Conflict avoidance

Last updated

Conflict Avoidance refers to a set of behaviors aimed at preventing or minimizing disagreement with another person. These behaviors can occur before the conflict emerges (e.g., avoiding certain topics, changing the subject) or after the conflict has been expressed (e.g., withholding disagreement, withdrawing from the conversation, giving in). Conflict avoidance can be employed as a temporary measure within a specific situation or as a more permanent approach, such as establishing "taboo topics" or exiting a relationship. [1] Although conflict avoidance can exist in any interpersonal relationship, it has been studied most closely in the contexts of family and work relationships. Consequently, research on conflict avoidance spans various disciplines including: clinical psychology, social psychology, organizational behavior, communication studies, and family studies.

Contents

Scholars use the term "conflict avoidance" to characterize specific behaviors as well as a broader conflict style. A conflict management style is an individual's preferred method for handling conflict. Those with an avoidant style tend to sidestep disagreement, postpone dealing with conflict, or withdraw. Traditionally, conflict avoidance has been considered a dysfunctional approach to managing conflict by researchers, clinicians, and the general public because it leaves issues unresolved and can lead to resentment. [2] [3] However, studies on conflict avoidance have produced mixed results, identifying functional benefits such as strengthening relationships, reducing stress, and increasing productivity. The general consensus is that avoidance is neither inherently good nor bad for conflict management but depends on the specific relationship, topic, and context. [1]

Origins & Theoretical Framework

Strategic Goals

Early research in conflict management focused on effective ways to actively manage conflict within the organizational setting. This line of research was largely inspired by the Management Grid introduced by theoreticians Robert R. Blake and Jane Mouton as well as Morton Deustch’s Theory of Cooperation and Competition. In the 1970s and 80s, various management scholars redeveloped these models, renaming the various dimensions and developing self-report scales to measure individual conflict management styles. One of the most popular versions to come out of this research was the Dual Concerns Model introduced by Pruitt & Rubin (1986) to predict behavior in negotiations. They labeled the two dimensions: concern for self and concern for others. The avoidance conflict style is marked by a low concern for self and low concern for their negotiation partner. [4] While the specific labels for each dimension and conflict styles vary across different models, avoidance is generally considered a passive, lose-lose approach. [5]

Personality

Conflict avoidance is often rooted in early socialization and personality traits that influence individuals' perception of potential harms or opportunities. According to communication scholar Michael Roloff, individuals often seek to create and maintain a state of interpersonal harmony in their relationships, which is defined by consensus about most issues. The existence of conflict threatens harmony, and some individuals report that they generally wish to avoid conflict. For example, some individuals have a low tolerance for disagreement, tend to take conflict personally, and believe that conflict is always destructive. Research has found that conflict avoidance is positively associated with agreeableness and neuroticism. [6] One study of 350 undergraduates and 100 managers discovered that personality traits, as measured by the Big Five, accounted for 20% of the variance in avoidant conflict style. [7]

Cultural Influences

According to Stella Ting-Toomey's Face Negotiation Theory, avoidant behavior may also be motivated by face concerns, defined as the self-image an individual has in social interactions. This theory is used by cross-cultural researchers to explain how people from different cultures interpret and react to conflict. For example, in collective societies, there is more of a sensitivity to hierarchy compared to the West, leading to greater avoidance when there is significant separation between the parties involved. [8] In collective societies, there are also greater relationship-oriented values and a belief that a direct approach will harm a relationship, causing a greater prevalence of conflict avoidance. [9] Generally, individuals from collectivist societies are more likely to avoid conflict compared to individuals from individualistic societies. [10]

Consequences of Conflict Avoidance

Research within conflict avoidance psychology has identified three areas that are significantly impacted by an individual's choices surrounding conflict: stress, loneliness, and relationship satisfaction. [11] According to communication scholar Michael Roloff, the general sentiment is that leaving conflicts unresolved and unaddressed causes interpersonal issues to fester, resulting in either explosive confrontation or crippling emotional suppression. However, empirical research has found mixed results, associating conflict avoidance with both positive and negative outcomes. [1]

Intimate Relationships

Partners in long-term relationships often "pick their battles" and withhold complaints to manage conflict. However, withdrawing from conflict has been associated with higher rates of divorce and lower relationship quality. According to communication scholars Caughlin & Scott, explicit avoidance is far more damaging than implicit or tacit avoidance. [1]

Conflict avoidance is just as prevalent within stable marriages as in unstable ones. Overall, the effect of conflict avoidance may depend on the interpretation of the behavior rather than the behavior itself. [12]

