Recommend The Importance Of Quick Conflict Resolution – Why A …

Recently police had to be dispatched to the land of children’s birthday parties in suburban Detroit. It seems that one patron was bothered by the fact that two individuals were spending too long in the photo booth. According to police reports, the patron had asked an employee to intervene. However the employee did not want to get involved and chose to avoid any confrontation with the duo in the booth. With impatient children in party hats waiting for a picture, customer decided to take matters into their own hands. Soon a fight ensued and not even a costumed Chuck E. Cheese could control the situation. What could have been resolved with simple customer service skills ended in multiple arrests.

The Chuck E. Cheese employee was fortunate to learn this lesson at a very young age. What they did was no different than what entrepreneurs, department managers, business owners, HR executives, and others do everyday. They avoid any potential confrontations with customers – both internal and external.

The customer’s obvious message was one of frustration waiting for the photo booth. The real message the customer was sending was hidden in facial expressions, the enunciation of the spoken words, body language, and stance — all of which can be easily detected after a short training session.

Let’s look at what the clerk did.

The clerk used the most common conflict resolution style used in the business world today, avoidance. People can be difficult or uncomfortable dealing with seemingly negative situations. They make excuses for not getting involved. Here are three of the most popular excuses:

1. The situation will blow over – By walking away, the clerk may have assumed these adults would not resort to such childish behavior. The clerk probably thought once the couple walked out of the photo booth nothing more would have been said other than a sneer at each other.

2. It’s not worth my involvement – Many times we focus on other problems over the current thinking in these situations are more important. This could be a salesperson who ignores one disgruntled customer to give more attention to a higher volume customer or the manager ignoring the needs of a coworker because a high-level report is due. Whatever the case, the internal or external customer will interpret the avoidance as meaning they are not as important as other aspects of one’s business.

3. There’s nothing I can do about it – When a person feels the cause is hopeless, avoiding the customer seems like a good time management tool. However the disgruntled customer never lets the situation drop completely. Instead they will tell an average of 11 friends and coworkers about their poor treatment. Think about the receptionist that ignores the fact that others are no longer bringing special projects to them. Eventually the coworkers wonder why the receptionist is even on the payroll. As the receptionist continues to ignore the situation, management eventually realizes that they need a new receptionist who will be a team player. Likewise a salesperson who ignores the fact that Mrs. Jones no longer buys from him or her and figures there is nothing that can be done to regain the business could be right. However not tring to do something means Mrs. Jones will tell a dozen others why they shouldn’t do business either.

Doing a customer service checkup.

In all three scenarios just given, the customer, whether internal or external, will eventually find someplace else to buy. An internal customer who is a subordinate or coworker will probably elevate the problem up the chain of command. The external customer may complain, but is nine times more likely to just go away never to return again. Whichever ultimately happens, a serious business problem is likely to result.

Therefore it is extremely important to create a customer service culture to permeate every aspect of your business. This includes direct employees, contract employees, partnerships, and those with whom you network. Here are five warning signs that you or your organization is failing to give superior customer service*.

1. The customer is the most knowledgeable person – If you find your customer is the most knowledgeable person in the transaction, there can be no doubt customer service is lacking. It is surprising how frequently this occurs in the workplace.

2. Poor treatment of coworkers or networking partners – When you treat business acquaintances at any level in a poor manner it is a sure sign of customer mistreatment. It is very difficult for anyone to be an effective Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, being mean to one person and nice to the next. If associates are treated badly, that poor treatment will extend to the customers.

3. Lack of relationship ownership – When responsibilities are passed from one hand to another it shows a lack of ownership in a business relationship.

4. Excessive or secret policies – If a business is riddled with red tape, having policies for every transaction or movement, it is nearly impossible to deliver quality customer service. No customer relationship can be built on trust if the customer is constantly learning about new rules. It is no different than playing a board game with a young child who makes the rules every time it looks like they may lose. Just as the child frustrates their fellow players, customers become frustrated.

5. Problems must be handled in multilevel structured pyramids – Each time people involved in a problem must repeat the problem to someone new they become more agitated and angered. Employees and business associates at all levels need to be empowered to resolve situations as they arise.

Look at your business in light of these five steps. You can be assured that if any of these five are present, your business is not being maximized. Examine what you’re doing and look for ways to make corrections.

For more information be sure to contact Maximpact at 248-802-6138 or via email to www.getmaximpact.com.

*From 8 Great Traits of Superior Customer Service, ©MaxImpact, www.getmaximpact.com. (used with permission)

================

Rick Weaver is an accomplished business executive with a wealth of experience in retail, market analysis, supply chain enhancement, project management, team building, and process improvement.

Rick career began in retailing as a stockclerk, eventually becoming the Director of Vendor Development at Kmart Corporation during it’s heyday. In this position he worked with hundreds of Kmart’s suppliers to improve mutual processes, procedures, and profits.

