Michigan State University Extension
Boardsmanship - 03170001
06/05/00
Capacity-building Skills for Public Officials - Why We Don't Agree, and What We're Going to Do about
List of files and visuals associated with this text.
#317
(Fil. 7) Text in PDF Version
Objectives of this bulletin are to:
1. Describe the types of disagreements found on local
boards.
2. Explain basic causes of disagreement.
3. Provide a framework for a process of managing conflict
in general terms and using the assertive style
4. Describe the role of the third party intervenor in
managing conflict.
While the focus of these bulletins is the public official,
the material covered is appropriate for all Extension
audiences.
Contents
I. Introduction
II. Types and Causes of Disagreement on the Local Board
III. Underlying Causes of Disagreement
IV. Techniques for Handling Disagreements, Confrontations
and Conflicts
A. General Guidelines
B. Using the Assertive Style
V. The Role of the Third Party
VI. Summary
For Further Readings in this Area
Appendices
A. Work-Related Conflict Evaluation
B. The Spring Conflict
C. Conflict on the Commission
D. The Domineering Clerk/Conflict on the Board
E. The "Cool" Colleagues
F. Check list to Develop Cooperation
G. How We Get Into Conflict With Others
Series developed through the courtesy of Cooperative
Extension Service, Michigan State University and the
Michigan Townships Association
I. Introduction
To discuss confrontation and conflict on local elected
boards, we must first destroy a cherished myth. Like it or
not, nice people DO get into conflict! Many people were
brought up to believe that this isn't true, but experience
shows that it is. Your board may be fortunate and have
smooth sailing for years, but sooner or later a situation
or a clash of personalities will disturb the peace. This
bulletin will give you some ideas on how this comes about.
It will help you to be able to sort out the pieces and to
know what to do about it before it becomes hurtful to
individuals or to the progress of the board.
The causes of disagreement are as complex as all the
personalities that bring it about. The local official needs
to learn to expect a variety of causes and forms of
disagreement, and to develop an equal variety of techniques
for managing it when it comes. As the political activist
Stokeley Carmichael once observed, "Conflict is as American
as apple pie." In a free society, where people may express
themselves openly, disagreements will always occur from
time to time. The public policy maker needs to accept this
as part of life. It is better to develop skills in managing
conflict when it comes than to try to ignore its presence.
Sometimes disagreement on a board may only indicate that
the board, as a unit, is alive and well! At other times,
its presence may be very divisive This bulletin will
present information to aid you, as a local official, in
determining what kind of trouble you may be experiencing
and some techniques for dealing with it.1)
II. Types and Causes of Disagreement on the Local Board
As indicated above, disagreements on local boards and
councils don't always take the same form. Though it is an
oversimplification to speak of conflict as entirely
positive or entirely negative, there is enough validity
in the positive-negative differentiation to pursue it to
further. A township treasurer described a problem she
experiences every year at tax time. She said, "I know,
just like clockwork, when Joe is going to come roaring
in! He always feels the township and I guess me, personally
is cheating him by his tax assessment We "have it in for
him." So every year he yells and swears at me. I hate it,
and I don't think I should have to take that kind of abuse,
but I don't know what to do about it." Joe is clearly one
of "the Bullies" described in Bulletin III of this
series.2) Is this a conflict? Joe is in conflict with the
idea of his tax assessment and the treasurer feels the
brunt of his anger. She doesn't respond in a conflictive
way, so conflict is only one-sided, yet her feelings
towards Joe are certainly negative.
Here is another example: "We never get anything
accomplished on our council! Every time we just begin our
meeting, the police chief and the fire chief get into their
usual arguments. If they don't argue about each
department's "turf" they argue about budget or something
else! They never have gotten along, and the rest of us
are held up in getting our business done. Too often, some
of the rest of us are drawn into the argument and it gets
pretty unpleasant. It's when some of them start name
calling that disgusts me the most!" This is clearly a
conflict, but is it a board conflict or a personality
conflict? Another example was recounted recently by a
local official: "We have the darnedest bunch on the board!
It seems like every meeting we get in arguments, but some
way they never feel bad to anyone. We just hash out the
issue until we decide what is best to do. Actually, it's
kind of fun and I think we all learn a lot from it!" Is
this a group conflict? Should it be avoided?
