THE LEADERS ROLE IN

RESOLVING CONFLICT AND

NEGOTIATING STYLES
Aida A. Paraguison, EdD
Lecturer
 INTRODUCTION
 Conflict may occur between people or within groups in all kinds of
situations. Due to the wide range of differences among people, the
lack of conflict may signal the absence of effective interaction.
Conflict should not be considered good or bad, rather it may be
viewed as a necessity to help build meaningful relationships
between people and groups. The means and how the conflict is
handled will determine whether it is productive or devastating.
Conflict has a potential to create positive opportunities and
advancement towards a common goal, however, conflict can also
devastate relationships and lead to negative outcomes ((Kazimoto,
2013; Fisher, 2000; Evans, 2013).
 An under-reported aspect that is not commonly discussed
among leadership qualities is the ability to handle conflict
(Guttman, 2004). Guttman explains that there might be two reasons
as to why there is little recognition of conflict management in
leaders.

One is called rationalistic fallacy, and Guttman explains that

most of the literature available focuses on arming leaders with all
necessary leadership concepts and success will just follow,
almost as if it is assumed that leaders will automatically know
how to manage conflict.

Secondly, Guttman explains that leaders may have a

fatalistic attitude towards conflict.
 Defining CONFLICT…
 What is conflict? The answer to this question varies, depending on
the source. The Webster Dictionary defines conflict as “the
competitive or opposing action of incompatibles: an antagonistic
state or action.” For some, the definition of conflict may involve
war, military fight, or political dispute.
 For others, conflict involves a disagreement that arises when two or
more people or parties pursue a common goal. Conflict means
different things to different people, making it very difficult to
come up with a universal or true definition.
 According to American psychologist Daniel Katz, conflict
may arise from 3 different sources: economic, value, and
power. (Evans, 2013)

Economic Conflict involves competing motives to attain scarce

resources. This type of conflict typically occurs when behavior
and emotions of each party are aimed at increasing their own
gain. Each party involved may come into conflict as a result of
them trying to attain the most of these resources. An example of
this is when union and management conflict on how to divide and
distribute company funds (Fisher, 2000; Evans, 2013).
Value Conflict involves incompatibility in the
ways of life. This type of conflict includes the
different preferences and ideologies that people
may have as their principles. This type of conflict
is very difficult to resolve because the differences
are belief-based and not fact-based. An example
of this is demonstrated in international war in
which each side asserts its own set of beliefs
(Fisher, 2000; Evans, 2013).
Power Conflict occurs when each party tries to exert and maintain its
maximum influence in the relationship and social setting. For one party to
have influence over the other, one party must be stronger (in terms of
influence) than the other. This will result in a power struggle that may end
in winning, losing, or a deadlock with continuous tension between both
parties.

This type of conflict may occur between individuals, groups, or nations.

This conflict will come into play when one party chooses to take a power
approach to the relationship. The key word here is “chooses.” The power
conflict is a choice that is made by one party to exert its influence on the
other. It is also important to note that power may enter all types of conflict
since the parties are trying to control each other (Fisher, 2000; Evans,
2013).
According to Ana Shetach, an organizational consultant in
team process and development, conflict can be a result from
every aspect such as attitude, race, gender, looks, education,
opinions, feelings, religion and cultures. Conflict may also
arise from differences in values, affiliations, roles, positions,
and status.