As a consultant, Rick has worked with companies in various industries to develop leadership and business strategies.

As an entrepreneur, Rick has founded or co-founded six successful organizations, including non-profit and for profit.

Now in his role as president of MaxImpact, Rick uses his vast experience helping individuals connect to their dreams and teams connect to a common vision.

Rick’s presentation style of blending humor, real life examples, and easy to implement ideas has made him a popular speaker at seminars, workshops, and conferences in in 43 states, Canada, and Puerto Rico.

(c) Max Impact Corporation

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Rick_Weaver


Recommend Teaching Your Kids Conflict Resolution To A Friend.

If you’re like me, you want to teach your kids how to resolve their little conflicts by themselves. Tattling is inappropriate attention-seeking behavior, and the tattler is rarely 100% free of responsibility.

Unless someone is bleeding, coughing up a lung or otherwise in danger, the rule in my house is: no tattling. Besides, a parent could spend their entire day mitigating sibling skirmishes! While saving yourself time, you could be teaching them an invaluable life skill.

Here is a great formula for conflict resolution:

1) Tell the person what you didn’t like

2) Tell the person how it make you feel

3) Tell the person what you want in the future

4) Person responds with what they can do.

Here is how this played out earlier in my home.

7 Year Old comes up to me with that distinctive “informer” sing-song voice.

“Mommmeeee, 4 Year Old said SHUT UP to meeeee….!”

I feel tension because he knows the rule about tattling but I supress the urge to punish him.

“7 year old, I just wrote down this neat thing you can do to resolve conflicts with other people. I put it here on the fridge where everyone can see it. Do you know what conflict means?”

“No.”

“Conflict is when two people are arguing. So here goes…”

And I explain the method. Then, I walk him into the playroom where 4 year old is hiding. (He has learned that “shut up” has much power over 7 year old but since Mommy doesn’t allow “shut up” he fears a little time-out reminder.)

I walk 7 year old through it while 4 year old emerges from his hiding place.

“4 year old, I don’t like it when you say “shut up” to me. It makes my feelings hurt. Next time I want you to not say “shut up”.

I ask 4 year old what he can do next time.

“Um…..I can say sumfin nice.”

Said children are playing in the living room again.

Mission Accomplished!

Carrie Lauth is the host of http://www.NaturalMomsTalkRadio.com She publishes an informative newsletter for Moms doing things the natural way. Get your copy plus free all natural skin care recipes at: http://www.Natural-Moms.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Carrie_Lauth


The Philosophy of Fear and Confrontation

Is there now, or has there been, a person or two in your life that you have difficulty in maintaining a civil relationship with at times? It may be your spouse or lover; it may be a friend or a superior at work. We usually say “I have a love-hate relationship with this person.”

Fight OR Flight; Attack OR Evade; Right OR Wrong; All OR Nothing; Win OR Lose – all are a form of what we can call “The Philosophy of Fear and Confrontation.” When we believe that a potential outcome has only two possible alternatives we come from a place of scarcity thinking and invariably add a good deal of stress to the system being addressed and limit what is possible.

In every interpersonal conflict both sides wind up wounded, albeit one side perhaps more than the other. Whenever a person feels that you must be wrong in order for me to be right, we invariably denigrate not only the other person’s point of view, but their overall character as well. We move away from attacking the issues at hand, and get involved in attacking each other. Arguing between right and wrong is often simply an excuse to prove myself somehow superior to you. “With my superior insight, with my superior intellect and knowledge, with my superior position in the world, I look to show you how your perception of reality is incorrect.” When I think of you and your opinions as being somehow inferior to me and my opinions, it is no wonder that you are not willing to agree with the opinions I put forth. In order to agree with my opinions, you would have to be willing to believe that you are somehow inferior to me.

When engaging in conflict resolution with others, staying locked into grappling between one of two possible outcomes requires that we both shut down our ability to notice additional alternative realities. When two individuals are locked into a confrontational mode of exchange, both parties to the conflict lose the possibility of acquiring information that might offer generative solutions that either side has yet to think of. We lose the possibility of understanding that in some important way, our limited range of thinking tends to make both of us somehow “wrong.” Or, to say it another way, we fail to realize that “We are both, both wrong and right, at the same time.” We lose touch with the fact that given new sources of information, both of us might come to a different opinion.

Often, the first step in successful conflict resolution requires that you acknowledge that your philosophy of fear and confrontation limits your ability to notice how a different way of thinking and a different way of using your body, would lead to a much wider field of possibilities.

For the average person, the more you feel attacked, the more you will look to defend. The more you look to defend, the more you narrow your field of vision, tighten up various muscle groups, and limit the flow of blood and oxygen in your system. And guess what happens at such times. When my adversary notices that I am preparing to defend, he perceives instead that I am preparing to attack him. What does he do in this instance? Why the very same thing that I am doing! He tenses up and prepares for the worst. In this moment of entering into mortal combat we get swept away by the vortex of fear and confrontation that is being generated by the both of us. When we react from this place of “high alert” on a regular basis, we quickly wind up weakening our immune system, and severely limit our ability to defend ourselves from the onslaught of physical and emotional disease. In Aikido this leads us to say that “The best defense is no defense,” which is another way of saying “The less defensive you are, the better able you are to defend yourself.”

