrogator, Intimidator, and Poor Me. The way to
respond to these games, according to Berne and Redfield is to
confront them directlyin a positive wayto stop the control
drama.
Hidden Agendas
Dealing with hidden agendas focuses on using pointed clarifying

questions to call the sender out on their agenda or assumption.
This can be done in a constructive, face saving way through the
specific questions you ask along with using open, calm
nonverbal messages.
The best soldier does not attack. The superior fighter succeeds without violence.
The greatest conqueror wins without a struggle. The most successful manager leads without dictating.
This is called intelligent non-aggressiveness. This is called mastery of men.
--Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching
Exercise C
Determine appropriate constructive solutions to the Case Studies in Conflict at the end
of this packet.
Page 24
CONCLUSION
Summary
Temperance, sophrosyne, and balance: Effective conflict resolution requires a positive

climate with confirming communication and emotional intelligence. This includes not
falling into their control dramas, and making sure the conflict episode does not escalate
into a negative spiral (it takes mutual influence and cooperation to escalate).
The paper covers background influences, what goes into a conflict interaction episode,
communication skills, the process of resolving conflict, handling your emotions,
negotiation, and fair fighting. With these considerations, the paper focuses on skills
and techniques for dealing with conflict.
The key to conflict resolution is to value and encourage a positive climate. If you are
passive or aggressive rather than assertive, if you are defensive, if you threaten the
other persons face, then the first thing you have to do is break that cycle in yourself. If
you are on the receiving end of that style, the tools are here to constructively break the
pattern with that other person.
Conflict is a normal part of everyday interaction. The question is not when, but how:
How you deal with the conflict is based on your values and skills.
Additional
Resources
Web Resources
The Conflict Resolution Network has a very thorough, free, training program on conflict
resolution and several other resources. The site is: http://www.crnhq.org/index.php
The training program is at http://www.crnhq.org/pages.php?pID=13
An organization focused on negotiating conflict resolution at a global scale, with lots of
application at the individual level. A full, detailed, specialized program in conflict
resolution with all materials available to everyone online. From the Global Negotiation
Project at Harvard University: http://www.thirdside.org
The Satir modes and responding to them, as used in the best selling book The Gentle
Art of Verbal Self Defense by Suzette Hagen Elgin, at: http://adrr.com/aa/index.html
Games People Play: the original types for control dramas, what to do and how to deal
with them, at Eric Bernes official website: http://www.ericberne.com/
Empathic approach to listening (a free one hour lesson from the University of California
in MP3 format): http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7article/article40.htm
Books
Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1979). Frogs into princes: Neuro linguistic programming.
Real People Press.
Elgin, S. H. (1980). The gentle art of verbal self defense. NY: Dorset House Publishing
Co.
Fisher, R. & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in.
NY: Penguin Books.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. NY:
Bantam Books.
Leonard, G. (1999). The way of Aikido. NY: Penguin Putnam.
Page 25
EXERCISE A
CONFLICT TYPE AND LEVEL
What level (behavioral, relational rules, personality) and what type of conflict (parallel, displaced,
misattributed, latent, false) is each of the following?
1. You hate that your roommate talks nonstop. To drown out the talking, you turn on a football game.
Your roommate doesnt like sports, so the two of you argue about what to watch on TV.
Level: _________________
Type: _________________
2. You got a job offer that requires you to move across the country. Your family does not want you to
leave, and they plead with you to stay home. You really dont want to leave, but this job is too good to
pass up.
Level: _________________
Type: _________________
3. You are completely upset with your mom for breaking up your family because she asks your dad to
move out. Your dad is very sad, but your mom wont discuss the issue with either you or your sister.
Years later, you discover that your dad had abused your mom.
Level: _________________
Type: _________________
4. Your brother uses drugs. The problem is that he cant care for his kids when hes high. He likes to get
high and take his daughters to the park to play. You hope he grows out of this phase.
Level: _________________
Type: _________________
5. You were mad at your friend who didnt invite you to her wedding. She is mad at you for not going to
her wedding. In actuality, the invitation was sent to your previous address but was not forwarded to you.
Level: _________________
Type: _________________
6. At a party, a friend consumed too much alcohol and still wants to drive home. You do not want him to
drive.
Level: _________________
Type: _________________
Adapted from Cupach & Canary (1997)
Page 26
EXERCISE B
PUTNAM/WILSON CONFLICT BEHAVIOR SCALE
Circle the appropriate number next to each item, and total your score using the scale provided below. Be
completely honest. The scale is a tool for your use only, and no one else will see this other than you.
1.
I blend my ideas with others to create new solutions to conflict.
Never
1 2 3
Always
5 6 7
2.
I shy away from topics that are sources of disputes.
3.
I insist on my position being accepted during a conflict.
4.