The first example (the Bully) is not a conflict so much
as a case of inappropriate behavior used by a highly
conflictive individual Upon being questioned about Joe,
the treasurer stated that he seems to react to many
things in life in this antagonistic way. Such a conflictive
personality needs to be dealt with by using specific
behavior, such as that referred to in Bulletin III. In the
second example, there is definitely a conflict, but it is
not a group conflict, though it occurs within the context
of the board meeting. It is a personality conflict and
probably happens wherever those two meet. However, because
it detracts from the goal achievement of the group, it
needs to be dealt with in that setting. The third example
should happen more often! What a healthy group that is.
Members can argue lustily, yet keep to the issues, without
getting into personalities, and cheerfully admit they learn
from the conflict.
These examples illustrate two very basic types of conflict,
as well as a third that may be seen as conflict but really
involves a troublesome personality and its victim. There
are always occasional bullying personalities, and they need
to be dealt with firmly and not allowed to abuse others.
Unless a bully's intended victim fights back with similar
abuse, there is no conflict. The case of the police chief
and the fire chief is a definite conflict. The situation
describing their behaviors is typical of disagreements
based on personality differences. Such problems usually
include name calling and other examples of vindictiveness.
Conflicting personalities will frequently draw others into
the fray and cause a deterioration of goal accomplishment
for everyone. When personality conflicts occur In a
meeting, they very often are based in personal power
struggles We can say, "Oh, they just don't get along!" But
with a deeper look we see that power or status-gaining it
or keeping its often is at the root of the problem. There
is very little to be gained when a local board allows
itself to become involved in this type of disagreeable
behavior. In fact, some of the effects of this negative
behavior are:
-It interrupts normal relations among individuals or
within the group.
-It harms the self-concepts of the antagonists
-It makes rational discussions difficult or impossible.
-It takes the time and energy of the whole group.
-It considerably lessens the productivity of the group.
The third example given earlier, the board that argues out
problems and learns in the process, illustrates what can be
termed positive conflict. This occurs when the conflict is
based on ideas, issues, values or principles and does not
deteriorate into personality attacks. Such interchanges
allow some very valuable results for the group, such as:
-It helps members know where others stand on issues- what
is important to them,
-It aids in defining a variety of issues and values, so
the group can see itself more cleanly.
-It often leads to a healthy confrontation that can bring
out ideas, issues or values in a way that resolves the
conflict and minimizes bad feelings.
-It can be the beginning of a redefinition of goals,
which will result in a more satisfying situation for all
the members
Whenever a local board finds itself in disagreement, each
member needs to be willing to face the facts and help to
keep it positive in areas of issues and ideas, It is
important not to try to avoid it or pretend it isn't
happening -conflict does not sweep under rugs well at all!-
or to allow it to become harmful and negative-centered
around personality attacks Leaders skilled in dealing with
conflict are very helpful to the success of a local board.
Such a person will generally be able to manage
disagreements so that they don't take on the greater
dimensions of actual conflict.
Many local board chairpersons, however, do not necessarily
have those skills. In fact, these leaders may even be part
of the problem As the old saying goes so correctly, "if you
are part of the problem, you can't be part of the solution"
The time may come when severe problems necessitate bringing
in an outside intervenor (This will be discussed later.) On
most daily problems, however, each member of a local board,
commission or council has equal responsibility to be alert
to the development of conflict. They can help keep it
positive and show a willingness to help save the group from
the wasteful effects of unchecked disagreement.
Trying to bring a disagreement back to a legitimate basis
after it has been allowed to deteriorate is very difficult.
At the first sign of petty bullying, attacking of fruitless
head banging, each member must be prepared to attempt
intervention, for the sake of the whole group and its goal
achievement. Impersonal statements can be used, such as,
"That is not the issue. The issue is..." or "Let's not
bring in personalities. Our problem, rather, is this.."
These are firm, meaningful statements that do not put blame
on any individual. Keep intervening statements from
pointing out those who are attacking others. This will help
avoid escalating the conflict by provoking defensive
reactions from the perpetrators.
The illustrations above provide examples of interpersonal
and intragroup conflicts. Another type of disagreement
can occur between boards or councils. This is called
intergroup conflict. This was described by a township
supervisor who related a problem his community was
facing: "The county commission wants to put a landfill on
a particular 40 acres in our township. We are fighting
them because we are farmers and know that piece of land
is too valuable to use for a landfill." If we have to
have the landfill in our township, we can identify other
property that is poor for farming and has lighter soil
that would work better, anyway. They don't want to listen
to us, though, and they are trying to force it on us!"