Charlie Badenhop is the originator of Seishindo, an Aikido instructor, NLP trainer, and Ericksonian Hypnotherapist. Benefit from his thought-provoking ideas and a new self-help Practice every two weeks, by joining 7,000 subscribers to his complimentary newsletter devoted to Seishindo Somatic Life Coaching. You are also invited to learn more about the Seishindo approach to Anger Management issues, which draws from the wisdom of Aikido as well as scientific research. Participating in Charlie’s on Anger Management Workshop can help you adopt the wisdom of Aikido to achieve a peaceful victory over anger.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Charlie_Badenhop

Approaches to Resolving Interpersonal Conflict in the Workplace …

Introduction

Because each of us possesses a unique set of personal characteristics, occasional conflicts of personality or interest with others are a regrettable yet inevitable fact of life. Furthermore, since we spend a large proportion of our lifetimes at work, often functioning under pressures and restraints that act as exacerbating factors, workplaces tend to become a primary site for inter-personal conflict. If such quarrels are not resolved in an equitable and timely manner, the resulting outcomes will typically be negative, not only for those directly involved, but also for co-workers and even organizations as a whole.

On the other hand however, both evidence and experience indicate that conflict in the workplace is often symptomatic of a healthy, dynamic and vibrant internal environment. Indeed, it is often said that a workplace devoid of tensions is in danger of becoming dull and stagnant, and therefore, is unlikely to foster any real sense of excitement, initiative or innovation amongst its constituents. In actuality then, conflict, if properly managed, has the potential to generate positive outcomes for all concerned.

If conflict is to be handled in a gainful manner however, it is vitally important that individuals and organizations develop robust strategies for coping with conflict in the workplace. This consideration is especially important for managers, whom are often required to handle conflicts, and for whom the sheer width, breadth, depth and frequency of interpersonal-interaction is often staggering. Therefore, in efforts to build a base of understanding, and with a particular focus on the role played by managers, let us now examine some of the core approaches employed in dealing with conflict in the workplace; namely: unilateral resolution, consultation, facilitation, mediation and arbitration.

Unilateral Resolution of Workplace Conflict

During the course of an average day a manager may be involved, either directly or indirectly, in a variety of interpersonal conflicts of varying intensities and foci. Not surprisingly, managers will often intuitively seek to resolve these disagreements by means that are primarily unilateral in nature.

In simple terms, a unilateral resolution revolves around efforts to resolve conflict via the application of influence or authority to one specific person, group, or faction involved in a dispute, and not to the other(s). For example, when dealing with a common workplace issue such as bullying or related misconduct, a manager might often respond, almost by way of reflex, by taking action upon the individual(s) whom are thought or evidenced to have been the instigators of the incident, while at the same time, giving little or no attention to those perceived as the ‘victim(s)’.

Unilateral resolutions are attractive simply because they seem comparatively quick and painless to a beleaguered manager: after all, it’s just a quick witch-hunt, a brief flex of managerial muscle, a few lashes with company policy and then on with the business at hand… right? Indeed, as a quick fix solution, few approaches can compare to the unilateral tack. There are however, a number of potential drawbacks that warrant discussion.

First and foremost, in the all too common event that no culpable individual(s) can be found, or more importantly, proven to be at fault, managers will find that all of their investigative efforts and best intentions have been for naught. Without a culprit, ideally one that can be proven to be at fault beyond reasonable doubt, the unilateral approach to conflict resolution simply does not work. There is also the very real potential that someone may be wrongly accused, by an over-eager or misinformed manager for example, or made a ‘scapegoat’ by their workmates. As a further consideration, even if a clear culprit can be found, punishing or disciplining the ‘guilty’ party is really only a ‘patch-job’, having little or no effect upon the underlying issues. Finally, unilateral resolutions largely ignore the role played by the other side in the conflict, which may leave them feeling neglected, or in some cases, feeling they have ‘gotten away with it’. This is dangerous because it can confer to such a party an enticing advantage towards engaging in the continuation and/or intensification of the situation.

However, all of these factors aside, research has shown that, while far from ideal, unilateral resolution is often a satisfactory method for dealing with trivial conflicts, wherein there is relatively little ego involvement on behalf of the disputing parties and relatively low levels of potential negative consequence. In the end though, it must be said that many attempts at unilateral resolution are impractical, irrational and biased in nature, and thusly, exist as a liability. Truly skilled managers therefore, should move beyond antiquated notions of the draconian manager exercising his/her might upon the whelps by raining down unilateral dictates; acting at once as judge, jury and executioner. In acknowledgment of these facts, when confronting conflicts within the workplace, alternative methods should always take precedence.

