Turning lemons
into lemonade

Public Conflict Resolution

This unit focuses on five individual conflict resolution styles and how those styles can be
implemented in dealing with public conflict. The five styles include Avoidance,Accommodation, Competition, Compromise, Collaboration and Problem Solving. Participants
will identify the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.
PurposeThere are five major conflict resolution styles andstrategies. The purpose of this session is for eachindividual to learn more about his/her “natural” conflictstyle. The strengths and weaknesses of each style in apublic setting will be examined. Participants will also learn
the difference between compromising and collaborating(also known as interest-based problem-solving).

Objectives

As a result, participants will:• Learn their preferred or “default” style of conflict
resolution.
• Understand that each style can become a strategy for
resolving conflicts.
• Become familiar with the terms “accommodate,"“avoid,” “compete,” “compromise” and “collaborate”
as strategies to resolve conflicts.
• Learn the strengths and weakness of each conflict
resolution strategy.
• Understand how to view the various responses toconflict in relation to satisfying one’s own interests, andthe interests of another party.
• Understand the differences between compromise andcollaboration.
• Learn how the problem-solving approach is used in apublic setting.

TimeOne Hour

Materials Needed

Pencils/pens for each participant
Flip Chart and Easel
II-1

Markers
Overhead Projector
Question and Answer Reference for the Leader—Questions
Most Often Asked About the Thomas-Killman Conflict
Mode Instrument
Overheads

12 Thomas-Killman Conflict Mode Instrument
13 Conflict Grid
14 Assumptions of the Compromise ApproachHandouts

Thomas-Killman Conflict Mode Instrument for eachparticipant.
Note: THIS INSTRUMENT SHOULD NEVER BE
DUPLICATED. Order from: XICOM, Woods Road,Tuxedo, NY 10987; phone: 914-351-4735 or 800759-42661

Directions

Overhead 12

1. Introduce the Thomas-Killman Instrument as a tool for
individuals to understand themselves better and how
they deal with conflict in comparison to otherindividuals in management and business settings.
Indicate that individuals will not be required to tellothers how they scored on the Thomas-Killman
Instrument. Assure everyone that there are no rightor wrong answers. Use Overhead 12 to underscoreyour points.
a. Trainers should read the “Questions Most Often
Asked About the Thomas-Killman Conflict ModeInstrument” before you lead Unit 2. It can be usefulin fielding questions from the participants.
2. Distribute a Thomas-Killman Instrument and pencil or
pen to each participant. Read the “Instructions” on thefirst page. Participants are asked to circle an “A” or“B” for each of the thirty statements on pages 1 through4. Participants are asked to stop at page 5 and not tobreak the seal until they are instructed to do so.

1Anyone interested in the variety of applications of the Thomas-Killman Conflict Mode Instrument should
contact XICOM about their 1996 publication of The Conflict Workshop Facilitators Guide, a bibliographicalreference guide to conflict research groups that have used the instrument.

II-2

3. After every individual has completed page 4 of theThomas-Killman Instrument, ask the participants tobreak the blue seal and turn to page 6. They should
circle the letters on page 6 that correspond to the circled
items of the questionnaire. For example, if someone
circled an A for statement #1 (“There are times when I
let others take responsibility for solving the problem.”)the individual should circle an “A” for #1 on page 6.
Mention that you will meet with individuals privately ifyour instructions are confusing.
4. After each of the thirty items are circled on page 6, eachparticipant will total the number of items circled in eachcolumn.
5. Participants are asked to turn to page 8. Each individual
graphs the numbers from the bottom of page 6 onto
page 8. Lines are usually drawn between the numbers.
6. Participants are told that their scores are graphed inrelation to middle and upper level managers ofgovernment and business organizations. For example,
if the participant received a score of 10 or above for“competing,” he/she ranks among the top ten percent of
test-takers who are more comfortable with thisapproach. Conversely, if you received a score of threeor less for “competing,” you probably use this approachless frequently than other leaders. Participants areurged to read pages 9-16 on their own about
interpreting high or low scores. Assure the participantsthat the Thomas-Killman instrument does not suggest
one is competent or incompetent in a particular style—it indicates what one's natural style is, and may reflect
their tendency to overuse one style or another.
Objective 13

7. Use Overhead 13 (Conflict Grid) to stimulate
discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of eachconflict approach.
8. Explain what “avoidance” means from Overhead 13.
Follow up questions could include:a. Strengths of the Avoidance Approach. “Do you
know of a public organization or group that has
successfully used avoidance to deal with conflict?”II-3