A city manager complained of intergroup conflict this way:
"We have one commissioner in our county who doesn't seem to
understand what territory is served by the county and what
is served by the city. He is always stirring up the
commission against us about something that is ours to
handle. He keeps saying that the city is part of the
county, too. This doesn't make sense, but he just keeps
something going all the time." Then after a moment's
reflection, the city manager added, "You know, he lost a
race for mayor once. I think he's been mad about that ever
since and takes it out on us!"
These are very different examples of intergroup
disagreement and ensuing conflict. The first case is more
typical: one group exerts its power over another, and the
second group guards its territory jealously, as it must
to remain intact. Each side feels the other is out of
order and misperceiving the real situation In the second
example, one board member's "hidden agenda"-- to "get back
at" the city because it rejected him-- influences others to
disharmony with the other board. This shows a
characteristic in group-oriented conflict that may
distinguish it from person-to-person conflict: the "mass
reaction" possible either in intra or intergroup conflict.
Emotional or hostile individuals or subgroups can influence
the larger group to irrational behavior by playing on their
loyalties to their own group and/or by developing a sense
of threat from the opposing group. It is precisely in this
way that mass hysteria begins. When carried to extreme,
this has too often ended in actions such as lynch mobs or
other examples of totally irrational mob violence.
Interpersonal conflict, on the other hand, generally hurts
only the original combatants.
Intra- or intergroup conflicts both have the potential to
incite whole groups to unplanned, irrational action
against opposing groups. This potential should provide
further incentive to group members to take the
responsibility for intervening, whenever this is
possible.3)
III. Underlying Causes of Disagreement
The incidents described above that led to conflict
demonstrate different types of conflict It will be helpful
now to take a close look at what goes on in groups that
brings about disagreement. Think of your membership on
local boards and recall incidents from your own experience
that will illustrate the following concepts.
Sometimes members of boards agree on what they are
working toward but disagree on how to get theme. This is
a goal vs. method disagreement. Example: Your board may
see the need for plans for future development of the
outlying areas you deal with. All of you agree this is
important, but some say it is necessary to hire a
planning firm to carry out the development, while others
feel the board can do it "without spending all that money."
Can you think of another example of goal vs. method
disagreement?
Just the opposite situation gets local boards into trouble
with each other at times. This occurs when they don't agree
on where they should be going or on what actions they
should take in particular situations. This is strictly a
goal assessment conflict Let's say you are budgeting funds
Some members argue that they should be used to buy needed
parks equipment, while another group feels that the money
should be put in savings against urgent future needs.
What situation have you seen that illustrates
disagreement because of differing assessment of goals in
a particular situation?
Another cause of disagreement that easily leads to conflict
is when individual members or groups feel threatened by
other members or by some situation. The sense of threat
affects insecure members most heavily, but everyone feels
threatened occasionally. What causes us to feel threatened
in our groups? It could be a threat to positions,
knowledge, values or our sense of "territory." A threat to
position and territory can be the same, but we sense our
territory in more ways than by position. It could refer to
groups of constituents that an official feels are his/he
particular supporters; it could be physical territory when
sharing office space. Most people react defensively when
they feel a sense of threat. An example might be when a new
secretary is hired. You may feel he/she will be welcomed by
the present secretary, as he/she can share the work load.
When you notice the original person acting put out and
offended, you don't understand it. What is occurring is
reaction to a territorial and possibly a knowledge threat.
Can you recall other examples of disagreement arising
because someone felt threatened?
Many times members of local boards get into disagreement
when it seems there is not enough of something needed, as
well as a problem allocating what is available. This is a
conflict of disposition of resources and can focus either
on tangible or intangible resources. We easily think of
tangibles, such as land, money, records, materials or
facts, as resources. But sometimes certain intangible
resources are equally important to a situation. Try to
move ahead on your board with a shortage of time, ideas
or cooperation! Clearly, scarcity of resources and the
issue of who will get what is available for use are
common causes of disagreement on local boards.
A member of a local council recently discussed a problem
that illustrates this concept. She said, "We have so much
trouble getting anything done that needs to involve
several departments They all see each other as competing
for every dollar the city gets They don't realize how
much it would be an advantage to all of them if they
would support each other, rather than waste energies and
abilities in non-productive competition." This is an
example of conflict over a tangible resource (money) that
results in an intangible resource (cooperation) becoming
more scarce because of the original conflict.
What have you experienced that would further illustrate
conflict over scarcity or allocation of resources?