Consultative Resolution of Workplace Conflict

Personal achievement and satisfaction within the workplace, as with any other domain of life, owes a great deal to the reciprocal relationships we hold with significant others. Sadly, when things are going well, we seldom express our true appreciation for, nor even recognize at times, the pivotal role that others have played in our success. Only when conflict arises in the workplace do the relationships we hold with others come consistently into our field of focus, and typically for all the wrong reasons at that. When this scrutiny of interpersonal relationships does occur, individuals involved in a conflict, typically after the initial heat of the stoush has died out, will often opt to attempt some sort of consultative resolution on their own initiative.

When taking a consultative approach to conflict resolution disputants attempt to take responsibility for, and ownership of, their own disputes. In this style, disputants attempt to sort out their own conflicts in a reasonable and pragmatic manner, with those involved advising, negotiating and counselling each other towards either shared understandings, a practical compromise or, ideally but very rarely, outcomes that are desirable for everyone involved.

Resolutions of this nature would of course delight any manager, after all, its one less problem for you to deal with right…? In the real world however, anecdotal evidence and the weight of common sense tells us that the consultative approach is, at best, idealistic. Indeed, while fairy-tale endings have been known to accrue, we should be mindful that consultative efforts are equally as likely to result in frustrating stalemates or the rapid escalation of disputes. This does not mean that the consultative approach is without merit.

Consultation certainly has the potential to be gainful when employed as an early-intervention strategy, especially as it can sometimes circumvent an escalation of matters towards formal resolution procedures and the involvement of third parties, such as managers or consultants, thereby saving organizational resources and sparing those that would be required to intercede a great deal of stress and strain in the process. However, because consultative resolutions are inherently informal and unsupervised in nature, they can often run the risk of becoming a liability, unless all parties involved are sufficiently skilled in negotiation, interpersonal communications and operating from a place of rationalism and empathy. Certainly, providing that all of these prerequisites can be met by those involved in the conflict, there is some potential for positive results to accrue from the consultative approach.

Of course, unless a manager is actually one of the disputing parties, they will typically not be involved in the consultative resolution of conflict, nor perhaps even aware that there is a problem, or that an attempt at resolution is taking place at all. This might concern some managers, especially those predisposed to a more dictatorial style, in that they would find themselves firmly ‘out of the loop’. If one is to capitalize on the potential gains of consultative conflict resolution it is crucial that managers can take a step back and allow employees to attempt to work out their differences. This is not to say however, that a manager should take a ‘hands-off’ attitude to workplace conflict, but rather, that they should position themselves as a safety-net, always vigilant, available and prepared to intervene should things turn sour.

Resolution of Workplace Conflict Through Facilitation

Sometimes there is an obvious need for a third party to intervene in a given conflict, and more often than not, this responsibility falls squarely upon the shoulders of a manager. It is an unfortunate reality of the workplace that some matters simply cannot be resolved by the parties involved, and that these conflicts, if left unresolved, can tend to fester. When third-party intervention is required, facilitation will typically be considered as the first port of call, and if it is not, it certainly should be.

Often known as the ‘softly-softly’ approach, facilitation is a relatively informal approach in which a third party, preferably one respected by and familiar with the disputing parties, brings the complainants together for discussions in the hope of establishing mutually satisfactory resolutions. Typically conducted for best effect on a relaxed and neutral stage, perhaps over drinks, or coffee, or at lunch, facilitation is most effective when the third party effectively elicits forthright communication between all the disputants. At times, a facilitator may be required to play referee, insofar as assuring that everybody has the chance to speak their mind, make their case and be heard. It is important however, that the facilitator does not overplay their role in the proceedings, remaining always a background character that stays as neutral and objective as possible.

Facilitation is a strategy for conflict resolution that is most potent in the early-stages of conflicts. Due to its informal air, facilitation need not cause disruption in the workplace, nor discontent amongst the parties involved, whom might well feel otherwise intimidated or embarrassed if called to account under a more formal context. Employed typically for fairly minor or mild conflicts, facilitation can be an extremely useful approach for a manager, whom sometimes might have to do as little as get the parties together and lend his/her presence to proceedings. Certainly, early informal interventions into conflicts, such as facilitation, should always be the first response to the identification of a potentially serious workplace conflict.

On the other hand, as with all approaches, there are issues revolving around facilitation that should concern a manager. Firstly, there is the very real potential that disputing parties may agree to meet, or even accept certain resolutions simply because of the involvement of the third party, whom can often unwittingly intimidate or guilt-trip disputants, even by just being involved. Also, half hearted agreements can often arise out a simple desire, on behalf of the disputants or facilitator, to escape the situation as expediently as possible in order to get on with other business, or for fear that other unwelcome issues and secrets might come to light during the process.