I try to find solutions that combine a variety of viewpoints.
5.
I steer clear of disagreeable situations.
6.
I give in a little on my ideas when others also give in.
7.
I look for middle-of-the-road solutions.
8.
I avoid a person I suspect wants to discuss a disagreement.
9.
I minimize the significance of a conflict.
10.
I build an integrated solution from the issues raised in a dispute.
11.
I may stress a point by hitting my fist on the table.
12.
I go 50-50 to reach a settlement.
13.
I may raise my voice when trying to get other to accept a position.
14.
I look for creative solutions to conflicts.
15.
I keep quiet about my views in order to avoid disagreements.
16.
I am willing to give in a little if others will meet me halfway.
17.
I downplay the importance of a disagreement.
18.
I reduce disagreements by making them seem insignificant.
19.
I meet the opposition midway to reach a settlement.
20.
I assert my opinion forcefully.
21.
I dominate arguments until others accept my position.
22.
I encourage working together to create solutions to disagreements.
23.
I try to use everyones ideas to generate solutions to problems.
24.
I make trade-offs to reach solutions.
25.
I argue insistently for what I want.
26.
I withdraw when someone confronts me about a controversial issue.
27.
I sidestep disagreements when they arise.
28.
I smooth over disagreements by making them appear unimportant.
29.
I insist that my position be accepted during a conflict.
30.
I take a tough stand and refuse to retreat.
31.
I settle differences by meeting the other person halfway.
32.
I am steadfast in my views.
33.
I make my differences with others seem less serious.
34.
I hold my tongue rather than argue.
35.
I ease conflict by claiming my differences with others are trivial.
Putnam & Wilson (1982)
Page 27
EXERCISE B, continued
PUTNAM/WILSON CONFLICT BEHAVIOR SCALE
Scoring:
1. Add your scores for the questionnaire items numbered: 2, 5, 8, 15, 17, 18, 26, 27, 28, 33, 34, 35.
Take the total, divide by 12.
Score: _____
2. Add your scores for the questionnaire items numbered: 1, 4, 6, 10, 12, 14, 16, 19, 22, 23, 24.
Score: _____
3. Add your scores for the questionnaire items numbered: 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 20, 21, 25, 29, 30, 31, 32.
Score: _____
Discussion:
This instrument measures 3 types of styles: Non-confrontation (Passive), Solution-Orientation
(Assertive), and Control (Aggressive). The scoring uses averages, based on all of the questions in that
category. Therefore, the higher the score, the more you use that style of conflict behavior. Conversely,
the style with the highest score is the style you probably use more often. Average scores can range from
1 to 7.
From the scoring, above:
Style 1 = Non-confrontational
Style 2 = Solution-Orientation
Style 3 = Control
Putnam & Wilson (1982)
Page 28
EXERCISE C
CASE STUDIES IN CONFLICT
Determine appropriate constructive solutions to the following situations: How wouldshouldcould you
handle the conflict? Also, what level and type of conflict do you think it is, can you identify any underlying
issues, how would you go about resolving it (the process), and what are some potential alternative
solutions?
Case 1: Roommates
Your roommate never helps with cleaning the house, and you are fed up with him being in front of the
Xbox playing Final Fantasy nonstop. Youve brought it up before and nothing has changed. Now you are
downright angry.
Case 2: Happy Couple
You and your wife have been married for five years. You are both happy, successful, and doing very well.
Both of you have a career, but you make a lot more than she does and make enough money for her to be
a stay at home mom. Youve hinted around at the idea of having a child for over a year and she has
never seriously entered the conversation. Now you really think it is past time to start the family and are
getting frustrated.
Case 3: Girlfriends
You just found out your best friend went out on a date with a guy you had been dating. You thought the
relationship was close to beingbut not quiteexclusive. You know you are in love with him, but the two
of you had not had that conversation yet. On the other hand, your girlfriend knows full well how you feel
about the guy. You are really mad at this breach of friendship.
Case 4: Elderly Sisters
Your mother and her sister are both nearing the end of their lives, and they have not spoken to each other
in over 20 years due to an argument over the terms of their mothers will. Youre grandmother had left the
house to your Aunt, which she now lives in, and all of her possessions to your mother. Feeling cheated,
your mother contested the will in court and lost, and has refused to talk to your Aunt since. You would
really like to see the two of them make up before they leave this life.
Case 5: The Breakup
You and your partner have been a committed couple for over five years and own a home together. Both
the property and the mortgage are in both of your names. But now the two of you have broken up, and
you have moved out. Splitting up possessions was difficult enough, but you also want your share of the
investment in the house, and your partner is refusing to sell or buy you out. You are bitter over the
relationship breaking up and seriously angry at your ex-partner.
Case 6: The Belligerent Drunk
You are using public transportation (the subway, with no transit staff in the train car). A rather large man
stumbles on board some time later, clearly inebriated, and still carrying a bottle in a paper bag. Once on
board he starts yelling at other people and threatening them. You, like everyone else are pretty nervous if
not downright scared. Finally the drunk starts to lurch forward, with his arms outstretched, toward a
woman sitting alone.
Cases adapted from various sources and personal experiences
Page 29
APPENDIX A: CONTROL DRAMAS