Conflict is a basic part of the human experience and can

influence our actions or decisions in one way or another.
It should not be viewed as an action that always results in
negative outcomes but instead as an opportunity for learning
and growth which may lead to positive outcomes.
 Since conflict can result in emotions that
can make a situation uncomfortable, it is often
avoided. Feelings such as guilt, anger, anxiety,
and fear can be a direct result of conflict, which
can cause individuals to avoid it all together.
Conflict can be a good thing and avoiding it to
preserve a false impression of harmony can
cause even more damage (Loehr, 2017a).
LEVELS OF CONFLICT
Interpersonal Conflict. This level of conflict occurs when
two individuals have differing goals or approaches in their
relationship. Each individual has their own type of personality,
and because of this, there will always be differences in choices
and opinions. Compromise is necessary for managing this type
of conflict and can eventually help lead to personal growth and
developing relationships with others. If interpersonal conflict
is not addressed, it can become destructive to the point where a
mediator (leader) may be needed (Loehr, 2017a; Fisher, 2000;
Evans, 2013).
Intrapersonal Conflict. This level of conflict occurs within an
individual and takes place within the person’s mind. This is a
physiological type of conflict that can involve thoughts and
emotions, desires, values, and principles. This type of conflict
can be difficult to resolve if the individual has trouble
interpreting their own inner battles. It may lead to symptoms
that can become physically apparent, such as anxiety,
restlessness, or even depression. This level of conflict can
create other levels of conflict if the individual is unable to
come to a resolution on their own.
Intergroup Conflict. This level of conflict occurs when two
different groups or teams within the same organization have a
disagreement. This may be a result of competition for
resources, differences in goals or interests, or even threats to
group identity. This type of conflict can be very destructive
and escalate very quickly if not resolved effectively. This can
ultimately lead to high costs for the organization. On the other
hand, intergroup conflict can lead to remarkable progress
towards a positive outcome for the organization if it is
managed appropriately (Loehr, 2017a; Fisher, 2000; Evans,
2013).
Intragroup Conflict. This level of conflict can occur
between two individuals who are within the same group
or team. Similar to interpersonal conflict, disagreements
between team members typically are a result of
different personalities. Within a team, conflict can be
very beneficial as it can lead to progress to
accomplishing team objectives and goals. However, if
intragroup conflict is not managed correctly, it can
disrupt the harmony of the entire team and result in
slowed productivity (Loehr, 2017a; Fisher, 2000;
Evans, 2013).
 Conflict
management…what
does it mean?
 Conflict management is a skill that leaders must be able to
employ when needed to help foster a productive working environment
(Guttman, 2004). There is a realization that conflict management should
be a skill that leaders need to give priority to learning and mastering
(Kazimoto, 2013).

The inability of a leader to deal with conflict will not only

lead to negative outcomes but may also undermine the credibility of
the leader (Kazimoto, 2013). Whereas if a leader is able to establish an
atmosphere of cooperation and foster teamwork, making it clear that this
is his/her value system, there is a likelihood that this value system will
be adopted by the entire organization (Guttman, 2004). Therefore, it is
very important that we discuss and address conflict management as a
leadership skill.
 POPULAR METHOD OF CONFLICT
MANAGEMENT STYLES

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument is an assessment

tool that helps measure an individual’s behavior in conflict situations.
The assessment takes less than 15 minutes to complete and provides feedback
to an individual about how effectively they can use five different conflict-
handling modes. TKI helps leaders understand how individual or team
dynamics are affected by each of the modes, as well as helping leaders decide
on which mode to employ in different conflict situations (Kilmann &
Thomas, n.d.).
 The TKI is based on two dimensions of behavior that help
characterize the five different conflict-handling modes. The first
dimension is assertiveness, and this describes the extent to which
a person will try to fulfill their own concerns. The second is
cooperativeness, and this describes the extent to which a person
will try to fulfil others’ concerns. The five conflict-handling
modes fall within a scale of assertiveness and cooperativeness as
shown in the figure below. They include: avoiding,
accommodating, competing, collaborating, and
compromising (Loehr, 2017b; Kilmann & Thomas, n.d.).
The TKI Five Conflict-Handling Modes (Avoiding,
Accomodating, Competing, Collaborating, and Compromising)

 Avoiding
This mode is low assertiveness and low cooperative. The leader withdraws
from the conflict, and therefore no one wins. They do not pursue their own
concerns nor the concerns of others. The leader may deal with the conflict
in a passive attitude in hopes that the situation just “resolves itself.” In
many cases, avoiding conflict may be effective and beneficial, but on the
other hand, it prevents the matter from being resolved and can lead to
larger issues.
Avoiding

This mode is low assertiveness and low cooperative. The leader

withdraws from the conflict, and therefore no one wins. They do not pursue
their own concerns nor the concerns of others. The leader may deal with the
conflict in a passive attitude in hopes that the situation just “resolves itself.”
In many cases, avoiding conflict may be effective and beneficial, but on the
other hand, it prevents the matter from being resolved and can lead to larger
issues.