Mediation of Workplace Conflict

Having established that third party conflict interventions are an unfortunate reality of the modern workplace, there are times when the subtlety of facilitation simply isn’t enough. When matters escalate towards disaster, or when pressing conflicts arise that are unlikely to be resolved in a timely manner by gentler means, a stronger and more involved stance may need to be adopted by a concerned third party. This is the point where the potential facilitator, intent on guiding and aiding in a resolution, must become a focused and driven mediator.

Mediation is defined as a formal process of negotiation conducted in a controlled environment through which an impartial third party, ideally someone with no inherent decision-making power in regards to the matter, takes an active role in guiding disputing parties towards voluntarily settlement of a dispute. As with facilitation, this is achieved by opening up the channels of communication and encouraging cooperation and compromise between the parties involved. Unlike facilitation however, mediation involves the third party being responsible for the establishing and enforcing of ground rules regarding the negotiations, assisting in the articulation of the various positions held by those involved in the argument and, in most cases, the provision of their own informed, objective and impartial recommendations.

It is wise to select a mediator that is not directly involved with the parties in dispute, and never someone with whom the disputants may have a personal relationship. Because of this, it is vitally important to exercise caution when using an internal mediator, especially if that mediator could be perceived as biased. If you are intent on settling a matter internally though, a relatively independent mediator may be able to be sourced from another department/branch/division. Of course, the easiest way to avoid these pitfalls is simply to bring in an independent mediator. Indeed, there are many private organizations and governmental bodies that offer highly skilled professional mediators for just such purposes.

Needless to say, properly conducted mediation, executed from a position of neutrality by suitably skilled and experienced mediators, exists as a powerful tool for resolving conflict in the workplace. Evidence suggests that, when mediation does work, it tends to produce enduring resolutions that involve minimal damage to the ego or interests of those involved and minimum potential for negative ‘spill-over’ in the workplace. Mediation is therefore widely regarded as an excellent means for resolving serious and pressing workplace conflicts. Regardless, it is worth noting that the process of mediation can consume enormous amounts of time and organizational resources, and thus, should be entered into only after conducting a cost-benefit analysis or a similar evaluation process.

Resolving Workplace Conflict Through Arbitration

When all other avenues of resolution have been exhausted, and when everything has come to naught, a legally binding solution to a particularly troublesome conflict may be suggested, or demanded, as the only way forward. While typically held as a last resort, a formal process of arbitration should always remain an option.

Arbitration is a formal process in which a third party, or occasionally parties, mutually agreed upon by the disputants or appointed by a suitable authority, renders a rational, legally-binding decision based upon the interpretation of the available evidence. The arbitrator(s) make this ruling after a formal hearing that generally involves the presentation of evidence and oral arguments in a style befitting of standard court proceedings. While relatively few workplace conflicts find their way into a court, or board of arbitration, in the most serious of disputes, lawyers or similar agents of representation will often be solicited by the disputing parties.

As already stated, the results of arbitration are legally binding, and whilst they may be appealed on sufficient grounds, the ruling is intended to provide robust resolutions that are enduring. Because of its litigious nature, the arbitration process holds great power as tool for conflict resolution and is doubtless an effective system for resolving disputes. However, there are some serious risk factors that can arise.

Foremost, arbitration presents a considerable risk of generating undesirable attitudinal and behavioural reactions on the part of the disputing parties. Regardless of how well it solves the immediate reality of the problem, arbitration rarely remedies the underlying issues. Because of this, arbitration can often distance and agitate the opposing parties, sometimes inducing them to increasingly perceive each other as self-interested opponents involved in a battle of wits and wills. This is never productive for a working relationship, and if the disputants are to go on working together, it can be potentially disastrous. Given these concerns, arbitration should be employed only in particularly troublesome or lingering conflicts and only after other approaches, such as facilitation or mediation, have failed to achieve a satisfactory resolution.

Conclusion

This paper undertook a critical examination of five core approaches to the resolution of conflict in the workplace: unilateral resolution, consultation, facilitation, mediation and arbitration. Whist this information is invaluable for everyone involved in employment, from the point of view of a manager, understanding these varying approaches to conflict resolution, and their respective strengths and weaknesses, is absolutely crucial to their proper application in practise. In the final analysis, the implication for managers is that conflict is not necessarily counterproductive, but the inability to resolve conflict definitely is.

Arron Stewart Is 26 years old, lives in Hamilton, New Zealand, and attends the University of Waikato as a graduate student in Sport & Leisure with an additional focus on Sociology and Human Resource Management. A website has been established featuring more information and selected articles of his work: http://www.geocities.com/arron_stew_79

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Arron_Stewart

Recommend Conflict Resolution: 3 Traffic Lights to Assertiveness …

Conflict. It’s a word that makes many people feel like running out the door. To these individuals, it’s synonymous with anger, resentment, raised voices, hostility. But is that what conflict is all about? No, it isn’t. Conflict itself is neither good nor bad.