GENERAL CONTROL DRAMAS
(From the Celestine Prophecy as adapted from Eric Bernes Games People Play)
People use dramas to manipulate for energy either aggressively, directly forcing people to pay attention to
them, or passively by playing on people's sympathy or curiosity to gain attention. There are four basic
types (condensed from many more in Bernes original work).
Aloof
In order to get energy coming your way, you withdraw and look mysterious and secretive. You hope that
someone will be pulled into this drama and try to figure out what's going on with you. When someone
does, you remain vague, forcing them to struggle, dig and try to discern your true feelings. As they do so,
they give you their full attention and that sends their energy to you. The longer you can keep them
interested and mystified, the more energy you receive.
Interrogator
The interrogator sets up a drama of asking questions and probing into another person's world with the
specific purpose of finding something wrong. Once they do, they criticize this aspect of the other's life. If
this strategy succeeds, the person being criticized is pulled into the drama. They find themselves
becoming self-conscious around the interrogator and paying attention to what the interrogator is doing
and thinking about, so as not to do something wrong the interrogator would notice. This psychic
deference gives the interrogator the energy he desires. Interrogators pull you off your own path and drain
your energy because you judge yourself by what they might be thinking.
Intimidator
Someone who threatens you, either verbally or physically is an intimidator. You are forced, for fear of
something bad happening to you, to pay attention to them and so to give him energy. This is the most
aggressive kind of drama.
Poor Me
You are the victim of a poor me when someone tells you all the horrible things that are already happening
to them, implying perhaps that you are responsible, and that, if you refuse to help, these horrible things
are going to continue. This is someone who makes you feel guilty when you're in their presence, even
though you know there is no reason to feel that way. Everything they say and do put you in a place where
you have to defend yourself against the idea that you're not doing enough for them.
Considerations
People use more than one drama in different circumstances, but most of us have one dominant control
drama that we tend to repeat, depending on which one worked well of the members of our early family. A
person goes to whatever extreme necessary to get attention energy in their family.
Interrogator parents tend to create aloof children. When someone continually asks you questions, only to
find something wrong with your answers, you must get vague and distant, to try to say things that will get
their attention, but not reveal enough to give them something to criticize.
Intimidators tend to create poor me children (or another intimidator). If someone is draining your energy
by threatening you with physical, mental or emotional violence, being aloof doesn't work; you can't get
them to give you energy by playing coy; you are forced to become more passive, and guilt-trip them about
the harm they are doing. If this doesn't work, then, as a child you endure until you are big enough to
explode against the violence and fight aggression with aggression.
Aloof parents tend to create interrogator children. If, when you were a child, your family members were
either not there or ignored you, playing aloof would not get their attention. You would have to resort to
probing and prying and finally finding something wrong in these aloof people in order to force attention
and energy.
Redfield (1993)
Page 30
APPENDIX B: CONTROL DRAMAS