All the causes of disagreement discussed above are
greatly intensified when communication is poor or
nonexistent. When people either can't communicate or
communicate poorly, the results can include increased
hostility, resentment, defiance, apathy (why try?) or
total polarization. It is easy to see that the
effectiveness of communication can greatly influence
whether a problem remains at the level of disagreement or
escalates to full-blown conflict.
A township trustee related a sad example of communication
problems leading to conflict when she said: "Our
treasurer has never accepted the new clerk, simply
because the clerk is a man. The clerk in our township had
always been a woman and the treasurer (herself a woman)
just thinks clerks should be women! Consequently, she
`picks' at everything the clerk does, criticizing and
fault finding continually. At first, the new clerk was
rather amused and able to tolerate it, but now he resents
this behavior It has gotten so bad that they get into an
argument several times a week. The supervisor is about
ready to suggest they both leave!" What a waste of time and
energy this illustrates.
Does this remind you of times that poor communication
added fuel to a small fire, resulting in real trouble?4)
IV. Techniques for Handling Disagreements, Confrontations
and Conflicts
A. General Guidelines
Problems between individuals or groups can often be kept in
the positive arena that is, kept to issues, ideas, values,
etc. When this occurs, management techniques can be used to
reduce the acrimony, minimize hostility and enable everyone
to learn from the situation. This is what needs to be done
with a conflictive situation reduce it, manage it, minimize
negativism. Too often, local officials feel they should
attempt to eliminate conflict completely, including simple
disputes, or there is something wrong. This is part of that
"nice people don't get into conflict" myth that was
rebutted early in this discussion.
Eliminating disagreements would also eliminate all chance
to learn from each other. Healthy conflict can provide
challenges to members that otherwise might not occur. Also,
it helps us test our knowledge and belief systems against
those of our peers. Rather than thinking how to do away
with various levels of disagreement, local decision makers
can concentrate on managing it for the greatest good to all
Organizations that see themselves as successful that is--
meeting their goals to a reasonable extent and satisfying
their followers-- tend to have a tolerance or disagreement
and even for conflict. In such an atmosphere, members are
often willing to be conciliatory with each other, smoothing
over disagreements and ignoring factors that could cause
unpleasant situations. When tension, unrest or
organizational insecurity exists, for whatever reasons,
members are far less able or willing to tolerate additional
stress. This holds true on local boards as well as in any
other kind of human grouping. Assuming that there is some
level of tolerance present in the group, the following
guidelines can be used in minimizing potential problems:
-Recognize and admit to a growing problem while it is still
small.
-Be willing to discuss it- don't avoid it,
-Do your best to empathize and feel the other's
viewpoint.5)
-Admit your own shortcomings of errors. Minimize
self-defending behavior.
-Ask questions, rather than attack.
-Attempt to understand, rasher than being judgmental of
critical.
-Use the problem to discover the other's thinking, not as
a way to WIN.
-Try to suggest mutual conciliation and/or compromise.
-Be flexible! Settle for gaining a little, rather than
trying for total defeat of the other.
-Keep the discussion focused on issues Avoid allowing the
interaction to deteriorate into personality attacks!
Always remember that you will live beyond this situation,
probably with these same people. It is too easy to win the
battle only to lose the war. You can "go for the jugular"
today with a fellow board member, but it gets a bit
uncomfortable if you find yourself passing the collection
box with the same person in church a few days later!
B. Using the Assertive Style
Few people really enjoy situations in which disagreements
get out of hand. You may find that risking confrontation
makes you very uncomfortable. However, the use of the
Assertive behavior style discussed earlier in this series
will help keep hostility and negative kinds of conflict to
a minimum.5) The use of Assertive behavior in a
confrontation creates a possibility of reducing ill
feelings and gives an opportunity for positive results and
"clearing the air."
In general, it is important to provide opportunities, as
well as encouragement, so hostile persons can honestly
express their feelings. You need ask only that they refrain
from abusive language. If you are in a situation with a
bully, as described earlier, it is all right to say
something like, "Now, hold on a minute! Let's make a deal.
I'll listen to you as long as it takes, if you promise not
to swear at me!" If you can do that with some humor, it
might help a bit, too. In any case, be willing to give time
and attention to the other person, and do your best to use
good listening skills. People who are full of acrimonious
feelings are rarely as rational as they might be So let
them run down before you begin to respond. When you are
faced with an angry or hostile individual, try to remember
that hostility is often based on fear, insecurity,
misinformation, frustration or a combination of all of
these. Knowing that this may be the basis for the tirade
you face can help you keep your response somewhat milder.