So, what’s the problem?

The problem is how people communicate when they disagree with someone. And, fortunately, there’s a very easy formula to follow to make sure that we get our point across without antagonizing the person we disagree with.

The 3 Traffic Lights to Assertiveness
We get into trouble because we don’t follow the right order. When driving, the traffic lights follow a set order – green, amber and then red. However, when dealing with others, instead of proceeding Green Light, Amber Light, Red Light, we usually go straight to RED! And that’s where we get into problems.

Step #1
Give them the Green Light. What we do with this step is drive their way. Show them that you understand their viewpoint. “Let me see if I understand you correctly. What you’re saying is ….”

Step #2
The Amber Light signifies that a change is coming. And that’s exactly what you do at this step. After showing that you understand the other person’s concerns, you signify that a change is coming. You do this by saying, “at the same time” or “however.” Do NOT use the word “but.” BUT is a traffic accident. It stops all information traveling in any direction. Instead, always use “at the same time” or “however.”

Step #3
Red Light – If you head straight for red, it will make your opponent see red. However, if you’ve prepared the person for your objection, it usually won’t upset them. At the red light, after saying “however” or “at the same time,” you now present your side of story and then your compromise solution

These are the three traffic lights to assertiveness. However, like driving, effectively driving the road to conflict resolution takes practice. So share this idea with a friend and then role play a conflict and see how well you follow the three steps. The more you do it the more results you’ll see. And your career and private life will show the results,

Jean V. Dickson is a Canadian-based entrepreneur who puts creativity’s ZING into training and corporate communications. For more information on creativity and innovation, visit http://www.jvdcreativity.com and http://www.experientialexercises.com. To jazz up your corporate PowerPoint presentations, visit The PowerPoint Joint at http://www.powerpointjoint.com.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Jean_Dickson

Recommend Conflict Resolution Training- When Personal Safety is an …

Conflict generally arises by having your needs, desires, perceptions and values challenged.

When a person feels that their values are being challenged they generally respond the strongest. Inwardly they feel their personal safety threatened and desire to stop that threat.

Surprisingly for most people, is that one of the reasons many attempts at conflict resolution fail is the desire to keep emotion out of the equation. People will look at content and make a decision on how to proceed with the conflict but want to disregard emotions. However, how we feel about our values and the emotional aspects of the conflict is of a very high importance.

When they are not dealt with, they can become a trigger during the process, depending on any history with the people involved or other unrelated incidences. Feelings and needs are a fundamental process and requirement of all people, men as well as women.
We can see the reason when we look at the three parts of the resolution.

Content: Is the issue to be resolved.

Process: How we talk to and treat each other. Allowing people to feel heard and acknowledged.

Emotion: How we feel about what happened. If we are angry, we shut down our thinking process and the conflicts rarely get resolved.

Many things trigger emotions;the history between the people or organization, the issue or other similar events.

People respond to conflict in many ways, some look for solutions and others just work on keeping it going. One of the most important aspects is not to jump into solution right away. Many times importance elements or ideas can be over looked. A secondary, yet highly important issue that that when we don’t give people a chance to come up with their own solutions we disempower them.

It is essential when you want a strong working team or family bond to give the belief of trust in the other person to come up with his or her own solutions whenever possible. In business, there are situations where time is of the essence, and you need to act, however, done too often will lead to a breakdown in trust and performance by workers and partners.

Your beliefs about how to deal with them also affects the process.
For example do you believe:
My way is the only way.
I can’t admit being wrong.
Talking shows weakness.
It’s normal

These will get in the way of constructive, solutions and waste time and money.

Or if you respond by:
Pretending nothing is wrong
Verbally attack
Give in
Go over their heads
Silent treatment
Complain or Blame
Make jokes

These can lead to stress, destroyed relationships, and production breakdown.

There are different styles of conflict resolution to choose from depending on the situation.

1)Accommodation
To build the relationship When the issue is more important to the other person and relatively unimportant to you.

Challenges with; If you feel taken advantage of, you may become resentful. You may not get your needs met.

2)Avoidance
If there is a chance of danger. When you feel that another person is much more qualified for it..

Challenges with; The conflict may grow until it boils over. Relationships will remain superficial.

3)Collaboration
With important issues- where both sides have merit. To strengthen relationships

Challenges with; There is a risk of wasted time and energy on issues that are considered unimportant.

4)Compromise
When two or more goals prevent collaboration. When time is an issue and you need to reach an agreement right away.

Challenges with; You may focus on what you compromised. Problems may recur if you did not fully explore the issues to reach a resolution.

5)Competition
When quick, decisive action is require. When your core values are at risk.

Challenges with; May weaken relationships. Other may not agree to your plan of action and may try to sabotage

Each has its pros and cons and a time for using them. Most often, we must look at the situation and decide which would be most effective.