THE SATIR MODES
Satir modes are common patterns in verbal behavior that we use to control stressful situations and protect
our face. There are five patterns.
BLAMER
Blamers feel that no one really cares about their feelings, and from that have a need to take charge.
Absolutes such as always and never are common words in their vocabulary. They usually stress the word
why in questions: Why do you always have to hurt my feelings? Most blamers are obvious, but some
are more covert: Honey, couldnt you be more careful once in awhile? Body language is usually
threatening: lean over you, glare, shake a finger, use the finger Conflict between two blamers will
almost invariably end up in screaming matches.
PLACATER
Placaters generally need attention and validation, and need to be liked. Their goal is to please, therefore
usually do not say what is on their mind for fear of offending: Oh, you know me, I dont care. Placaters
tend to fidget, hang onto you, and easily cringe if threatened. Two placaters together trying to decide
where to eat dinner: I dont know, what do you want? Gee, I hadnt thought about it, what would you
like? (repeat endlessly).
COMPUTER
Computers do not have emotions. Underneath, maybe subconsciously, they are afraid someone will find
out what their emotions are. Computers avoid personal pronouns (I, Me, mine, you,), talk in vague
generalities, and maintain little to no facial expressions and limited body movement. Everything becomes
distant and minor: Its no big deal, theres no reason for alarm This is the most neutral of the modes
and can function with all of the other modes relatively easily.
DISTRACTOR
Panic or disorganization is the hallmark of the distractor. They use all of the other modes randomly, in
apparent chaos. Their body language is as random as their verbal mode. One way to describe a
distractor is that they dont have any idea what to say, but they know they have to say something, and say
it immediately: Why dont you ever let me decide where to eat? Not that it matters, you know how I am,
anything makes me happy. But simple courtesy says that we should both have a say in where we go.
But whatever you want is fine by me
LEVELER
The leveler tells it like they see it. The verbal message may sound like a blamer, placater, or computer,
but it is not the same. Generally there is no difference between verbal, nonverbal, and feelings: They are
all in synch (congruency). If a leveler asks you why you do something, it is not intended as an attack or
face threatening act. To them it is a sincere, legitimate question (it may sound rude or impolite, but that is
totally accidental for the leveler). The way to tell the difference is in the emphasis, or lack of emphasis on
usual trigger words.
Blamer: WHY do you ALWAYS chew SO much gum? (A face threatening attack)
Leveler: Why do you always chew so much gum? (A simple request for information)
Beware the phony leveler: this mode is the most dangerous and the hardest to spot. The phony leveler is
a blamer disguising themselves as a leveler to get your trust and cooperation, then attack you when you
are most vulnerable. Watch the congruency in verbal and nonverbal for clues.
Continued
Page 31
APPENDIX B: Continued
THE SATIR MODES
EXAMPLE
Directly from Suzette Haden Elgins (1980) book The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense is an example of
all five types stuck in a broken elevator together:
Blamer:
Placater:
Which one of you idiots was fooling around with

the buttons?
Oh, I hope I didnt do anything to cause this. I
sure didnt mean to!
Computer:
There is undoubtedly some perfectly simple

reason why this elevator isnt moving. Certainly
there is no cause whatever for alarm.
Distractor:
Did one of you hit the stop button? Oh, I didnt

mean that; of course none of you would do
anything like that! It is, however, extremely easy
to do that sort of thing by accident. Why do things
like this only happen to me?
Leveler:
Personally, Im scared.
(p. 11)
CONSIDERATIONS
Like any other of the control drama archetypes, we have a dominant mode, especially under stress. We
also have the ability to move between modes as needed to effectively deal with a situation.
The best way to handle a leveler is to level back.
The best way to handle a blamer or placater is to use the opposite mode.
When you are not sure what mode you are getting, or are getting a distractor or think you might be
dealing with a phony leveler, the best mode to go into is computer. Stay a computer until you have a
better understanding of what/whom you are dealing with, then change your mode to fit the situation.
Satir (1964) as used in Elgin (1980)
Page 32
APPENDIX C: CONTROL DRAMAS