Family Relationships

Conflict in families can serve an important function, supporting child development through individuation and communicating the specific needs of individual family members. When conflicts are avoided, individuals may perceive their family as unresponsive or indifferent to their needs, which increases frustration and hostility. Conflict avoidance has been associated with poor outcomes for children, including loneliness and maladjustment. [13] [14]

In the Workplace

Conflict avoidance has received considerably less study and attention compared to active conflict management behaviors such as mediation or integrative negotiation. This is partly due to the difficulty of studying unobservable behaviors such as "not engaging" or "avoiding" conflict. [15] In the workplace, avoiding conflict often leads to emotional suppression and feelings of powerlessness, which can increase stress, burnout, and fatigue. From a productivity perspective, conflict avoidance is negatively related to information exchange and team cohesiveness. Unresolved conflict in the workplace has been linked to miscommunication resulting from confusion or refusal to cooperate, increased stress, reduced creative collaboration and team problem-solving, and distrust. [16] However, this negative effect depends on the quality of workplace relationships; in generally positive relationships, avoiding conflict can be associated with higher productivity. [1]

Measuring conflict avoidance

There are two main approaches to studying conflict avoidance in academic research: self-report scales and behavioral observation. Several instruments have been developed to measure conflict management styles based on the dual-concerns model and are listed below:

InstrumentAuthorContext
Conflict Strategies in Serial ArguementsBevan (2014) [17] Romantic Couples
Avoidant Conflict Behavior Scale (ACBS)Ubinger et al. (2013) [18] Family Conflict
Dutch Test for Conflict Handling (DUTCH)De Dreu et al. (2001) [19] Workplace Conflict
Management of Differences Exercise (MODE) Thomas & Kilmann (1977) [20] Workplace Conflict
Organizational Communication Conflict Instrument (OCCI)Putnam & Wilson (1982) [21] Workplace Conflict
Rahim Organizational Conflict Inventory II (ROCI - II)Rahim (1983) [22] Workplace Conflict

Interventions

Experts suggest that management should not wait for formal complaints to take action and should establish unrelated complaint networks such as counselors to provide a more effective outlet for avoiding employee distress. [23] Managers should also develop strong cooperative goals and proactively train employees in conflict management which promotes more constructive conflict management. [24]

See also

Related Research Articles

In social psychology, an interpersonal relation describes a social association, connection, or affiliation between two or more persons. It overlaps significantly with the concept of social relations, which are the fundamental unit of analysis within the social sciences. Relations vary in degrees of intimacy, self-disclosure, duration, reciprocity, and power distribution. The main themes or trends of the interpersonal relations are: family, kinship, friendship, love, marriage, business, employment, clubs, neighborhoods, ethical values, support and solidarity. Interpersonal relations may be regulated by law, custom, or mutual agreement, and form the basis of social groups and societies. They appear when people communicate or act with each other within specific social contexts, and they thrive on equitable and reciprocal compromises.

Conflict resolution is conceptualized as the methods and processes involved in facilitating the peaceful ending of conflict and retribution. Committed group members attempt to resolve group conflicts by actively communicating information about their conflicting motives or ideologies to the rest of group and by engaging in collective negotiation. Dimensions of resolution typically parallel the dimensions of conflict in the way the conflict is processed. Cognitive resolution is the way disputants understand and view the conflict, with beliefs, perspectives, understandings and attitudes. Emotional resolution is in the way disputants feel about a conflict, the emotional energy. Behavioral resolution is reflective of how the disputants act, their behavior. Ultimately a wide range of methods and procedures for addressing conflict exist, including negotiation, mediation, mediation-arbitration, diplomacy, and creative peacebuilding.

Impression management is a conscious or subconscious process in which people attempt to influence the perceptions of other people about a person, object or event by regulating and controlling information in social interaction. It was first conceptualized by Erving Goffman in 1956 in The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, and then was expanded upon in 1967.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intimate relationship</span> Physical or emotional intimacy

An intimate relationship is an interpersonal relationship that involves emotional or physical closeness between people and may include sexual intimacy and feelings of romance or love. Intimate relationships are interdependent, and the members of the relationship mutually influence each other. The quality and nature of the relationship depends on the interactions between individuals, and is derived from the unique context and history that builds between people over time. Social and legal institutions such as marriage acknowledge and uphold intimate relationships between people. However, intimate relationships are not necessarily monogamous or sexual, and there is wide social and cultural variability in the norms and practices of intimacy between people.