If you find yourself using accommodation all the time, you may be trying to show yourself as nice person and are at risk of becoming used. If on the other end, you are using competition most of the time, you may be seen as controlling and uncaring about the people you work with. This will destroy trust and production.

In all aspects, it is important not to generalize. Stating observable facts in a neutral tone with open the doors to resolution. People who feel attacked will close down and fight and solutions.

An example would be:
Instead of: You’re late again. Why are you so inconsiderate!

Try: We all arrived at 8 am and have been waiting for you. The last three times you have arrived at 8:30am. We need to start on time in order to meet our deadline.

There are many aspects to conflict resolution and some things seem like they are harder to deal with. However, in the end, when trust and respect are a part of your atmosphere, you will find greater success and achievements in all of your endeavors.

All the Best!
Maria Boomhower
The Master Communicator
To sign up for a free report on “The 7 Secrets to Communication Mastery” go to:
http://www.falconfreedom.com
Master Communicator Blog

P.S. If you like what you’re reading in this newsletter, you’ll love the book,
“Perceptions, How to discover what you are really seeing and how it affects your belief system.”
It’s an interactive manual that takes you through the steps to help you overcome
challenges in communicating and connecting with others.
Perceptions-Understanding What you are Really Seeing.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Maria_Boomhower

Recommend Conflict Resolution To A Friend.

Ask yourself ‘so what?’ Accurately assess what is at stake.

Look at your intention. Be honest,state your intentions, and make sincere invitations.

Face your fears. Ask yourself ‘what is the worst that can happen?’ Dare to say it. E.g. I’m really angry. Although the sheer thought, of conflict may be overwhelming, it is always better to address any internal issues that you have with yourself or altercations that you have with others than to sweep it aside in avoidance. At the time of the conflict, it may be mentally draining. However, you must remember that it will only benefit you and those affected in the future.

Stay centered. Remember the basics of pleasure, especially breathing. Be aware of where you end and everything else begins.

Give up being right. Favor being present rather than winning. Express yourself accurately rather than trying to control the outcome.

Be open to feedback. Know that each individual possesses an opinion of his or her own. In addition, when you decide to be attentive to what others are saying, listen and do not interrupt. There will be time for you to talk after the person has finished their bit.

Go slowly. Set the tempo for conversations that is slow enough to be comfortable.

Express your truth. Preferences may differ. Allow yourself to have an opinion. Report how you feel. Don’t be defensive or hostile. Communicate congruently without blaming.

Describe what is annoying you. Do not be judgmental.

Suggest solutions. It does not necessarily mean that you are in agreement. You can agree to disagree.

http://crohns.net

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Pamela_Nathan

Recommend Activities for Conflict Resolution Skills Development in …

Conflict is part of life. It is only when we as family members don’t have the skills to move through conflict that it becomes a problem. If you find yourself revisiting the same issues—“Why can’t you pick up after yourself?”, “Why can’t you help out more with the kids?”, or “Why can’t you two just get along for once?”—you may be living in a cantankerous home environment that has your whole family in the “deep end” of life.

Don’t despair: there is a solution.

Easy-to-Use Activities for Conflict Resolution Skills Development

My book, When You’re About To Go Off The Deep End, Don’t Take Your Kids With You contains dozens of easy-to-use tips for developing conflict resolution skills in your children. Here are three of the most effective:

1. Establish Family Rules For Conflict – As a family, create a document that each of you can refer to during fights and arguments. Include things like: we are specific when we talk about our problems, we forgive one another, we are honest, we don’t yell or put another person down, etc. Create this document when things are going well in your household and commit to referring to it whenever a fight heats up. The more everyone is involved with creating the family rules for conflict, the more members of the family will tend to use it.

2. Use a “Mom’s Timeout” – Timeouts are often used as punishment when a child misbehaves (for example, putting them in a corner or on a stair for a certain amount of time). This technique meets with varied success. In my book, I spend four pages discussing a “Mom’s Timeout.” How this activity works is that mom (or dad) takes the timeout—disengaging from the conflict in order to return with a clear head, one of the key requirements to resolving conflict quickly. This strategy works all the time when used correctly. Why? Because, although a mom can’t control her child all the time, she can control herself.

3. Perform “Daring Do Overs” – We all make mistakes and say things that we wish we could take back. Instead of feeling guilty, use a “Daring Do Over.” This activity is like the rewind button for your mistake. It’s your “take two” opportunity in which you can do it all over again—only this time, better. This strategy not only decreases conflict, but also helps all members of the family to practice behaving well so there is a much better chance that we all do it better next time.

Many of us cringe at the thought of conflict; however, it is an unavoidable part of life. Equip your children with the skills to handle conflict well by using the above activities for conflict resolution. Your family members will not just survive conflict: they will actually thrive as a result of it.

Kelly Nault, MA author of When You’re About To Go Off The Deep End, Don’t Take Your Kids With You inspires moms to put themselves first—for the sake of their children. She shares time-tested tools that motivate children to want to be well behaved, responsible and happy! Sign up for her free online parenting course here.