If no one responds, you could mention that forreligious, ethical and practical purposes pacifists such
as Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. avoided all
conflict that involved violence. Gandhi believed it was
foolish to fight violence with violence because thedominant side would always have more power. Somegroups choose their battles carefully. They have
limited resources and energy to get involved in allconflict situations. Hence, they avoid the smaller
conflicts and focus on the bigger ones.
b. Weakness of the Avoidance Approach. “Do youknow of a public organization or group that has
avoided conflict in ways that hurt theorganization?”
If no one responds, the trainer could refer to theAbilene Paradox in Unit 1.
9. Explain what “accommodation” means from Overhead
13.
a. Strengths of the Accommodation Approach. “Doyou know of a public organization or group that has
successfully used accommodation to deal withconflict?”
If no one responds, the trainer could mention that somepublic figures and organizations have publicly
apologized when confronted with conflict. For
example, a Lexington, Kentucky church apologized tothe community for not investigating rumors ofpedophilia about one of its leaders. Many small
business organizations typically operate under theadage that “the customer is always right.” Inaccommodating their customers they strengthen thecredibility of the organization.
b. Weaknesses of the Accommodation Approach. “Do
you know of a public organization or group that hasused accommodation in ways that have harmed theorganization?”
If no one responds, the trainer could mention howorganizations have been taken advantage of by clientsor their own members when there is excessive
accommodation. The organization or group can bewalked on like a doormat.
II-4

The trainer could ask if any of the participants have felt
they have accommodated so much in personal
relationships that it eventually led to the destruction of
the relationship? Did they feel they were taken
advantage of?
10. Competition. Use Overhead 13 to explain thecompetition approach to conflict. This approach issometimes called “win-lose.”a. Strengths of the Competition Approach. “When doyou think the competition approach would beespecially appropriate for public groups?”
If no one responds, the trainer could mention that someorganizations have used competition because it seemed
to be the most appropriate method. For example, someinner city churches have declared a “war on drug lords.”
They believe it is inappropriate for them to avoid or
accommodate the conflict with the drug culture. They
enter the fray with idea of "winning" and the hopes thatthe drug culture will lose.
Some organizations encourage healthy competition
among internal teams. For example, UPS pits different
packing lines against each other with the promise of
incentives to the line that is most efficient. It is believedthat this competition strengthens the entire organization.
In other cases, groups turn to the courts because they
believe they have a high probability of winning theircase. They may also want the courts to set precedents orthey may want to use "competition" to publicize theintellectual, economic or moral worth of their cause.
Proponents of the competition approach are willing tosacrifice money and time in order to win.
b. Weaknesses of the Competition Approach. "What doyou think are the weaknesses with the competition
approach in public settings?"

II-5

The trainer could respond with several observations. If
organizations successfully pursue a "win-lose"
approach, they may permanently destroy theirrelationships with the "losers." Losers may use the loss
to regroup and strengthen their resources. Eventually,
the losers may find a way to get even so that the former
losers become "winners" and the former winners
become losers. The win-lose approach may also lead topermanent gridlock in which each side has just enoughstrength to stop the other side from achieving theirobjectives, but not enough strength to win anything.
This is particularly dangerous for public groups.
11. Compromise Approach. Use Overhead 13 to explain
the compromise approach. It means "splitting thedifference." Show Overhead 14 to list theAssumptions of the Compromise approach.
Assumptions of the Compromise Approach:• Pie is limited• Best solution is to divide the pie• Win-win is not possible• Win-lose = too many negatives• Everyone wins something• But everyone loses something
The trainer may illustrate the compromise approachwith the case of two library patrons who are arguingover whether the window in the reading room should beclosed or open. The librarian may seek a compromise
solution and leave the window slightly open. Inessence, each party wins a little and loses a little.
Compromise is often used in public settings. Its appeal
may be rooted in our American sense of fairness.
a. Strengths of the Compromise Approach. "Have you
seen the compromise approach used effectively inpublic settings?"
If no examples are offered, the trainer can mention that
it works well in cases where there are two opponents
with equal power who are strongly committed tomutually exclusive goals. For example, compromise
has been effective in organized labor and management
disputes. Compromise can be used effectively inorganizations where goals are moderately important but
II-6

not worth the effort of more assertive modes such ascompetition.
b. Weaknesses of the Compromise Approach. "Haveyou seen the compromise approach used
ineffectively in public settings?"
If no examples are offered, the trainer can mention thatgroups may have goals that are so important thatcompromise would only weaken the organization.
They may have little choice but to pursue a win-losestrategy. In other cases, the compromise approachdissatisfies all parties because everyone wins something
but they also lose something. The trainer should
mention that the compromise approach, not matter how
familiar it seems, is not always the best approach.
Some critics of compromise say organizations shouldattempt to pursue a "win-win" strategy that would leave
all parties satisfied.
12. "Collaboration" or "Problem-Solving." Note that
Thomas-Killman calls this approach "collaboration",
but it is more commonly called "problem-solving" or"interest-based problem solving." Refer to the upper
right-hand corner of Overhead 13.
This approach is the least understood of all five
strategies. It usually involves a redefinition of theproblem and then the disputants seek creative ways toaddress the problem. Let's take the earlier case of thetwo library patrons who are arguing whether thewindow should be closed or open (see compromise
explanation — #11). The interest-based problem
solving approach probes under the interests underneaththe positions. The positions are clear. One patronwants the window closed and the other wants it open.
But we don't know why they have such strong
positions. The person who wants the window closed
says that she wants to avoid a draft. The person whowants the window open says that he needs fresh air.
The problem changes from "Should the window beclosed or open?" to "How can one patron get fresh air
while the other avoids a draft?"