HIDDEN AGENDAS
Hidden agendas are a defensive maneuver used especially by people with lower self esteem. They serve
to protect the user from rejection, and are a blatant attempt to create a specific desired impression.
Goffman (1959) identified identity as a performance with a back stage and front stage, where the back
stage is the true self that no one really sees and the front stage is where we act out our identitythe
presentation of selffor an audience. Hidden agendas, also based on a portion of Bernes (1964) work,
are the negative extremes of that performance. There are eight agendas:
IM GOOD
You are the hero of all your stories. The stories highlight the attributes you favor most (honesty, success,
adventurous, generous).
IM GOOD (BUT YOURE NOT)
You show that you are all right by showing how bad other people are.
YOURE GOOD (BUT IM NOT)
Always flattering others, or greatly admiring others, while putting yourself down in the process: You do
that so well and I always screw it up. Can be used to receive favors, and is a tool for soliciting
complements.
IM HELPLESS, I SUFFER
The classic victim. Aint It Awful is a common game of complaining about your romantic partner, Why
does this always happen to me? is another common game.
IM BLAMELESS
Its not my fault! Look what you made me do! These fall into the classic attribution error of external locus
of control.
IM FRAGILE
The stories of betrayal and broken trust that shows how vulnerable you are. It makes me sad when you
do that
IM TOUGH
The stories about how much you do, how hard you work, such as frequently sharing a laundry list of
everything you did today.
I KNOW IT ALL
Constantly having the answer, perpetually philosophizing or lecturing. This is usually done in the guise of
informing or entertaining. The hidden agenda really tries to prove how much you know.
Continued
Page 33
APPENDIX C: Continued
HIDDEN AGENDAS
CONSIDERATIONS
You can change your agendas, and improve self-esteem and relationships in the process by consciously
taking a new agenda and performance. This is a mental exercise to reframe your own perspective. The
new agendas (McKay, Davis, & Fanning, 1983, p. 83):
OLD AGENDA
Im Good:
Im Good (But
Youre Not):
Youre Good (But
Im Not):
NEW POSITION
Im a mixture of strengths and weaknesses. I can
shape both sides of myself.
I dont have to tear you down to make me good.
Im no longer in the business of comparing.
I can get attention with my strengths and abilities.
I dont need to make excuses.
Im Helpless, I
Suffer:
My life is a balance of pleasure and pain, hope

and sadness. I can share each side of myself.
Im Blameless:
Nobodys perfect. Decisions I make sometimes

affect things that go wrong.
Im Fragile:
It scares me a little when someone is upset, but I

can listen to it.
Im Tough:
I can take care of myself. I can relax and people

will still like me. I can be safe without scaring
people.
I Know It All:
I can listen, can be interested, can ask questions.

There are interesting things to learn and discover.
(McKay, Davis, & Fanning, 1983)
Page 34
APPENDIX D: CONFLICT TACTICS