As a public official facing confrontations whether person
to person or by a group at a meeting remember that you are
the symbol of government to constituents who are frustrated
or feel ill-treated. Local officials are handy they live
nearby and are approachable. Try to recognize that, very
often, the anger or frustration directed toward you is
really felt toward your role, and not toward you as an
individual. You are there, and people can express their
dissatisfaction personally. An elderly woman who has spent
many years in local government put it this way: "When they
come in mad, I just remember it's not really me they are
mad at, so I let them blow off steam! You know, very often
they apologize when they are done and tell me they weren't
upset at me." She also wisely said that she "wouldn't think
of interrupting them before they were finished."
When facing confrontation, local policy makers will benefit
by using straight forward, assertive behavior and being
very careful not to become judgmental. A part of the
process of defusing hostile people is to recognize, openly,
the negative feelings they are expressing. When people are
upset, they expect to have those negative feelings rejected
by the one they are confronting. It generally reduces some
frustration if you can respond with an honest "I" message,
such as, "I can see you are really angry today," or, "I
feel you don't trust me in this matter." Angry people often
expect they can dump their feelings on another. Accepting
that puts the victim in a defensive position, and the
confronter just "won a round." The assertive person refuses
to be dumped on by openly recognizing the other's negative
feelings.
The next step in the defusing process is to tell the upset
person that you regret there is a problem and that the
accusations or hostility being directed toward you are
personally hurtful. "I feel bad that you are upset with
me," is an honest statement of feelings. It can easily be
followed by a statement such as, "But let's see if we can
find a way to work out this problem." Note: not "your"
problem that can sound judgmental. If you can use this
assertive process, it tells the confronter that you:
Really heard what he/she said.
Recognize that there is a problem.
Have feelings/reactions, too.
Are not trying to deny that he/she is upset.
Do not intend to allow the confrontation to become a
shouting match.
Refuse to be dumped on.
Are willing to work with him/her to try to solve the
problem.
At this point, it will be helpful to be as open and
thorough as possible in using facts in further dealing with
the confronter. When people are upset, they tend to see
written material as more valid than words. Showing the
records, or whatever, will be more convincing than your
statements.6)
V. The Role of the Third Party
Earlier in this bulletin appeared the statement, "If you
are part of the problem, you can't be part of the
solution." That old saying is generally accepted as valid.
If the problem is severe, the local official may well find
him/herself in a situation where this holds true. If
confrontation and intense, negative conflict have come
about through a personality clash, the saying may very well
apply. If a group of citizens is taking hostile action
against a unit of local government, the saying may also
apply. Further, it may be valid if subgroups on a board or
council are in conflict and simply cannot resolve their
differences
When a confrontation has become intense and reached an
impasse, it may be time to consider identifying a third
party to serve as an intervenor.7) The intervenor needs to
be someone who has little or no association with the
individuals or groups in conflict. For instance, if
subgroups on a board or council are in conflict, the third
party chosen to intervene would not be a member of any of
the groups. An intervenor should be selected because he/she
is:
-Someone known and credible to all parties.
-One who can be fair and impartial.
-Able to use group skills effectively (is a good"people
person").
-Patient, positive and tactful.
-Available over extended periods of time, if this becomes
necessary.
Though all of these criteria are important, credibility to
all those involved is the factor that provides the best
chance for success.
Once an intervenor has been selected, the process he/she
uses should be based on the following guidelines:
-Use assertive behaviors in all interactions.
-Be well prepared with all facts pertaining to the problem.
-Use non-judgmental, feeling response questions.
-Help all parties to "save face" wherever possible.
-Attempt to establish any common goals, perceptions,
information or attitudes shared by the opposing parties.
-Reinforce all positive behavior or attitudes shown by any
party.
-Tackle the problems apiece at a time, easiest pieces
first, in separate sessions.
-Build confidence by emphasizing even small successes
-Negotiate sub-parts of the conflict when this is possible.
-Show that reasonable behavior is expected from
participants, and disallow behavior that may be offensive
or abusive.
-Choose "neutral ground" for the negotiating sessions.
-Attempt to develop consensus wherever possible (a little
agreement gives hope that more can occur).
-Restate and summarize frequently, helping each party to
express his/her real feelings.
-Attempt to separate feelings from facts as participants
express themselves
-Maintain a calm and positive demeanor throughout the
process.
