Conflicts are common in workplaces and in personal life. Conflicts can lead to unproductive behaviors, derailing an organization from achieving its goals. However, conflicts are inevitable. They can be positive and negative, based on the magnitude that the methods used to resolve the concerning conflicts. Conflicts could arise from personality differences, opinion differences, unclear communication, poor cultures, personal agendas, competition, and management problems (Obi & Obineli, 2015). Resolving conflicts can be challenging when dealing with difficult people. Despite such situations, it is critical to resolving conflicts to reduce the costs that an organization might suffer because of the conflicts. Avoidance of conflicts often resolves the matter temporarily as it broods emotions and anger that later develops into an erratic situation (Overton & Lowry, 2013). This essay will discuss ways to deal with difficult people in a way that is advantageous to both parties.
Self-awareness
In conflict resolution with a difficult person, the first step is to create self-awareness. This involves accepting that there is a conflict that needs to be resolved. Then the individual can opt for various options for resolving the conflict, which include avoidance, collaboration, accommodating, competing, or compromising (Overton & Lowry, 2013). Avoidance includes being silent on the situation, which is often not encouraged since it broods negative emotions. The competition includes being forceful and assertive without considering the views of the other person. Accommodation involves an individual letting go of their needs and allowing the other party to have their way. Compromising and collaborating involve meeting each other halfway, introducing cooperation, and yielding to conflict (Overton & Lowry, 2013). When resolving conflicts, individuals need to be open-minded to the perspectives of the other party.
One must identify a difficult person to understand the conflict resolution method to use. Difficult people are tactful, aggressive, hot-tempered, negative towards life, sarcastic, and un-accommodating (Biradar et al., 2010). After identifying the issue and realizing the person is difficult, one can narrow it down to specific methods.
Collaboration
This involves both parties. Parties agree on a position that benefits both of them without neglecting the needs of another. The desires of each party are taken into account to enable them to work cordially (Obi & Obineli, 2015). For instance, in the workplace, the marketing team is complaining that they are being neglected despite not achieving the targets for the year. Constantly, they refuse to work, yet raise demands to the manager. To resolve this conflict, the manager can ask the marketing tea to raise a budget to be appreciated for their work based on their milestones. Therefore, for every target they achieve, the manager allows them to submit a budget within the finance policy to be appreciated in the way that they prefer. In this approach, the manager would have collaborated with the marketing team that is ever complaining to reach their target, fulfilling their role in the organization, while at the same time, their needs being met through a way that they feel best. Listening is critical when dealing with difficult people to be able to understand the root cause of the problem and establish a favorable solution (Overton & Lowry, 2013). Collaborating promotes satisfaction by all parties.
Withdrawal/ avoidance
This solution is not advantageous to both parties since they both lose the situation. The parties chose to ignore the problem at hand, therefore, making it difficult to achieve any of their needs. This strategy often assumes that conflicts are unnecessary; therefore, they do not require attention from either party (Obi & Obineli, 2015). Avoidance creates resentment and bottled feelings, which not only detriments the mental health of the parties but also leads to losses within the organization; for instance, an employee requested leave to attend to personal matters at home. However, the manager is difficult and does not understand why the employee should be going on a leave day after a two-day holiday. The employee decides not to push for the leave because the manager has a history of rejecting leave applications from the employees. He decides to stay at work despite being frustrated and angry, making him unproductive. On the other hand, the manager also decided not to follow up with the employee. In this scenario, both parties will lose, and the manager will indirectly lead to losses in the organization due to poor performance from the employee. The employee will be frustrated and unhappy while working, and he will not be able to attend to his personal issues.
Forcing
This involves forcing one party to let go of their needs in favor of the other party. This resolution is also not encouraged because it is only advantageous to one party (Obi & Obineli, 2015). It involves one party pursuing its needs while suppressing the needs of the other party. This method is authoritative. It could be used on people who are aggressive and hostile. Forcing could be used on difficult people in an attempt to force them to achieve the goals of the organization, especially when they are constantly playing victim after harassing others (Gadd, 2012). For instance, an employee is constantly refusing to report to work early. On several occasions, the employee has been verbally warned about coming late, but every time, she plays the victim and refuses to adhere to the regulations. To solve this conflict, the manager can write the employee an official written warning letter, threatening the employee with the termination of employment if she continues to report to work late.
Smoothing
This involves giving one party a considerable outcome, meeting the demands of the adversary while ignoring its own needs. This is a loser and-winner situation, despite solving the conflict (Obi & Obineli, 2015). This solution is often temporary and ends up frustrating the other party. Smoothing ineffectively resolves a conflict since the problem remains and is bound to resurface from time to time. For instance, a high school has requested the mother for a weekend with her boyfriend. The student is often rebellious, and the mother is afraid that if she refuses to grant her permission, she might elope or do something more drastic. So the mother decides to let the daughter go for the weekend without holding her accountable n anything.