SILLERS CLASSIFICATION OF CONFLICT TACTICS
Destructive Tactics
Denial and Equivocation
1. Direct denial: Statement that deny a conflict is present
2. Implicit denial: Statements that imply denial by providing a rational
3. Evasive remarks: Failure to acknowledge or deny the presence of a conflict when other inquires
Topic Management
1. Topic shifts: Statements that terminate discussion of a conflict before completion
2. Topic avoidance: Statements that explicitly terminate discussion before completion
Confrontational Remarks
1. Personal Criticism: Remarks that directly criticize the personal characteristics or behaviors of the
partner
2. Rejection: Statements in response to the partners previous statements that imply personal
antagonism toward the partner, as well as disagreement
3. Hostile imperatives: Requests, demands, arguments, threats or other prescriptive statements that
implicitly blame the partner and seek change in the partners behavior
4. Hostile joking: Joking, teasing, or sarcasm at the expense of the partner
5. Hostile questions: Directive or leading questions that fault the partner
6. Presumptive remarks: statements that attribute thoughts, feelings, and so on to the partner that
the partner does not acknowledge
7. Denial of responsibility: Statements that minimize or deny personal responsibility for the conflict
Neutral, Leaning Toward Destructive Tactics
Noncommittal Remarks
1. Noncommittal statements: Statements that neither affirm nor deny the presence of conflict
2. Noncommittal questions: Unfocused questions that rephrase questions with irrelevant information
3. Abstract remarks: Abstract principles, generalizations, or hypothetical statements
4. Procedural remarks: Procedural statements that supplant discussion of a conflict
Constructive Tactics
Analytic Remarks
1. Descriptive statements: Non-evaluative statements about observable events related to conflict
2. Disclosure statements: Non-evaluative statements about events related to conflict which partner
cant observe (thoughts, feelings, intentions)
3. Qualifying statements: Statements that explicitly qualify the nature and extent of the conflict
4. Solicitation of disclosure: Non-hostile questions about events related to conflict that cannot be
observed
5. Solicitation of criticism: Non-hostile questions soliciting criticism of self
Conciliatory Remarks
1. Supportive remarks: Statements that refer to understanding, acceptance, support and son on fro
the partner and shared interests
2. Concessions: Statements that express a willingness to change, show flexibility, make
concessions, or consider mutually acceptable solutions to conflicts
3. Acceptance of responsibility: Statements that attribute responsibility for the conflict to self or to
both parties
Sillars (1980)
Page 35
APPENDIX E: BAD LISTENING HABITS

OUR 13 WORST LISTENING HABITS
Which habits are your favorites? What can you do to change these habits?
1. Comparing
Do you try to assess who is smarter or better you are the speaker? Instead of listening youre
thinking about how you would act in the situation.
2. Mind Reading
Do you try to guess what the other person is thinking? Do you make assumptions about how
people react to you? Instead of listening youre trying to figure out what they are really thinking
and feeling, and probably dont trust what they are saying.
3. Rehearsing
Do you try to figure out what you are going to say next? Instead of listening youre rehearsing
what you want to say.
4. Filtering/Pseudolistening
Do you pay attention to the speakers emotional level, make sure youre not in trouble, and then
check out? You listen long enough to make sure you are not in emotional danger, then mentally
plan the weekend party. Or do you try to avoid listening to certain topics? Or simply pretend to
listen.
5. Judging
Do you label the speaker or something they said and mentally dismiss them? Instead of listening
you prejudge the speaker as stupid or unqualified or negatively react to a statement they have
made, and purposely do not pay attention.
6. Dreaming/Glazing Over
Do you take something the speaker said and let that carry you back into your own memories?
Instead of listening you are lost in the memory and dont even hear the speaker.
7. Identifying/Shift Response
Do you take everything the person tells you and refer it back to your own experience? Instead of
listening you focus on your own experience. Shift Response is verbally referring to your
experiences when the speaker initiates a subject, shifting the focus to you.
8. Advising
Do you try to solve the speakers problems? Instead of listening and supporting the speakers
needs and feelings, you help with suggestions and advice.
9. Sparring/Ambushing
Do you argue and debate with the speaker after only a sentence or two? Instead of listening you
focus on what is wrong and disagree with it, leaving the speaker to feel they were not heard.
Look for weakness and attack, contradict.
10. Interrupting
Do you respond to the speaker before they have finished speaking? Instead of listening you
competitively interrupt by finishing their statement for them, asking questions, or practicing many
of the other habits on this page before the speaker has finished speaking.
11. Being right
Do you find it impossible to accept criticism or be corrected? Instead of listening you go to any
length to avoid acknowledging mistakes or being wrong.
Continued
Page 36
APPENDIX E: Continued
OUR 13 WORST LISTENING HABITS
12. Derailing
Do you immediately start asking questions and interrogate the speaker? Instead of listening you
derail the speaker by asking questions that change the subject or shift the direction the speaker
was going. Another way to derail is by making jokes out of what the speaker says.
13. Placating
Do you get overly supportive? Do you agree with everything? Instead of listening you placate
the speaker, using lots of yearightright oncool fabulous
Adapted from: McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (1983). Messages: The communication skills book.
Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.
Page 37
APPENDIX F: RESPONDING NON-DEFENSIVELY