VI. Summary
Though few people enjoy being involved in disagreement or
conflict with friends or colleagues, it is important to
accept that it will happen at times. To find yourself
occasionally involved in an unpleasant dispute is a normal
part of life and should be accepted as such, Instead of
wasting time and energy looking for what went wrong and
then worrying about how it came about, try to develop
skills in managing conflict. Concentrate on keeping the
problem within the bounds of issues and ideas. Proceed with
an open. flexible attitude that shows a willingness to
learn from the conflict. Remember that conflict can help
both individuals and groups to glow, to become stronger and
more capable. Pursuit of goal accomplishment can become
more meaningful and give increased satisfaction when group
members develop skills in conflict management.
For Further Readings In This Area
Robinson and Clifford. Conflict Management in Community
Groups. University of Illinois Press,
Steve Turne. Conflict in Organizations: Practical Solutions
Any Manager Can Use. Prentice-Hall.
"Dealing With Conflict." Harvard Business Review. Harvard
University Press.
Dean Tjosvold. Productive Conflict Management: Perspectives
for Organizations. lrvington.
Joyce Hocked Frost, Interpersonal Conflict. W,G. Brown CO.
Kichard Watton, Interpersonal Peacemaking, Confrontations
and Third-Party Consultation. Addison-Wesley.
Robert J. Doolittle. Communication and Conflict. Science
Research Foundation.
Sex Roles, Rights and Values In Conflict. New York: Facts
on File.
Jay Folbert. Mediation: A Comprehensive Guide do Resolving
Conflicts Without Litigation Jossey-Bass.
Roger Fisher and William Ury. Getting to Yes, Penquin
Books.
FOOTNOTES
1) Refer to Appendix A, "Work-Related Conflict Evaluation,"
for assessment of conflict your office situation may bring
you.
2) Refer to NCR Extension Bulletin #316, "Local Boards-
Working Together," for a description of the Bullies and how
to handle them.
3) Refer to Appendix B, "The Spring Conflict."
4) Refer to Appendix C, "Conflict On The Commission."
5) Refer to Extension bulletin E-1915, "Express Yourself
(Without Turning Others Off!) for explanations of empathy.
6) Refer to Appendix D, "The Domineering Clerk."
7) Refer to Appendix E, "The Cool Colleagues."
Appendices
Appendix A
WORK- RELATED CONFLICT EVALUATION
Stressful day-to-day conditions, such as those listed
below, often exist in the office with employees or with the
elected staff members in a local governmental unit.
Indicate the relative frequency with which you experience
each of the following sources of conflict by writing the
appropriate response number in the corresponding blank.
Then add all numbers in the frequency column and write the
result in the TOTAL column.
FREQUENCY SCALE
1 = Never
2 = Infrequently
3 = Sometimes
4 = Often
5 = Always
FREQUENCY CONDITION
1. I am unclear about what is expected of me.
2. My fellow board members seem unclear about what my job
is.
3. I have differences of opinion with my fellow board
members.
4. The demands of others for my time are in conflict
5. I lack confidence in the board on which I serve
6. New board policies interrupt my daily work routine
7. Conflict exists between my unit and others with which it
must work
8. I get feedback from the public only when my performance
is unsatisfactory
9. Decisions or changes that affect me are made without my
knowledge or involvement
10. I am sometimes expected to accept the decisions of
others without being told their rationale
11. I must attend too many meetings to get my job done
12. I feel the need to be cautious about what I say in
meetings.
13. I have too much to do and too little time in which to
do it
14. I feel overqualified for the work I actually do
15. I feel underqualified for the work I actually do.
16. The people I work with closely are trained in a field
that is different from mine.
17. I must go to other departments (units) to get my job
bone.
18. I have unsettled conflicts with my co-workers.
19. I get no personal support from my co-workers.
20. I spend my time "fighting fifes" rather than working
according to a plan,
21. I do not have the right amount of interaction (too much
or too little) with others.
22. I do not have the opportunity to use my knowledge and
skills to the best advantage.
23. I worry about complying with state laws affecting my
job,
Scoring:
Frequency
115 - 90 = Extreme conflict (unlivable)
89 - 60 = Unpleasantly high conflict
59 - 35 = Reasonable conflict (livable)
34 - Below = Excellent work environment
If your score is 60 or higher, seriously consider using
assertive, confident behavior and discuss your conflictive
feelings with your fellow board members. Point out that a
positive feeling about the work and work situation will
increase everyone's productivity.