Situations when this mode is useful include: when emotions are

elevated and everyone involved needs time to calm down so that productive
discussions can take place, the issue is of low importance, the team is able
to resolve the conflict without participation from leadership, there are more
important matters that need to be addressed, and the benefit of avoiding the
conflict outweighs the benefit of addressing it.
Accommodating

This mode is low assertiveness and high cooperation. The leader ignores their
own concerns in order to fulfill the concerns of others. They are willing to sacrifice their
own needs to “keep the peace” within the team. Therefore, the leader loses and the other
person or party wins. This mode can be effective, as it can yield an immediate solution to the
issue but may also reveal the leader as a “doormat” who will accommodate to anyone who
causes conflict.

Situations when this mode is useful include: when an individual realizes they are
wrong and accepts a better solution, when the issue is more important to the other person or
party which can be seen as a good gesture and builds social credits for future use, when
damage may result if the leader continues to push their own agenda, when a leader wants to
allow the team to develop and learn from their own mistakes, and when harmony needs to
be maintained to avoid trouble within the team. This mode should not be used when the
outcome is critical to the success of the team and when safety is an absolute necessity to the
resolution of the conflict (Loehr, 2017b; Mediate.com; Kilmann & Thomas, n.d.).
Competing

This mode is high assertiveness and low cooperation. The leader fulfills their own
concerns at the expense of others. The leader uses any appropriate power they have to win the
conflict. This is a powerful and effective conflict-handling mode and can be appropriate and
necessary in certain situations. The misuse of this mode can lead to new conflict; therefore,
leaders who use this conflict-handling mode need to be mindful of this possibility so that they
are able to reach a productive resolution.

Situations when this mode is useful include: an immediate decision is needed, an

outcome is critical and cannot be compromised, strong leadership needs to be demonstrated,
unpopular actions are needed, when company or organizational welfare is at stake, and when
self-interests need to be protected.

This mode should be avoided when: relationships are strained and may lead to
retaliation, the outcome is not very important to the leader, it may result in weakened support
and commitment from followers, and when the leader is not very knowledgeable of the
situation (Loehr, 2017b; Mediate.com; Kilmann & Thomas, n.d.).
Collaborating

This mode is high assertiveness and high cooperation. In this mode both individuals or teams
win the conflict. The leader works with the team to ensure that a resolution is met that fulfills both of
their concerns. This mode will require a lot of time, energy and resources to identify the underlying
needs of each party. This mode is often described as “putting an idea on top of an idea on top of an
idea” to help develop the best resolution to a conflict that will satisfy all parties involved. The best
resolution in this mode is typically a solution to the conflict that would not have been produced by a
single individual. Many leaders encourage collaboration because not only can it lead to positive
outcomes, but more importantly it can result in stronger team structure and creativity. Situations when
this mode is useful include: the concerns of parties involved are too important to be compromised, to
identify and resolve feelings that have been interfering with team dynamics, improve team structure and
commitment, to merge ideas from individuals with different viewpoints on a situation, and when the
objective is to learn.

This mode should be avoided in situations where time, energy and resources are limited, a
quick and vital decision needs to be made, and the conflict itself is not worth the time and effort (Loehr,
2017b; Mediate.com; Kilmann & Thomas, n.d.).
Compromising

This mode is moderate assertiveness and moderate cooperative. It is often described as

“giving up more than one would want” to allow for each individual to have their concerns partially
fulfilled. This can be viewed as a situation where neither person wins or losses, but rather as an
acceptable solution that is reached by either splitting the difference between the two positions,
trading concerns, or seeking a middle ground. Leaders who use this conflict-handling mode may be
able to produce acceptable outcomes but may put themselves in a situation where team members
will take advantage of the them. This can be a result of the team knowing that their leader will
compromise during negotiations. Compromising can also lead to a less optimal outcome because
less effort is needed to use this mode. Situations when this mode is effective include: a temporary
and/or quick decision to a complex issue is needed, the welfare of the organization will benefit from
the compromise of both parties, both parties are of equal power and rank, when other modes of
conflict-handling are not working, and when the goals are moderately important and not worth the
time and effort.
This mode should be avoided when partial satisfaction of each party’s concerns may lead to
propagation of the issue or when a leader recognizes that their team is taking advantage of their
compromising style (Loehr, 2017b; Mediate.com; Kilmann & Thomas, n.d.).
 Leadership and Conflict Management

