Module 2.

2 Thomas Killman Conflict Mode

Inventory
TKI Readings: (Read before Entrance Conference)
 
    The  Thomas  Killman  Conflict  Mode  Instrument  (TKI)  is  not  a  personality  
assessment  and  should  not  be  referred  to  as  your  thinking  or  learning  style.    It  is  an  
indicator  of  how  you  manage  conflicts  and  is  used  to  help  you  individually  clarify  yours  
and  others  negotiation  skills.    Learning  to  negotiate  successfully  includes  understanding  
the  concept  of  interest-­‐based/principle-­‐centered  vs.  positional  bargaining,  the  actual  
bargaining  structure,  and  strategies  with  an  emphasis  on  win-­‐win  bargaining,  as  well  as  
knowing  when  to  avoid  a  negotiation.    The  TKI  is  employed  to  support  your  
understanding  and  self-­‐assessment  of  the  different  approaches  to  conflict  resolution  
resulting  from  the  research-­‐based  and  highly  popular  "Thomas  -­‐  Kilmann  Conflict  Mode  
Inventory"  and  theory.    Once  an  understanding  of  the  TKI  is  mastered  your  
understanding  of  when  it  is  appropriate  to  use  each  conflict  style  and  how  to  flex  your  
preferred  style  to  respond  appropriately  for  consensus  building  will  be  enhanced.  

INTERPRETING  THE  THOMAS-­KILMANN  CONFLICT  MODE  INSTRUMENT  

(reprinted  with  permission  Thomas  &  Killman;  CPP)  
*Scores  are  graphed  in  relation  to  the  scores  of  the  original  norm  group,  composed  of  managers  at  
middle  and  upper  levels  of  business  and  government  organizations.    
 
The  Five  Conflict  Handling  Modes    
  The  Thomas-­‐Kilmann  Conflict  Mode  Instrument  is  designed  to  assess  an  
individual's  behavior  in  conflict  situations.  "Conflict  Situations"  are  situations  in  which  
the  concerns  of  two  people  appear  to  be  incompatible.  In  such  situations,  we  can  
describe  a  person's  behavior  along  two  basic  dimensions:  (1)  assertiveness,  the  extent  
to  which  the  individual  attempts  to  satisfy  his/her  own  concerns,  and  (2)  
cooperativeness,  the  extent  to  which  the  individual  attempts  to  satisfy  the  other  
person's  concerns.  These  two  basic  dimensions  of  behavior  can  be  used  to  define  five  
specific  methods  of  dealing  with  conflicts.  These  five  "conflict-­‐handling  modes"  are  
shown  below:  

  1  
  
 
 
*This  two  dimensional  model  of  conflict  handling  behavior  is  adapted  from  "Conflict  
and  Conflict  Management"  by  Kenneth  Thomas  in  The  Handbook  of  Industrial  and  
Organizational  Psychology,  edited  by  Marvin  Dunnette  (Chicago:  Rand  McNally,  
1976).  Another  valuable  contribution  in  this  field  is  the  work  by  Robert  Blake  and  
Jane  Mouton  in  The  Managerial  Grid  (Houston:  Gulf  Publishing,  1964).        

  2  
Five  Conflict  Management  Styles  Summary  (Thomas,  K.W.,  &  Kilmann,  R.  H.)  
 
1. Accommodating  is  cooperating  to  a  high-­‐degree,  although  it  can  be  at  your  expense,  
actually  working  against  your  own  goals,  objectives,  and  desired  outcomes.    This  
effective  use  of  this  approach  is  when  you  understand  that  the  other  party  is  an  
expert  or  has  a  better  solution.    You  can  also  implement  this  style  when  you  want  to  
preserve  future  relations  with  the  other  party,  knowing  that  utilizing  this  style  will  be  
at  your  expense.  
 
2. Avoiding  is  when  you  simply  evade  the  issue  by  hindering  the  other  party’s  ability  to  
reach  their  goals  or  assertively  pursuing  your  own.    This  style  is  effectively  used  
when  the  issue  is  trivial,  when  you  have  no  chance  of  winning,  or  when  pursuing  the  
issue  would  be  very  costly.    Another  effective  use  of  this  style  is  when  the  
atmosphere  is  emotionally  charged  and  you  need  to  create  some  space,  but  
sometimes  avoiding  because  the  situation  is  emotionally  charged  can  escalate  rather  
than  diffuse  the  situation.  Sometimes  issues  will  resolve  themselves,  but  “hope  is  
not  a  strategy”,  and,  in  general,  avoiding  is  not  a  good  long-­‐term  strategy.  
 
3. Collaborating  is  when  you  partner  or  pair  up  with  the  other  party  to  achieve  both  of  
your  goals.    Collaborating  allows  you  to  break  free  of  the  “win-­‐lose”  paradigm  and  
seek  the  “win-­‐win.”    This  can  be  effective  for  complex  scenarios  where  you  need  to  
find  a  novel  solution.    This  can  also  mean  re-­‐framing  the  challenge  to  create  a  bigger  
space  and  room  for  everybody’s  ideas.    The  downside  is  that  it  requires  a  high-­‐
degree  of  trust  and  reaching  a  consensus  can  require  a  more  time  and  effort  to  get  
everybody  on  board  and  to  synthesize  all  the  ideas.  
 