Appendix B
THE SPRING CONFLICT
Every spring you observe the same conflicts. The roads
start to break up from the stress of winter, and new
residents who don't understand the law come to the township
board to protest. The supervisor tells them that roads are
up to the county to handle. Sooner or later, they are right
back to the township saying the county hasn't done anything
and they think their township board should act. As a
trustee for several terms, you know this will be repeated
again this year. Your supervisor ends up annoyed at the
county because they "don't move faster"; the commissioners
make remarks about "those township people not knowing their
business"; the new residents become frustrated because they
"don't get any help from anyone!" As a township trustee,
you think something should be done to resolve this annual
spring conflict, but you don't really know what to do or
where to start.
Review Section 11 and determine what type of conflict this
is. Is it:
-a personality conflict?
-an intragroup conflict?
-an intergroup conflict?
Do you understand the differences among these types of
conflict?
Appendix C
CONFLICT ON THE COMMISSION
You have just become township treasurer. As you went over
the records to acquaint yourself with them, it seemed
that some transactions didn't make sense. You felt that
either you didn't understand the system or the
transactions had been done improperly. The former
treasurer moved away so you went to the township clerk to
ask for clarification. You were met with indignation and
affront that you would imply that things were done
crookedly. You weren't implying that and had asked in an
honest effort toward clarification, so you felt hurt and
confused at such a hostile reaction.
a. What is happening here in terms of causes of
disagreement between people? Review Section III and
identify which causes described there apply to this
situation.
b. Would you say this is a positive or a negative
disagreement? Why?
c. How could this disagreement be managed before it becomes
a real conflict? Use information presented in this bulletin
to formulate your answers.
Appendix D
THE DOMINEERING CLERK
As a first-term supervisor, you can see that you are
going to have to do something about the clerk. When you
ran for office, friends warned you about him: "He will
try to run you as he has the last three supervisors. He
won't stick to what is his business and will get his
cronies on the board to oppose anything you do when he
doesn't like it." You have found all this to be true. The
clerk has met all your attempts at conciliation with his
usual argumentative, defensive style, refusing to
acknowledge your good intentions, acting as if you are
trying to pick on him. It is time for a different
approach to work out this problem.
a. Using the suggestions in Section IV, how could those
techniques be employed in this situation?
b. What behaviors could the supervisor use to face the
clerk more effectively?
c. How could the supervisor employ the assertive style
of intervention in this situation? Think these questions
through as though the problem was yours.
CONFLICT ON THE BOARD
You and other administrative officials on your township
board definitely feel that the trustees are trying to
tell you how to run your business too much of the time.
They seem to question every decision you make just to
show their "authority ." The other administrators and you
have had enough and intend to force a confrontation about
this at the next board meeting.
Describe how this confrontation could be handled
negatively. What would be said, how, by whom; what
resulting actions or behavior would you predict?
Describe how this confrontation could be handled
positively What would be said, how, by whom; what
resulting actions would you predict?
How often have you seen negative behaviors used in a
conflict? In the long run, did anyone win, using such
behavior?
Could you begin to use positive behaviors now, to help
confrontations have positive results?
Appendix E
THE "COOL" COLLEAGUES
Bob is a local official who shares a secretary, Toni,
with two other officials, Mary and Tim. Something is not
working right in his secretarial arrangements, but he
can't figure what it is Lately he has realized that Toni
seems to work for him rather grudgingly. Not only that,
he has the distinct impression that Mary and Tim aren't
especially friendly to him, although he can't imagine
why. After all, he isn't in the office very often, so why
should they have anything to be unfriendly about? When he
comes in, he puts his priority items on Toni's desk and
goes about his work. Of course, he realizes sometimes she
has seemed a little busy and actually wanted to put his
needs at the end of her "To Do" list! Bob remembered that
he had quickly set her straight on that after all, Mary
and Tim are newly elected, while he has been in office
for years! Clearly, she should help him first.
After thinking about this little problem, Bob decided to
just ignore it. As long as Toni gets to his work fast, in
time for his deadlines, it really doesn't matter whether
she likes him or not She's paid to works not to like him.
However, he does wonder why Tim and Mary seem cool; Bob
decided to ignore that, too. They probably have so little
to do that they get bored and moody. Oh, well!
Think about this case of insensitivity
If you were Toni, Mary or Tim and were increasingly
frustrated by Bob's behavior, would you:
a. Ignore it?
b. Just tell him off?
c. Ignore him, and hope he noticed?
d. Use the assertive conflict management process to try
to work out a better atmosphere?
e. Bring in a third-party intervenor? If so, what person
could you look to for this role?
