The authors define the “process view of conflict” as a series of stages. Ideally, a properly resolved conflict situation will have five distinct steps - Prelude, Triggering, Initiation, Differentiation, and Resolution.
When asked what it means to have a non-process view of communication, I don’t interpret this as meaning that none of the five phases occurred, rather that the process has been interrupted or derailed some point before the Resolution stage. When we take a non-process view of conflict in communication, the Prelude and Triggering phases may be met, but never fully evolve into Resolution.
Having never allowed the conflict situation to reach the Initiation phase can be seen as a result of “Confrontational Avoidance” or due to whats known as the “Chilling Effect”. Although it is often times better to “let sleeping dogs lie”, avoidance is often the result of a lack of confidence in the recipient.
We can change our thinking first by education ourselves as to the five phases of conflict resolution. When we are put into situations like these, now we are capable of stopping to consider what kind of outcome is most desirable in a conflict situation. Instead of storming out of the room at the Differentiation Phase, instead, we now can recognize this as just being a prelude to Resolution, rather than treating it as the final act.
-Ben
I agree; it would be helpful to become educated about the five phases of conflict resolution.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting when the authors of our book pointed out that the conflict process can be looked upon as a cycle, “where the resolution or management of one conflict becomes part of the prelude of the next conflict” because whether a conflict is resolved or not, the way the conflict was handled will affect how future conflicts are handled. Our successes and failures will affect our future ventures into conflict resolution.
I also thought it would be helpful to do what the authors recommended: after a period of time, discuss and evaluate changes that occurred as a result of the resolution of a conflict. This would help assure a “win-win” situation because if things aren’t working out as expected, the involved parties could go back to the differentiation phase and come up with a resolution that may be better at allowing both parties to “win.”