4. Competing  is  the  “win-­‐lose”  approach.    You  act  in  a  very  assertive  way  to  achieve  
your  goals,  without  seeking  to  cooperate  with  the  other  party,  and  it  may  be  at  the  
expense  of  the  other  party.        This  approach  may  be  appropriate  for  emergencies  
when  time  is  of  the  essence,  or  when  you  need  quick,  decisive  action,  and  people  
are  aware  of  and  support  the  approach.  
 
5. Compromising  is  the  “lose-­‐lose”  scenario  where  neither  party  everything  they  want.    
This  requires  a  moderate  level  of  assertiveness  and  cooperation.    It  may  be  
appropriate  for  scenarios  where  you  need  a  temporary  solution,  or  where  both  sides  
have  equally  important  goals.      The  trap  is  to  fall  into  compromising  as  an  easy  way  
out,  when  collaborating  would  produce  a  better  solution.  
 
         By  acknowledging  the  styles  you  underuse  can  help  improve  your  self-­‐awareness.    
Once  you  are  aware  of  your  own  patterns,  you  can  pay  attention  to  whether  they  are  
working  for  you  and  you  can  explore  alternatives.    By  using  a  scenario-­‐based  approach,  
you  can  choose  more  effective  conflict  management  styles  and  test  their  effectiveness  
for  you  and  your  situations.  

  3  
Interpreting  Your  Scores  
 
           Usually,  after  getting  back  the  results  of  any  test,  people  first  want  to  know:  "What  
are  the  right  answers?"  In  the  case  of  conflict-­‐handling  behavior,  there  are  no  universal  
right  answers.  All  five  modes  are  useful  in  some  situations:  each  represents  a  set  of  
useful  social  skills.  Our  conventional  wisdom  recognizes,  for  example,  that  often  "two  
heads  are  better  than  one"  (Collaborating).  But  it  also  says,  "Kill  your  enemies  with  
kindness"  (Accommodating),  "Split  the  difference"  (Compromising),  "Leave  well  enough  
alone"  (Avoiding),  "Might  makes  right"  (Competing).  The  effectiveness  of  a  given  
conflict-­‐handling  mode  depends  upon  the  requirements  of  the  specific  conflict  situation  
and  the  skill  with  which  the  mode  is  used.  
 
           Each  of  us  is  capable  of  using  all  five  conflict-­‐handling  modes:  none  of  us  can  be  
characterized  as  having  a  single,  rigid  style  of  dealing  with  conflict.  However,  any  given  
individual  uses  some  modes  better  than  others  and  therefore,  tends  to  rely  upon  those  
modes  more  heavily  than  others,  whether  because  of  temperament  or  practice.  
 
             The  conflict  behaviors  which  individuals  use  are  therefore  the  result  of  both  their  
personal  predispositions  and  the  requirements  of  the  situations  in  which  they  find  
themselves.  The  Thomas-­‐Kilmann  Conflict  Mode  Instrument  is  designed  to  assess  this  
mix  of  conflict-­‐handling  modes.  
 
               To  help  you  judge  how  appropriate  your  utilization  of  the  five  modes  is  for  your  
situation,  we  have  listed  a  number  of  uses  for  each  mode  –  based  upon  lists  generated  
by  company  presidents.  Your  score,  high  or  low,  indicates  its  usefulness  in  your  
situation.  However,  there  is  the  possibility  that  your  social  skills  lead  you  to  rely  upon  
some  conflict  behaviors  more  or  less  than  necessary.    To  help  you  determine  this,  we  
have  also  listed  some  diagnostic  questions  concerning  warning  signals  for  the  overuse  or  
underuse  of  each  mode.  
 
               Conflict  management  styles  do  not  solve  conflict.    Once  you  develop  an  
understanding  that  differences  of  opinion  are  context  specific,  you  can  identify  whether  
the  persons  involved  are  managing  the  conflict  effectively.    People  have  fifteen  options  
when  managing  a  conflict.  When  faced  with  a  difference  of  opinion  with  others  you  
choose  from  five  management  styles  to  settle  the  conflict.    Your  decision  is  usually  
predicated  upon  what  style  you  are  most  comfortable  with  and  have  used  many  times  in  
the  past  rather  than  the  most  effective  style.    Choosing  the  appropriate  style  is  the  
major  factor  in  whether  the  conflict  is  settled  appropriately  or  not.      People  are  usually  
unaware  that  they  are  choosing  a  style  that  they  are  either  under  using,  over  using  or  
appropriately  using.    If  in  the  survey  your  score  is  lower  than  50%  then  the  person  under  
used  the  style,  over  50%  over  used  the  style  and  if  the  score  is  50%  used  the  style  
appropriately.  
                             
 

  4