When a conflict exists, the primary step is to come to a decision whether or not to deal with it. That call involves reconciliation the reward against worth of addressing the issue; that balance is exclusive to every circumstance. Some general rules square measure that if the difficulty is difficult enough that it's moving your behaviour or consideration on your conscience, it ought to be self-addressed. It’s vital to not confuse the perceived issue of the spoken language unfalteringly of whether or not it'll be helpful and acceptable to proceed. Perceived variations in power typically impact a choice to deal with a conflict; but, lessons from aviation and alternative industries illustrate the advantages of open communication and therefore the risks of silence even in things of various levels of authority or power (Behfar et al., 2011).

Once it's been determined to deal with the conflict, there square measure many steps concerned in preparation for the spoken language. One step is to see the precise nature of the conflict. Once considering the precise nature of the conflict, some authors supply the subsequent steering. If the difficulty happens once, it's acceptable to debate the content of the issue; if it's occurred repeatedly, one ought to specialize in the pattern of events. If the matter impacts your relationship with the opposite person or team members, then the subject ought to be your relationship. One pitfall of conflict management is permitting task or pattern kind conflict to deteriorate to relationship conflict by over personalizing the difficulty. Another system acceptable for team conflict divides conflict into task, process, and relationship conflicts Jang et al. (2018). Task conflict is analogous to content conflict, whereas method conflict refers disagreement over team processes. One should conjointly completely perceive one's own position. It’s vital to assemble all of the background info and any knowledge necessary to debate the conflict (Artto et al., 2009).

Then one must accomplish clarity regarding what's desired from the confrontation further as what one is ready to provide up or compromise. Another key part is awareness of that outcome one considers undesirable. a part of the preparation is thought of one's own motivations and goals further because the motivations and goals of the opposite party. This step appears obvious however is usually not done or solely superficially evaluated. Considering why a rational and moral person would have behaved within the manner worrisome you regularly opens an alternate read of matters. The authors of Crucial Confrontations label this preparation as “Mastering your story”. In short, it understands from as several vantage points as attainable however the matter state of affairs may need developed. The level of intensity of the conflict is another thought in decisive however best to approach the difficulty. One model divides the intensity of conflict into 5 levels.

References

1. Artto, K., Martinsuo, M., Gemunden, H.G., & Murtoaro, J. (2009). Foundations of program management: A bibliometric view. International Journal of Project Management, 27(1), 1-18.
2. Behfar, K.J., Mannix, E.A., Peterson, R.S., & Trochim, W.M. (2011). Conflict in small groups: The meaning and consequences of process conflict. Small Group Research, 42(2), 127-176.
3. Jang, W., Yu, G., Jung, W., Kim, D., & Han, S.H. (2018). Financial conflict resolution for public-private partnership projects using a three-phase game framework. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 144(3), 1-10.