Cooperative Strategies

Page 181

Of course, the most practical and fairest way for Leslie to manage this conflict is to propose a compromise, offering to split the last piece of pie with Kathy. If Leslie decides to share the pie, she is attempting to arrive at the best outcome for both partners in this relationship. Strategies that benefit the relationship, serve mutual rather than individual goals, and strive to produce solutions that benefit both parties are called cooperative strategies (Zacchilli, Hendrick, & Hendrick, 2009).

Whether the issue is pie or child custody decisions, several tactics are useful in cooperative conflict management. For example, let’s consider a larger issue that is causing conflict within a family: twenty-year-old Kieran wants to drop out of college to join the Army. His mother is very upset and wants him to continue his education. A number of strategies can help them manage the conflict cooperatively.

Debate and Argue. As noted earlier in this chapter, when we engage in conflict by debating the issue at hand, we exchange more ideas, reach better decisions, and foster stronger, healthier relationships. Healthy debate is, therefore, a cornerstone of cooperative conflict management. A number of tactics can help foster debate.

One is probing—asking questions that encourage specific and precise answers. If Kieran’s mother asks probing questions (“Why do you want to join the Army now when you’re so close to graduating?”), she’ll get a better understanding of why and how he’s come to this decision. Likewise, Kieran will get a better sense of his mother’s feelings if he asks similar questions of her (“Why is it so important to you that I finish my degree now?”).

Probing can help encourage either side of a conflict to consider both the positive and the negative aspects of an issue. Kieran, for example, might note that the job market for college graduates in his major is completely flat, and so he sees the Army as a solid employment opportunity. His mother might point out that he’ll still have to pay back his college loans, with or without his degree, and that all that expenditure will have amounted to little if he doesn’t finish. Kieran’s mother might also play the role of devil’s advocate—pointing out the worst-case scenarios (“There’s a war going on. What if you get hurt or killed?”)—to make sure her son has considered all possible outcomes of his decision (and revealing her own fears in the process).

Offering—and potentially negotiating—alternatives is a useful tactic for cooperative conflict management.

Consider Options and Alternatives. Offering—and potentially negotiating—alternatives is a useful tactic for cooperative conflict management. Kieran’s mother might suggest, for example, that he join the Army Reserve instead, which would allow him to finish school while also serving his country and would ensure a career if he wants to go on active duty after graduation.

Consider the Importance of the Outcome. Obviously, a disagreement over a serious issue like quitting school to join the Army warrants serious debate. But many of the conflicts in which we find ourselves embroiled (like disputes over pie) don’t seem all that important. Nevertheless, it’s important to clarify that the issue will have consequences. For example, Kieran’s mother might emphasize that the Army is not a job he can simply quit if he doesn’t like it.

Reassure Your Partner. To resolve a conflict cooperatively, a straightforward explanation of your good intentions might be in order. When Kieran’s mother tells him, “Please, I just want to talk about this to make sure I understand your reasons before you make your decision,” she’s stating her desire to resolve the disagreement, showing him that she respects his feelings and intelligence, and reassuring him that she wants to engage in a discussion with him, not simply tell him what to do.

Focus on Issues. With any issue, it’s very important that the discussion remain centered on the matter at hand and steer clear of any personal attacks. If Kieran’s mother boldly declares, “You are irrational and thoughtless. Who drops out of college with only one year left?” she’s making the argument personal and isn’t considering the fact that Kieran may well have thought through the ramifications of his decision. Such verbal aggressiveness—attacks on individuals rather than issues—is common, but it is also unproductive. Research by Roberto, Carlyle, Goodall, and Castle (2009) suggests that parents’ verbal aggression toward their children can have a negative impact on relationship satisfaction and is associated with nonsecure attachment styles among young adult children. Further, when verbal aggression is used by supervisors toward their subordinates in the workplace, it can negatively affect employee job satisfaction and commitment (Madlock & Kennedy-Lightsey, 2010).

Such personal attacks do little to foster cooperation and usually succeed only in putting the other person on the defensive and making the interaction more heated. So Kieran’s mother would do better to keep the focus on his decision rather than on Kieran himself.