Compromise
This approach involves both parties winning or losing at the same time. Both parties are concerned about the welfare of one another; therefore, they choose to meet each other halfway (Obi & Obineli, 2015). It is advantageous for both parties since they meet their needs to some extent without favoring either of the parties. It can also be a loss for both parties because they are unable to meet their needs in totality. They forgot some of their needs to accommodate the needs of the other party. For instance, an employee has constantly been coming to work late, citing that she comes from far and cannot make it to work early. The manager has written this employee several warnings to no avail. The manager decides to compromise by allowing the employee to come to work late but also leave late, despite the organization having no policy on shift hours. In this approach, the employee can meet the required hours of being at work, and also, the manager can account for the required hours from the employee. Dealing with difficult individuals in conflicts at times requires specific approaches based on the difficulty presenting itself. Compromising ensures that both parties meet halfway.
Accommodating
This involves allowing the difficult party to have leeway to some extent. It can be made to some extent, despite this case, both parties benefit because their needs are met (Biradar et al., 2010). For instance, an employee that often wants to use the central computer without considering other can be difficult to deal with. To address this issue to allow other people to use the computer, the manager can require the employee to submit a schedule for his computer use. During this schedule, he will be allowed to use the computer, after which others will be allowed to use it freely. Therefore, everyone who needs to use the computer is able to use it, achieving goals successfully. In this approach, the needs of both parties are addressed fully without compromising the needs of any of the parties. Accommodating provides a platform for solving issues peacefully.
Dealing with aggressive and bullying individuals
Avoiding such conflicts should not be an option, regardless of the difficulty of the situation. To address conflicts involving bullies, the victim must stand up for himself. While standing up for one’s self, one can consider employing compromise of collaborating tactics. The victim should be assertive and show the aggressor the seriousness of the situation (Gadd, 2012). One should also consider involving others with different points of view to avoid focusing on the aggressor’s point of view. Being confident in the resolutions and demanding the bully consider a compromise or a collaboration will help resolve the conflict. For instant, a boss is constantly taking credit for the work done by his junior and often telling off the junior when she complains. On this occasion, the junior has worked on a project that the overall boss is considering rewarding the employee monetarily. However, the immediate boss is claiming credit for the project, and this has led to a great conflict in the organization. To resolve this, the junior employee should talk to the boss assertively, offering him a compromise or a collaboration, where they can both share the credit for the project. If he refuses, the employee should consider engaging another senior employee that could reason with the immediate boss to consider a compromise or a collaboration.
Dealing with complainers
Complainers have inflexible perspectives. To address complainers, harness and empower them through compromise. Compromising will involve engaging the complainers through open discussion to identify the problem and address it accordingly (Gadd, 2012). One can also ask the complainer to come up with solutions, and through this, a compromise could be reached for both parties. For instance, when an employee is always failing to achieve the goals of the week due to constant complaining of the workplace being inefficient, a manager can ask the employee to come up with solutions to make the place efficient. Through this, the employee can reach a compromise that will help her perform well, and the manager will be able to improve the overall performance of the workplace. For instance, the employee can suggest solutions such as reporting early to work, adjusting shift hours, introducing in-house training, or emphasizing the economy of resources. Then, the employee can be engaged in choosing the best approaches, which she or he will be comfortable with, in his/her given list. This approach eliminates the complaints.
Dealing with the “helpless” people
These are people who refuse to make an effort to accomplish any goals. They often rely on others to accomplish their duties for them and refuse to learn these skills (Gadd, 2012). Helpless people refuse to learn or utilize the required skills since they depend on others to accomplish their goals. They are a burden to the organization. When dealing with such people, the best solution is to consider the collaboration method. In this approach, the victim could talk the individual into learning the skills necessary for the job. The victim can help the “helpless” employee in achieving this goal. Then, for an individual who does not want to use the skill even after acquiring it, he can be given tasks in a team. In the end, both parties would have benefited since the employee would have learned the skills, and the other party would eliminate the burden involved in helping the nagging employee. In tackling conflict, it is important not to get personal during the resolution process. Considering the VALUED conflict method, where one has to validate the conflict, ask open-minded questions, and listen to all the parties involved in the conflict. Further, one has to uncover all interests and explore all the options on the table before finally settling on a given solution.
In conclusion, these are common, especially with difficult people in the workplace and in their personal life. To reach a reasonable solution, both parties must be willing to reach a solution for both parties to gain from the solution. The first step is to realize there is a problem that needs a solution. Confronting the other party is important to inform them of the opportunity to work out the pending issues. Thereafter, based on the type of the situation, an individual can decide to ignore/avoid, smooth, compromise, force, accommodate or collaborate. Avoiding does not benefit either party, while forcing only benefits one party. Compromising, accommodating, and collaborating are proven to have benefits for both parties. Once an approach has been considered, it is advised to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach, after which the individual can consider other methods to enhance the conflict resolution process.
References
Biradar, R. S., Dhole, G. R., Jadhav, P. B., & Devarkar, D. V. (2010). Handling Difficult People for Better Administration. (p. 7). Research Gate. doi:DOI: 10.13140/2.1.2351.7126
Gadd, G. (2012). Dealing with difficult people. Veterinary Nursing Journal, 27(11), 424–425. doi:DOI: 10.1111/j.2045-0648.2012.00235.x
Obi, S. J., & Obineli, A. S. (2015). Psychological Strategies for Resolving Interpersonal Conflicts among Administrators in Tertiary Institutions: A Case of Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka, Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(26).
Overton, A. R., & Lowry, C. A. (2013). Conflict Management: Difficult Conversations with Difficult People. Conflict Management. Doi: DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1356728.
write