Organizational behavior or organisational behaviour is the "study of human behavior in organizational settings, the interface between human behavior and the organization, and the organization itself". Organizational behavioral research can be categorized in at least three ways:

Conflict management is the process of limiting the negative aspects of conflict while increasing the positive aspects of conflict in the workplace. The aim of conflict management is to enhance learning and group outcomes, including effectiveness or performance in an organizational setting. Properly managed conflict can improve group outcomes.

Fear of commitment, also known as gamophobia, is the irrational fear or avoidance of long-term partnership or marriage. The term is sometimes used interchangeably with commitment phobia, which describes a generalized fear or avoidance of commitments more broadly.

Psychological resistance, also known as psychological resistance to change, is the phenomenon often encountered in clinical practice in which patients either directly or indirectly exhibit paradoxical opposing behaviors in presumably a clinically initiated push and pull of a change process. In other words, the concept of psychological resistance is that patients are likely to resist physician suggestions to change behavior or accept certain treatments regardless of whether that change will improve their condition. It impedes the development of authentic, reciprocally nurturing experiences in a clinical setting. Psychological resistance can manifest in various ways, such as denying the existence or severity of a problem, rationalizing or minimizing one's responsibility for it, rejecting or distrusting the therapist's or consultant's suggestions, withholding or distorting information, or sabotaging the treatment process. It is established that the common source of resistances and defenses is shame. This and similar negative attitudes may be the result of social stigmatization of a particular condition, such as psychological resistance towards insulin treatment of diabetes.

Greenberg (1987) introduced the concept of organizational justice with regard to how an employee judges the behavior of the organization and the employee's resulting attitude and behaviour. For example, if a firm makes redundant half of the workers, an employee may feel a sense of injustice with a resulting change in attitude and a drop in productivity.

Organizational conflict, or workplace conflict, is a state of discord caused by the actual or perceived opposition of needs, values and interests between people working together. Conflict takes many forms in organizations. There is the inevitable clash between formal authority and power and those individuals and groups affected. There are disputes over how revenues should be divided, how the work should be done, and how long and hard people should work. There are jurisdictional disagreements among individuals, departments, and between unions and management. There are subtler forms of conflict involving rivalries, jealousies, personality clashes, role definitions, and struggles for power and favor. There is also conflict within individuals – between competing needs and demands – to which individuals respond in different ways.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Face negotiation theory</span> Theory in social science

Face negotiation theory is a theory conceived by Stella Ting-Toomey in 1985, to understand how people from different cultures manage rapport and disagreements. The theory posited "face", or self-image when communicating with others, as a universal phenomenon that pervades across cultures. In conflicts, one's face is threatened; and thus the person tends to save or restore his or her face. This set of communicative behaviors, according to the theory, is called "facework". Since people frame the situated meaning of "face" and enact "facework" differently from one culture to the next, the theory poses a cross-cultural framework to examine facework negotiation. It is important to note that the definition of face varies depending on the people and their culture and the same can be said for the proficiency of facework. According to Ting-Toomey's theory, most cultural differences can be divided by Eastern and Western cultures, and her theory accounts for these differences.

Workplace aggression is a specific type of aggression which occurs in the workplace. Workplace aggression is any type of hostile behavior that occurs in the workplace. It can range from verbal insults and threats to physical violence, and it can occur between coworkers, supervisors, and subordinates. Common examples of workplace aggression include gossiping, bullying, intimidation, sabotage, sexual harassment, and physical violence. These behaviors can have serious consequences, including reduced productivity, increased stress, and decreased morale.

Counterproductive work behavior (CWB) is employee's behavior that goes against the legitimate interests of an organization. This behavior can harm the organization, other people within it, and other people and organizations outside it, including employers, other employees, suppliers, clients, patients and citizens. It has been proposed that a person-by-environment interaction (the relationship between a person's psychological and physical capacities and the demands placed on those capacities by the person's social and physical environment.) can be utilized to explain a variety of counterproductive behaviors. For instance, an employee who is high on trait anger is more likely to respond to a stressful incident at work with CWB.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interpersonal communication</span> Exchange of information among people

Interpersonal communication is an exchange of information between two or more people. It is also an area of research that seeks to understand how humans use verbal and nonverbal cues to accomplish several personal and relational goals. Communication includes utilizing communication skills within one's surroundings, including physical and psychological spaces. It is essential to see the visual/nonverbal and verbal cues regarding the physical spaces. In the psychological spaces, self-awareness and awareness of the emotions, cultures, and things that are not seen are also significant when communicating.