GIBB CATEGORIES OF DEFENSIVE AND SUPPORTIVE BEHAVIORS
Non-defensiveness, whether initiating a conflict interaction or responding to conflict is a skill that helps
keep a conflict from escalating into a negative spiral. Because of mutual influence, communicating in
such a way as to save the other persons face and not make them defensive is as vital as not being
defensive when under attack. Gibb looked at relational behaviors and determined characteristics that can
be supportive or defensive depending on how you communicate. The behaviors serve to contrast each
other.
Supportive Behavior
Description: Non-judgmental, objective
observations, genuine requests
for information.
Evaluation:
Defensive Behavior
Passing judgment, blaming,
criticizing or praising, questioning
motives or standards.
Problem
Orientation:
Integrative, collaborative problem

solving rather than telling
someone what to do.
Control:
Spontaneity:
Flexibility. Freedom from hidden

agendas or other deception.
Straight forwardness.
Strategy:
Willingness to become involved

with others; identifying with,
respecting, accepting,
understanding others.
Neutrality:
Indifference, detachment, aloofness.
Failure to recognize the worth of the

other person, arousing feelings of
inadequacy in the other.
Empathy:
Equality:
Willingness to participate with the

other person, to mutually define
and resolve problems.
Superiority:
Provisionalism:
Tentativeness, open-mindedness,
willingness to explore alternative
points of view.
Certainty:
Doing something to other people;

telling what to do or how to feel or
think.
Manipulating through the use of
tricks or hidden plans. Hiding
intentions.
Dogmatism, resisting consideration

of alternatives, emphasis on proving
a point rather than solving a problem.
Supportive behaviors work with and encourage non-critical confirming messages to save face and
promote a positive, constructive climate. Defensive behaviors contribute to the negative escalation spiral
of destructive conflict.
Page 38
REFERENCES
Adler, R. B. & Proctor, R. F. (2007). Looking out/looking in (12th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson
Wadsworth.
Americans for Divorce Reform (2008). Webpage: What are the most common Causes of Divorce?
Retrieved 2/26/2008 from: http://www.divorcereform.org/cau.html
Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1979). Frogs into Princes: Neuro Linguistic Programming. Real People Press.
Beebe, S. A., Beebe, S. I. & Ivy, D. K. (2001). Communication: Principles for a lifetime. Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Center for Disease Control (2007, August 28). Births, Marriages, Divorces, and Deaths: Provisional data
for 2006. National Vital Statistics Reports, 55 (20). Retrieved 2/26/2008 from:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_20.pdf
Conflict Resolution Network (2004). 12 skills trainers manual. Retrieved 3/10/2008 from
http://www.crnhq.org/index.php
Cupach, W. R. & Canary, D. J. (1997). Competence in interpersonal conflict. Prospect Heights, IL:
Waveland Press.
Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press.
Elgin, S. H. (1980). The gentle art of verbal self defense. NY: Dorset House Publishing Co.
Foucault, M. (1990). History of sexuality: An introduction. NY: Vintage Books.
Gibb, J. (1961). Defensive communication. Journal of Communication, 11 (pp. 141-148).
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. NY: Bantam Books.
Gottman, J. M. (1994). What predicts divorce? The relationship between marital processes and marital
outcomes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Hocker, J. L. & Wilmot, W. W. (1985). Interpersonal conflict (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: William C Brown.
Kurdek, L. (1994). Conflict resolution styles in gay, lesbian, heterosexual nonparent, and heterosexual
parent couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 705722.
Kurdek, L. (1998). The nature and predictors of the trajectory of change in marital quality over the first 4
years of marriage for first-married husbands and wives. Journal of Family Psychology, 12.
McKay, M., Davis, M., & Fanning, P. (1983). Messages: The communication skills book. Oakland, CA:
New Harbinger.
Mehrabian, A. (1970). Nonverbal communication. Chicago: Aldine Atherton.
Putnam, L. L. & Wilson, C. E. (1982). Communicative strategies in organizational conflicts: Reliability and
validity of a measurement scale. In M. Burgoon (Ed.), Communication yearbook 6 (pp. 629-652).
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Redfield, J. (1993). The Celestine prophecy. NY: Warner Books.
Page 39
Satir, V. (1964). Conjoint family therapy: A guide to theory and technique. Palo Alto, CA: Science &
Behavior Books.
Sillars, A. L. (1980). The stranger and the spouse as target persons for compliance-gaining strategies: A
subjective expected utility model. Human Communication Research 6 (pp. 265-279).
Tice, D. & Baumeister, R. (1993). Controlling anger: Self-induced emotion change. In D. Wegner & J.
Pennebaker (Eds.), Handbook of mental control (v. 5). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
US Bureau of Justice Statistics (2003, February). Crime Data Brief, Intimate Partner Violence, 19932001. As reported by Family Violence Prevention Fund. Retrieved 2/26/2008 from:
http://www.endabuse.org/resources/facts/DomesticViolence.pdf
Zillmann, D. (1993). Mental control of angry aggression. In D. Wegner & J. Pennebaker (Eds.),
Handbook of mental control (v. 5). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Managing Conflict