CHECKLIST TO DEVELOP COOPERATION
Much of the time, elected officials find taxpayers ready
to cooperate with their elected officials. Sometimes,
however, the official may have to go further to develop
cooperation among certain individuals or groups. The
following checklists contain reasons an individual or
group may not want to work with the official, and
strategies helpful in moving them to accept cooperation.
Instructions:
On a separate paper, apply the following checklists to a
particular problem you have experienced where gaining
cooperation was very difficult. Think of it through the
taxpayer's viewpoint as much as you are able, even if you
didn't agree with that view.
A. Reasons individuals or groups may not want to work
with the elected official:
1 Disagreement on defining the problem.
2. Disagreement on how to solve the problem.
3 Bad experience with past cooperation efforts.
4. Bad experience with other officials
5. Too much expected from taxpayer (in tangibles or
intangibles).
6 Fears of:
a. Loss of independence
b. Rejection
c. Disrespect.
7. Personality conflict
8. Differences in values and lifestyles.
9. Sense of others' values imposed on them.
Strategies used to produce cooperation:
1. Emphasize mutual desire to solve the problem that exists
between citizen and official
2. Clearly spell out the specific areas of cooperation
needed and the time period involved.
3. Point out proven reasons for trust of the official.
4. Empathize with the taxpayer try to encourage him/her to
express real feelings; be sensitive to fears; try to see
the problem as the other does, through his/her values. Do
not judge. Let real feelings spill out.
5. Outline benefits to be gained by the taxpayer through
cooperation.
6. Openly discuss past problems and give positive assurance
on reasons you feel you both can work together now.
7. When personality or value conflicts have been a problem,
level with the person and admit you have found it hard to
understand his/her position. Tell him/her eye to eye, that
you want a chance to do better this time. Taking blame
relieves another person of burdens and possible guilt for
past behavior, which itself often produces
defensive/hostile reactions.
Appendix G
HOW WE GET INTO CONFLICT WITH OTHERS
DEFINITIONS:
1. We agree on the goal but differ on how to get there.
Please mark the best response:
Have you experienced this situation?
Yes No
If you have, how was it solved?
a. By someone dominating through argument.
b. By someone using his/her power over the group.
c. By trying different ideas until one worked.
d. By someone persuading the others.
e. We never got it worked out!
f. Other means (please write in what happened in a
sentence or two)
2. Our goals simply are far apart
Please mark the best response:
Have you experienced this situation?
Yes No
If you have, how was it solved?
a. By someone dominating through argument.
b. By someone using his/her power over the group.
c. By trying different ideas until one worked.
d. By someone persuading the others.
e. We never got it worked out!
f. Other means (please write in what happened in a
sentence or two)
3. Others seemed threatening to values or customs I hold
important.
Please mark the best response:
Have you experienced this situation?
Yes No
If you have, how was it solved?
a. By someone dominating through argument.
b. By someone using his/her power over the group.
c. By trying different ideas until one worked.
d. By someone persuading the others
e. We never got it worked out!
f. Other means (please write in what happened in a
sentence or two)
4. There wasn't enough of something to go around, and who
should get what was the problem.
Please mark the best response:
Have you experienced this situation?
Yes No
If you have, how was it solved?
a. By someone dominating through argument.
b. By someone using his/her power over the group.
c. By trying different ideas until one worked.
d. By someone persuading the others.
e. We never got it worked out!
f. Other means (please write in what happened in a
sentence or two)
5. We couldn't really communicate.
Please mark the best response:
Have you experienced this situation?
Yes No
If you have, how was it solved?
a. By someone dominating through argument.
b. By someone using his/her power over the group.
c. By trying different ideas until one worked.
d. By someone persuading the others.
e. We never got it worked out!
f. Other means (please write in what happened in a
sentence or two).
Look back over your responses. Think of how the assertive
style might have been used in the situations you have
experienced that led to conflict.
1. What was the situation?
2. If more conflict developed, how did the leaders handle
it?
3. How could the assertive style have been used to reduce
or avoid conflict?
| Visual title - Visual size |
Visual title - Visual size |
This information is for educational purposes only. References
to commercial products or trade names does not imply
endorsement by MSU Extension or bias against those not
mentioned. This information becomes public property upon
publication and may be printed verbatim with credit to MSU
Extension. Reprinting cannot be used to endorse or advertise
a commercial product or company.
This file was generated from data base BD on 06/05/00.
Data base BD was last revised on 06/05/00.
For more information about this data base or its contents please contact
smalley@msue.msu.edu . Please read our
disclaimer for important
information about using our site.