Communication privacy management (CPM), originally known as communication boundary management, is a systematic research theory developed by Sandra Petronio in 1991. CPM theory aims to develop an evidence-based understanding of the way people make decisions about revealing and concealing private information. It suggests that individuals maintain and coordinate privacy boundaries with various communication partners depending on the perceived benefits and costs of information disclosure. Petronio believes disclosing private information will strengthen one's connections with others, and that we can better understand the rules for disclosure in relationships through negotiating privacy boundaries.

Stigma management is the process of concealing or disclosing aspects of one's identity to minimize social stigma.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conflict (process)</span> Friction, disagreement, or discord within a group

A conflict is a situation in which inacceptable differences in interests, expectations, values, and opinions occur in or between individuals or groups.

Psychological safety is the belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes. In teams, it refers to team members believing that they can take risks without being shamed by other team members. In psychologically safe teams, team members feel accepted and respected contributing to a better "experience in the workplace". It is also the most studied enabling condition in group dynamics and team learning research.

Team diversity refers to the differences between individual members of a team that can exist on various dimensions like age, nationality, religious background, functional background or task skills, sexual orientation, and political preferences, among others. Different types of diversity include demographic, personality and functional diversity, and can have positive as well as negative effects on team outcomes. Diversity can impact performance, team member satisfaction or the innovative capacity of a team. According to the Input-Process-Output Model, team diversity is considered an input factor that has effects on the processes as well as on the team outputs of team work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">James Honeycutt</span> American academic