You are free to print or publish this article provided the article and bio remain as written and include a link to http://www.mommymoments.com as above.

© 2005 UltimateParent.com. All rights reserved.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Kelly_Nault

Recommend Christian Coaching – The Art of Biblical Conflict …

Conflict happens. It starts with the difficulty of pulling the covers off and stepping out of bed. So far so good. You shower, eat, drive to work, then something happens. (You knew it would, right?)

Trouble can come from every direction. A missed appointment causes a client to miss a deadline. A salesperson (maybe even you!) promises more than your business could deliver. A customer finds a defect in one of your best sellers that needs repairing right away.

We all know that setbacks are going to occur in life. difficulties that strain relations between you and your prospect. difficulties that can cause disappointment and mistrust to build. Will this mean the end of a once profitable relationship?

Not necessarily, when tensions rise between you and a client, it may be time for a real conversation. It is time to become transparent and address the problem that is causing trouble. But how do you keep a ugly conversation from becoming a full-scale argument that forever damages relations with your friend?

Here are 4 tips to get you through the hard talks that can make or break your business. Interpersonal obstacles or your hot buttons as they are called, are the emotional responses set off by the words or actions of others during tough conversations. You feel triggered during conflict when you think the other person’s words or actions as threatening to your being in some way. Common blockers include real or perceived threats to your competence, worth, freedom, and sense of belonging.

Your hot buttons can trip you up in argument because they cause you to misrepresent, switch off, lash out, or go off on the wrong trail. They also launch a set of emotional responses that may cause to expansion.

When you are exploding, your brain may encounter what is described as a neural hijacking. The brain concludes a threat, announces an calamity and moves into engagement. This taking over occurs so fast that the conscious, thinking portion of the brain does not yet fully process what is happening.

So, you are going ahead blindly. While saying he rubs me the wrong way suggests it is the other persons duty to leave you alone, only you can deal with your own triggers. Everyone’s bait is a little different, so what triggers me may not trigger you. This is why blaming others for baiting you is not very productive. You waste energy expecting them to change and do the right thing, when only you can change your own reactions.

How do you sidestep a trap instead of point fingers? Here are some effective principles for acknowledging, noticing, and monitoring conflict sparks. Start with reflecting your self. Keeping your self in check during difficult circumstances is in a large part dependent upon the evaluation you do when you are not in conflict.

Learn what triggers you and why you are set off. Get back to the bottom of it. A coach is an excellent resource to walk you through the process. Ignoring your intentions is like building a house without planning. Teach yourself alternative responses. Once you are less intense situations. You probably would not take Spanish 101 and then offer your services as an guru. By using your new skills often when the critical situation develops, you will be prepared to handle and masterfully defuse the situation.

In the beginning of the foray, step back. Assess your physiological state, body language and spoken communication. A hot face, sweating, yelling takes for your emotional flooding to ebb.

Beware of venting as a default method. While it is a popular notion that venting makes people feel better and aids getting the emotional buzz out of the way, research suggests that if you use this practice over and over, the opposite effect occurs. While it may take it away in the moment, venting anger as your normal mode may make you more angry and push your body and brain into a more intense state of anxiety or rage.

God’s Word tells us in Proverbs 26:4,5 says, the fool must be answered but not in a foolish manner. Studies show that anger is a obstacle for every Christian. Sinful anger comprises roughly 90 percent of all counseling issues . While it is not wrong to act in anger since the purpose of the emotion is to motivate. It is wrong if it is not used properly. It must be used to honor God. After all, anger is a compelling stimulus that God built into man with the desire of moving him to Scriptural action. Rage and anger are two separate emotions. Anger is appropriate in communication of feelings in reverberation to someones behavior. Jesus got angry. Mark writes to us that Jesus turned on the Pharisees in anger (3:5). John reminds us of Jesus driving out the moneychangers from the house of God (2:17). God, Himself is angry with the wicked everyday (Psalm 7:11).

To presuppose anger as wrong without qualification constitutes a careless and capricious use of scripture. Our emotional mix is from God. All of our emotions when used in love are blessed. Emotions become harmful when we fail to express them in conformity with Biblical limitations and structures. The Bible also teaches us to be angry AND sin not! Biblically appropriate anger can become inproper anger in two ways. By the ventilation of anger and by the internalization of anger. That is by blowing up and clamming up. The scriptural way to handle anger is to focus it on the circumstance not toward the person. Deal with it fast, and regain the relationship. Putting the other before yourself.

Michael Young is an experienced Christian coach and author who has coached others to success in their life, business, and relationships. Would you like to see how Michael can help you bring your dreams to life? Click here Christian Life Coaching Life Coaching – Complimentary Session Click here Life Coaching Session

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_Young

Recommend Christian Coaching – The Art of Biblical Conflict …