The leader’s role in managing conflict can have a significant impact on

how they are resolved within the workplace or organization. Leaders spend about
24% of their time resolving conflicts, however the process to approaching conflict
management relates to a great extent to their leadership style (Guttman, 2004).
Leaders who use conflict management skills can provide guidance and direction
towards conflict resolution. A common trait of leaders is they are able to build
teams that work well together and help to set the tone for the organization. They
must be able to facilitate the resolution of conflicts through effective conflict
management (Guttman, 2004; Doucet, Poitras & Chenevert, 2009).
 The ability to recognize one’s own
leadership style will ultimately help describe how
a leader handles conflict. Peter Northouse states
that “it is up to the leader to assess what action,
if any, is needed and then intervene with the
specific leadership function to meet the demand
of the situation.” To be an effective leader, one
needs to respond with the action that is required
of the situation” (Northouse, 2016).
 Conflict management must be a part of a leader’s toolbox
and be deployed when conflict arises within a team or
organization. If conflict is not addressed in a timely manner, it can
not only affect the moral of the team/organization but can create
larger issues later. Once this happens it may be more difficult to
resolve then it would have been if the conflict was addressed
immediately and effectively. Leaders must be able to recognize
that conflict can cause negative issues within their team or
organization. If they are able to pull on their leadership skills and
recognize which conflict-handling mode is required for each
situation, they can create an opportunity to improve team structure
and dynamics, and ultimately achieve their goal of changing,
developing, and transforming organizations.
NEGOTIATING
AND
BARGAINING
 The goal of police negotiation
techniques is to “work with the person
in crisis towards a peaceful solution that
previously seemed impossible,” or, in
other words, to reconcile a counterpart’s
problems with the need to maintain the
peace for society at large.
 Using active-listening techniques, maintaining
an open-minded approach, and building rapport to
influence one’s counterpart are just a few of the “skills
negotiators use to transcend these unique incidents
and [which] are applicable to a variety of other
[negotiating] situations.”
Crisis Negotiation Skills #1. “Talk to Me”

The NYPD HNT’s motto, “Talk to Me,” emphasizes

communication as an essential police negotiation technique
for their crisis negotiators, and for good reason. Opening up
avenues of communication to your counterpart signals that
you are ready to listen, an integral first step to building
rapport between negotiating counterparts by “build[ing]
trust…as well as display[ing] empathy,” which can lead to
further mutual gains at the bargaining table as the
negotiation progresses beyond the initial stages.
Crisis Negotiation Skills #2. Patience

Not only is it important to allow your counterpart a

forum to air concerns during a hostage negotiation, it is also
critical for the crisis negotiator to be patient and “avoid
jumping to conclusions and rushing quickly towards a
resolution.” The patient negotiator seeks to build rapport so as
to influence her counterpart’s actions; if she ignores this
process, she greatly hinders her ability to influence her
counterpart and resolve the situation in a peaceful manner.
Crisis Negotiation Skills #3. Active Listening

The NYPD Hostage Negotiations Team calls “

active listening” an affective and effective skill.
Active listening is an affective skill when it is used to
build trust and rapport between negotiating parties
with the effective byproduct of this process resulting
in information gathering, which can help maintain an
open dialogue with your negotiating counterpart.
Crisis Negotiation Skills #4. Respect

Active listening and patience are high on the list

of the NYPD HRT’s conflict resolution tactics. Both
result in your counterpart feeling she is respected and
that her concerns are being heard and addressed.
Crisis Negotiation Skills #5. Calm

Displaying calm in the midst of a heated crisis

negotiation is perhaps one of the most critical police
negotiation techniques a hostage negotiator can
master, because “the negotiator’s actions are
contagious and . . . using a calm, understanding, and
respectful tone is what helps the subject realize there
is an alternative way out.”
Crisis Negotiation Skills #6.

Self-Awareness

Self awareness for the NYPD HNT involves

the dual realization that the crisis negotiator must
establish a relationship with a complete stranger
while keeping her communication strategic and
purposeful in nature.
Crisis Negotiation Skills #7. Adaptability

A police negotiation technique that all skilled negotiators

should possess in their negotiation skills repertoire is the ability
to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to those
circumstances in a way that preserves the relationship they have
built with their counterpart while also bringing them closer to
their negotiation goals. As the NYPD HNT points out, “crisis
and hostage negotiation is not a ‘cookie-cutter’ design where
the same approach and actions are used each time in an
identical way,” and, indeed, no skilled negotiator would ever
approach the bargaining table with this mindset.
 While negotiations are never uniform or universal, the
relationship building and communication skills advocated by
integrative bargainers do apply in nearly every negotiation
scenario you can imagine.