II-7

The trainer asks the workshop participants tobrainstorm solutions to the question : "How can onepatron get fresh air while the other avoids a draft?" Thecreative brainstorming by the group is reflective of how
problem-solving works.
After the participants offer possible solutions the trainer
reveals that this real case was solved in a unique way.
The librarian went into another room and raised awindow which brought fresh air into the reading room
but did not create a draft.
a. Strengths of the Problem-Solving Approach. The
trainer asks the participants "Have you seen theproblem-solving approach used effectively in public
settings? If so, how?"
If there is no response from the participants the trainer
can mention that interest-based problem solving has
been used in Washington state to address an agricultural
pest problem.2
First discovered in Texas in 1986, the Russian wheat
aphid (RWA) spread into Washington by 1988,
resulting in millions of dollars of crop loss. Since
biological control was still several years away frombeing developed, Washington producers aeriallyapplied the insecticide disulfoton to kill the RWA.
Producers supported the aerial applications, butchallenges were raised by the nonagriculturalcommunity that was concerned about chemical drift andits impact on waterways, wetlands, and wildlife andhuman contact. Other incidents of chemical contact inWashington cast the debate over aerial application ofdisulfoton into "pro" and "con" camps.
Hoping to end the polarizing direction of the debate, theagricultural industry supported a Washington State
Conservation Commission-sponsored proposal callingfor a consensus-based dispute resolution.
Before the positions became entrenched, the producers
and nonagricultural parties were able to reframe theissue to reflect the key stakeholder's interests.
Originally the question was cast as "Should we permit
aerial application of disulfoton, or shouldn't we?" The2

Adapted from Fiske, Emmett P. 1991 (Fall) "Extension's Effectiveness in Resolving Environmental
Disputes" in Journal of Extension as viewed on the internet at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1991fall/a8.txt

II-8question became "How can we control the RWA
problem while still safeguarding the environment andhealth of the surrounding land and people?" Notice
how this question did not place people into two camps.
Through a series of meetings between the stakeholding
groups, several important agreements were reached:
there would be voluntary compliance among producers
with the established agreements; public education about
RWA and disulfoton; protection of people, wildlife,
wetlands, and waterways; and ongoing monitoring andassessment of RWA potential for crop damage.
The result of these voluntary agreements included:
more than 80,000 fact sheets about the possible
countermeasures against the RWA and the impact onhuman and wildlife health resulting from disulfoton;
75% of wheat and barley growers who sprayedcomplied with the group's recommendations; fewer
pesticides were used, and those used were more
effective because of intensive management andmonitoring efforts; and in the 1989 growing season
there were no reported health hazards associated withdisulfoton.
b. Weaknesses of the Problem-Solving Approach.
"Have you seen the problem-solving approach used
inappropriately in public settings?"
If no one responds, the trainer can mention that it isinappropriate if one of the key disputants/stakeholders
refuses to be involved in any kind of dialogue. In othercases, it may be too time-consuming for organizations
to pursue. Sometimes, it is quicker and easier if anauthority figure makes a decision and sticks with it.
Some disputants may want to pursue litigation in order
to set a legal precedent. In other cases, it may take a lotof time to create the atmosphere of trust and openness
problem solving requires.

II-9

13. Summarya. The trainer mentions that each of these five
approaches has strengths and limitations. Ask theparticipants if they understand how the five
approaches work and when they likely won't work.
b. The trainer mentions that the participants are free tokeep their Thomas-Killman Conflict Mode
Instrument. They should be aware that their"natural" conflict resolution styles may be overused.
People tend to overuse their natural styles because
they feel comfortable with them even when it isinappropriate. Ideally, one uses all five styles
when dealing with public conflict.
14. The next step. The trainer asks if any participant scored"high" on "collaborating" on the Thomas-Killman
Conflict Mode. Most likely, very few people will havescored high. The trainer mentions that this approachtends to be underutilized and that the bulk of thetraining will focus on collaboration or interest-based
problem-solving.
15. As a final exercise, the trainer might want to graph thecollective score of the group. By making hash markson the flip chart indicating each participants high andlow score the group can gain a sense of how their scorescompare to those of their peers.

II-10