Styles of Conflict

Whenever there's a problem, it helps to be able to identify how the people around you approach it. Some people move from one style to the next when dealing with a problem, and all are appropriate for certain settings. It's also good to know when your own style of conflict is just making the situation worse.

Collaborating

Problem-solving. Slow discussion, wants to hear everyone out and affirm everyone's point of view. Wants to find the best solution and not just the most obvious. Best when you care about everyone's opinion but also feel strongly on the issue. Worst when things need to be done quickly or when you don't care about the issue.

Example: Teo, our guild leader, is huge on collaboration. When he took the office back up recently, he posted three posts a day with end dates (the days those discussions would be closed and we'd move on to something else) and required that each officer post a response to each topic. He required that everyone have their say, even though it took a significant amount of time, so that we could find solutions that everyone had a hand in.

Compromising

Best for quick decisions and when everyone is willing to give something up to get something now. Tries to split the difference, meet halfway, and let chance decide. Is worst when it's possible for everyone to be more satisfied by working a little longer.

Example: Random loot rolls on emotional loot. Back in Burning Crusade, we were trying to form novelty loot rules (which would have just covered the phoenix mount). I wanted novelty loot rules that favored long-term members who wouldn't leave the guild after getting a rare status piece, because I wanted the phoenix and would have hunted down and killed anyone who had the temerity to grab it and take it to another guild. A now-former member ignored the reasoning for even discussing novelty loot rules and espoused a "Just let everyone roll" philosophy. This might not have been a problem if she hadn't ignored everyone's feelings and voted with the mindset of "I don't care, so why should anyone else?"

Forcing

Controls the argument and discourages disagreement. Forces others to agree, insists on being right. Best when things need to be done quickly or when an issue of conscience is in play. Worst when you want people to feel free to disagree and discuss the issue.

Example: Squelching disagreements in a raid when time is a factor. It's not that rare that people disagree on how a boss should be approached, especially if the current strategy hasn't panned out. Raid leaders need to be able to say "Okay, this is how we're going to do it, no arguments" and make their decision quickly in order for the raid to keep moving. When everyone wants to have a say, a raid grinds to a halt and the leader must take control to start things moving again. A stationary raid is a cranky raid.

Accommodating

Giving in. Refusing to acknowledge your own wants and needs to keep the peace. Deciding that it doesn't matter. Best when you care more about the other person than the issue or you were wrong about something. Worst when you wish you could speak up more.

Example: Acquiescing to someone's constant begging. A trial member begged constantly for help. My friend gave in once to help him get a hunter pet but insisted he kill the mobs himself. Though the trial member continued to beg that my friend kill the mobs, my friend refused to do more than physically guide him to his destination. That trial member continued to beg and people continued to give in; I eventually gave him a warning and then failed his trial membership for so much begging -- because our members would keep giving in, get frustrated, and never complain (so that we would never know action needed to be taken).

Avoiding

Leaving. Running away. Refusing to deal with the problem. Best when someone needs to cool off, you don't care much about the issue, or the situation is physically dangerous. Worst when you care but refuse (or are afraid) to face the problem.

Example: Gquit when things go wrong. One of our members took a lot of his alts out of the guild because he couldn't choose a "main" and didn't want to make a stink about it. The officer core could have gladly found a way to work the problem out, but he avoided mentioning it for so long (even lying about his alts, saying he took them out because he didn't play them anymore) that running away became the only option he considered viable.

---------------------------

Beth Blevins is a former officer in In Vino Veritas.

She's a writer, artist and avid blogger.

Beth's been married since her junior year of college.