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Managing Conflict

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Cant We All Just Get Along?

The Art and Skill of Managing Conflict

Cant We All Just Get Along?

1. Understand the nature of conflict and your individual emotional styles.

Organized Christian religions refer to it as temperance. The

Cant We All Just Get Along?

Communication climate is simply the emotional tone of the relationship: Positive or

Are your relationships

The level of fairness, justice, and reciprocity between the

In a relationship we seek the greatest amount of reward with the

The extent to which you want to remain in the relationship

The balance of normal tensions that exist in a relationship, and

For a relationship to grow, or develop beyond a superficial level, it

Self-perpetuating spirals can be positive and confirm, or be negative and disconfirm

Cant We All Just Get Along?

From sef-perception, self-awareness, and identity, face is our

Defensiveness is a warning sign that the relationship is in trouble. It broadly means

Meaning to counterattack, usually through verbal aggression

Meaning to rationalize (seemingly logical explanation),

Meaning to stay away from the person/people who deliver the

Cant We All Just Get Along?

Confirming and disconfirming communication is an indicator of how you do or dont

The basic act of responding to the other person (responding to

Actively listening, discussing ideas and feelings.

Agree with the other, supporting them and showing their

Disconfirming/De-valuing Communication: 7 Types

Ignoring the other person (not responding).

Direct or indirect communication that causes psychological pain

Broad observations about (or imply) personality or character

Feedback that has no relationship to the senders original

Clichs and superficial feedback that avoids the specifics of the

Messages with more than one meaning

How do you handle conflict situations? Are you

Cant We All Just Get Along?

There are three basic levels of conflict:

What to watch on television, which way the toilet paper roll

Religious differences, maturity level, annoying habits

Braiker and Kelley (1979) as found in Cupach & Canary (1997)

According to Deutsch (1973), there are five different types of conflict:

An actual conflict, accurately understood by both parties (you

An actual conflict, but not accurately understood by one or both

An actual conflict, but associated with, or blamed on, the wrong

An actual conflict, but neither party sees it yet (common in

An error in perception, a misunderstanding usually through lack

Cant We All Just Get Along?

CONFLICT INTRODUCTION, continued

Cant We All Just Get Along?

CONFLICT INTRODUCTION, continued

Control dramas are ingrained defensive behaviors, originating in our learned

Cant We All Just Get Along?

CONFLICT INTERACTION EPISODES

There are three general strategies to handling conflict.

Cant We All Just Get Along?

CONFLICT INTERACTION EPISODES, continued

Cant We All Just Get Along?

CONFLICT INTERACTION EPISODES, continued

Cant We All Just Get Along?

Example and Clarifying Question

Im disgusted (About what or whom?)

She made me lose (How did she make you lose?)

They say a housing shortage is coming (Who are they?)

The marriage is empty (What makes you feel empty?)

You cant succeed (What or who would stop me?)