James M. Honeycutt is an American academic who is currently a lecturer on the faculty of Organizational Behavior, Coaching, and Consulting at the UT-Dallas Naveen Jindal School of Management. A Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Communication Studies at Louisiana State University, he is best known for his Theory of Imagined Interactions (IIs). IIs are a form of social cognition in which an individual imagines and therefore indirectly experiences themselves in anticipated and/or past communicative encounters with others. IItheory appears in communication encyclopedias, handbooks and graduate and undergraduate textbooks.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Roloff, Michael E.; Liu, Esther (2016). "Conflict Avoidance". In Berger, Charles R.; Roloff, Michael E.; Wilson, Steve R.; Solomon, Denise (eds.). The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication. The Wiley Blackwell-ICA international encyclopedias of communication. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell. pp. 1–9. doi:10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic020. ISBN   978-1-118-30605-5.
  2. ↑ Tjosvold, Deon; Sun, Haifa F. (2002-01-01). "Understanding Conflict Avoidance: Relationship, Motivations, Actions, and Consequences". International Journal of Conflict Management. 13 (2): 142–164. doi:10.1108/eb022872. ISSN   1044-4068.
  3. ↑ Caughlin, John P.; Hardesty, Jennifer L.; Middleton, Ashley V. (2012-01-20). Noller, Patricia; Karantzas, Gery C. (eds.). The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Couples and Family Relationships (1 ed.). Wiley. pp. 115–128. doi:10.1002/9781444354119. ISBN   978-1-4443-3450-0.
  4. ↑ De Dreu, Carsten K. W.; Evers, Arne; Beersma, Bianca; Kluwer, Esther S.; Nauta, Aukje (2001). "A theory-based measure of conflict management strategies in the workplace". Journal of Organizational Behavior. 22 (6): 645–668. doi:10.1002/job.107. ISSN   0894-3796.
  5. ↑ Roloff, Michael E.; Liu, Esther (2016). Berger, Charles R.; Roloff, Michael E.; Wilson, Steve R.; Solomon, Denise (eds.). The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication. The Wiley Blackwell-ICA international encyclopedias of communication. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell. pp. 1–9. doi:10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic020. ISBN   978-1-118-30605-5.
  6. ↑ Tehrani, Hossein Dabiriyan; Yamini, Sara (2020-04-15). "Personality traits and conflict resolution styles: A meta-analysis". Personality and Individual Differences. 157: 109794. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2019.109794. ISSN   0191-8869.
  7. ↑ Antonioni, David (1998-01-01). "Relationship Between the Big Five Personality Factors and Conflict Management Styles". International Journal of Conflict Management. 9 (4): 336–355. doi:10.1108/eb022814. ISSN   1044-4068.
  8. ↑ Friedman, Ray; Chi, Shu-Cheng; Liu, Leigh Anne (2006-01-01). "An expectancy model of Chinese–American differences in conflict-avoiding". Journal of International Business Studies. 37 (1): 76–91. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400172. ISSN   1478-6990.
  9. ↑ Chunyan Peng, Ann; Tjosvold, Dean (2011). "Social face concerns and conflict avoidance of Chinese employees with their Western or Chinese managers". Human Relations. 64 (8): 1031–1050. doi:10.1177/0018726711400927. ISSN   0018-7267.
  10. ↑ Leung, Kwok (1988). "Some Determinants of Conflict Avoidance". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 19 (1): 125–136. doi:10.1177/0022002188019001009. ISSN   0022-0221.
  11. ↑ Bruce, Madeline J.; Chang, Alexander; Evans, Luke; Streb, Madison; Dehon, Jewell; Handal, Paul J. (2022-12-15). "Relationship of Conflict, Conflict Avoidance, and Conflict Resolution to Psychological Adjustment". Psychological Reports. 127 (5): 2324–2333. doi:10.1177/00332941221146708. ISSN   0033-2941. PMID   36520593.
  12. ↑ Roloff, Michael E.; Liu, Esther (2016). "Conflict Avoidance". In Berger, Charles R.; Roloff, Michael E.; Wilson, Steve R.; Solomon, Denise (eds.). The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication. The Wiley Blackwell-ICA international encyclopedias of communication. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell. pp. 1–9. doi:10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic020. ISBN   978-1-118-30605-5.
  13. ↑ Koerner, Ascan F.; Fitzpatrick, Mary Anne (2006), "Family Conflict Communication", The SAGE Handbook of Conflict Communication: Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice, 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks California 91320 United States: SAGE Publications, Inc., pp. 159–184, doi:10.4135/9781412976176.n6, ISBN   978-0-7619-3045-7 , retrieved 2024-11-24{{citation}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  14. ↑ Caughlin, John P.; Hardesty, Jennifer L.; Middleton, Ashley V. (2012-01-20), Noller, Patricia; Karantzas, Gery C. (eds.), "Conflict Avoidance in Families", The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Couples and Family Relationships (1 ed.), Wiley, pp. 113–128, doi:10.1002/9781444354119.ch8, ISBN   978-1-4443-3450-0 , retrieved 2024-11-24
  15. ↑ Hample, Dale; Hample, Jessica Marie (2019-11-11). "There is No Away: Where Do People Go When They Avoid an Interpersonal Conflict?". Negotiation and Conflict Management Research. 13 (4). doi:10.34891/fy30-0198. ISSN   1750-4716.
  16. ↑ Workplace Coach: Companies pay the price when managers avoid dealing with conflict, Maureen, Moriarty, Seattlepi, Oct. 28, 2007.
  17. ↑ Bevan, Jennifer L. (2014). "Dyadic perceptions of goals, conflict strategies, and perceived resolvability in serial arguments". Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 31 (6): 773–795. doi:10.1177/0265407513504653. ISSN   0265-4075.
  18. ↑ Ubinger, Megan E.; Handal, Paul J.; Massura, Carrie E. (2013). "Adolescent Adjustment: The Hazards of Conflict Avoidance and the Benefits of Conflict Resolution". Psychology. 4 (1): 50–58. doi: 10.4236/psych.2013.41007 .
  19. ↑ Dreu, Carsten K. W. De; Evers, Arne; Beersma, Bianca; Kluwer, Esther S.; Nauta, Aukje (2001). "A Theory-Based Measure of Conflict Management Strategies in the Workplace". Journal of Organizational Behavior. 22 (6): 645–668. doi:10.1002/job.107. ISSN   0894-3796. JSTOR   3649613.
  20. ↑ Kilmann, Ralph H.; Thomas, Kenneth W. (1977). "Developing a Forced-Choice Measure of Conflict-Handling Behavior: The "Mode" Instrument". Educational and Psychological Measurement. 37 (2): 309–325. doi:10.1177/001316447703700204. ISSN   0013-1644.
  21. ↑ Putnam, Linda L.; Wilson, Charmaine E. (1982). "Communicative Strategies in Organizational Conflicts: Reliability and Validity of a Measurement Scale". Annals of the International Communication Association. 6 (1): 629–652. doi:10.1080/23808985.1982.11678515. ISSN   2380-8985.
  22. ↑ Rahim, M. A. (1983-06-01). "A Measure of Styles of Handling Interpersonal Conflict". Academy of Management Journal. 26 (2): 368–376. ISSN   0001-4273. JSTOR   255985. PMID   10263067.
  23. ↑ Cortina, Lilia M.; Magley, Vicki J. (2009). "Patterns and profiles of response to incivility in the workplace". Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 14 (3): 272–288. doi:10.1037/a0014934. ISSN   1939-1307. PMID   19586222.
  24. ↑ Tjosvold, Deon; Sun, Haifa F. (2002-01-01). "Understanding Conflict Avoidance: Relationship, Motivations, Actions, and Consequences". International Journal of Conflict Management. 13 (2): 142–164. doi:10.1108/eb022872. ISSN   1044-4068.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.