Though not often fraught with the emotional

complexity of a hostage negotiation, business negotiations
still rely upon trust, rapport, and a mutual sense of respect in
order to make the deal happen. Likewise, when dealing with
difficult people in your daily life, active listening and a
respectful, calm demeanor are proven techniques for
preserving your relationship with your counterpart while also
addressing her concerns in a thoughtful way.
Negotiation Skills

Negotiation is a deliberative process between two or more

actors that seek a solution to a common issue or who are
bartering over an item of value. Negotiation skills include the
range of negotiation techniques negotiators employ to create
value and claim value in their dealmaking
business negotiations and beyond. Negotiation skills can help
you make deals, solve problems, manage conflicts, and build
relationships as well as preserve relationships. Negotiation
skills can be learned with conscious effort and should be
practiced once learned.
 MANAGING INTERGROUP CONFLICT
Preventing Conflict

Preventing disruptive conflict involves establishing an environment

characterized by trust and respect. When an inter-group project starts,
schedule a kickoff meeting and invite all the team members. Since some
conflict is inevitable, discuss the need for creating a comprehensive
process for resolving inter-group issues. Brainstorm possibilities and agree
upon a decision-making strategy and communicate it to all the teams. For
example, distribute a checklist that lists the tips for solving inter-group
conflict within teams. This gives people the tools they need to develop the
skills associated with respecting others who have different ideas, opinions
and experiences.
Resolving

To resolve inter-group conflict, start by

acknowledging it. When you ignore issues and avoid
confrontation, it tends to cause problems to fester.
Instead, openly discuss the impact that conflict has on
inter-group team productivity. For example, if differences
of opinion prevent good communication, work may not
flow from one process to the next in a timely manner,
impacting project milestones. Lead by example and keep
communications open. Use active listening skills to
understand both sides of any issue. This involves
paraphrasing or repeating back what the other person
has said so you make sure that you truly demonstrate
understanding.
Understanding

To understand ongoing issues, schedule regular meetings

and invite all the teams. Allow each team leader to provide an
update on issues. Then, allow time for discussion. This gives the
whole group an opportunity to air grievances and work on
resolutions. Prevent issues from becoming personal by focusing on
the problems, not the person raising the issues. Avoid personal
attacks and pay attention to the work at hand instead. Clarify each
team's position when inter-group conflict arises. If you can clearly
identify and articulate the issue, the problem can be discussed
more objectively. List facts and assumptions associated with each
point of view. Then, the group can begin to consider alternative
solutions.
Agreeing

To reach agreement on a problem resolution, encourage

everyone involved to keep an open mind. Analyze the issue from
several angles to get a broad perspective. This approach typically
leads to innovative and creative solutions that all teams can feel
good about. Engage a facilitator to handle volatile discussions
between groups. An impartial mediator can help diffuse tempers
and help all parties reach a solution faster. Celebrate resolution
and acknowledge the contributions made by each team member.
This helps build long-lasting relationships. Team members gain
confidence in their ability to negotiate, influence and debate
issues for a positive outcome. This reduces future conflict and
improves overall productivity.
PREVENTING DESTRUCTIVE CONFLICT

1. In the Midst of Conflict, Never Compare.

Comparisons are weapons — especially in conflict

situations. They’re used to point out the worst in someone
else. And when you think about it, comparisons are
counterproductive. How can you expect to bring out the
best in someone by pointing out his/her worst?
2. Never Condemn.

The great football coach Lou Holtz

says, “It’s tough to get ahead when you waste
your time getting even.” That’s why
condemnation has to be avoided. It’s a dead
end to nowhere.

Blaming, condemning behavior often starts

with the “You” word. It comes out in words such
as “You should … You always … You never … or …
You’re the one to blame.”
3. Never Command.

People hate being told what to do. They

just HATE it. After all, a command, any command
says, in effect, “I’m better than you. I’m your superior;
you’re inferior. I know what’s best, not you.”

Before you bark out a command, remember, “A word

to the wise is resented.” Refrain from commands, unless the
other person asks for your input, feedback, advice, or
direction.
4. Never Challenge.

Be wary of dares and challenges.

They’re dangerous. Remember your grade-
school days when someone dared, double
dared, or double-dog dared you to do
something? It was seldom a good idea.
Let us never negotiate out of fear.
But let us never fear to negotiate.

-John F. Kennedy