Sunday, February 28, 2016

Resolving Interpersonal Conflict

Interpersonal conflict occurs when a person or group of people frustrates or interferes with another person's efforts at achieving a goal. Conflict can consist of three different components
Firstly, the behavioral component which involves someone interfering with the objectives of another person. 
Next, the cognitive component which involves a disagreement between the parties that illustrates the differences between the interests and objectives of the conflicting parties.
Lastly, the affective component which relates to the negative emotional states of the conflicting parties. 

The most common conflict is where two people having different opinions. Their goal is to “win” or make the other person “lose”, showing high concern for self and low concern for others. For example, I happen to see this conflict between a salesman and a customer. Apparently, the customer come back to complain to the salesman about his spoilt product. After explaining why the product didn’t work, the salesman thinks that it isn’t his product fault and said it is probably some external equipment that cause it. The customer isn’t quite happy with his respond and demand a refund. However, the salesman insist that it cannot be refund as it is not caused by technical fault. This conflict went on and on until the manager steps in.

In order to solve this conflict, usually we need a third person to make a stand for both of them, simply the judge. They need to have a mutual goals and facilitate to a “win/win” situation for both of them, showing high concern for self and other. Sometimes, you can also put yourself into the shoes of the other person. Empathy is a good form which helps you understand the other person’s message.


If there is no manager and you are the passer by, how will you assist to solve this conflict?

4 comments:

  1. Hi CS,

    I totally agree with the 3 components that make up a conflict. It is essential that we know how conflicts are created so that we can proceed to minimize them in the future.

    With regards to your question, if the manager had not stepped in, I would have tried to understand both sides of the story first before making any calls. It is possible that the customer is not being honest and would have gone there for the sole purpose of getting a refund under the guise of repairing his product. However, on the other hand, it is also possible that the salesman is being dishonest as well. He could have tried to convince the customer that there was no problem with his product so as to make it seem like it's the customer's fault and then proceed on to try to sell him another product for monetary gains. You know how people are...

    After understanding both sides of the story, I would then try to make them both understand the other party's difficulties and try to lead them into a collaborative effort and come to an agreement.

    Hope this helps!

    Sincerely,
    Samuel

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hello Chor Sheng!

    It's me again!

    Everyone has their side of the story.

    From the salesman's perspective, it could be that accepting the damaged goods and filing a report is tedious. Or that, this isn't the first time this customer is doing this, a benefit of the doubt cannot be given.

    From the customer's perspective, it could be that this product is really faulty and it feels that the customer's explanation fell on deaf ears. And further ridiculed that it is the fault of another appliance. Since the customer is already at the store, the salesman is not being able to provide a constructive suggestion besides the possible fault of another appliance, and that the valid refund period is almost due, the customer does not want to let it expire and live with a spoiled product.

    If I were a passerby, I'd like to make a point to listen to both sides of the story, agree to their frustrations individually, in doing so, demonstrate that I am not taking any sides. I would then suggest to offer an extended warranty to the customer or offer the service center details. And if it is possible to send the product in for servicing on the customer's behalf.

    This scenario is rather common, that it leaves the salesman wary about the customer's intend, and vice versa. It is difficult to weigh honesty for both parties involved and it is natural to respond with a defensive stance. I hope both the salesman and customer would learn from this and get better at handling similar situations.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Chor Sheng
    It’s good that you did some research on the topic, I agree that the 3 component you mentioned make up a conflict.
    My answer to your question is that I will first take time to listen to both sides of the story and analyse the product and determine who is at fault. Assume that both is at fault (miscommunication on product usage), I would suggest to the salesman to offer a product servicing base on goodwill, and tell the customer that due to miscommunication in usage of the product, the salesman is willing to offer a product servicing .In this case, it’s a win – win situation

    ReplyDelete
  4. Again, you have shown initiative in finding out more about the topic, which is really good! Keep up the effort!
    With the information in the opening paragraph about the 3 components making up a conflict, the post looks promising. I was hoping to see an analysis of the encounter touching on these components. Without this, I was left wondering how the body and the introductory paragraphs connect to each other.
    I encourage you to revise this part of the post by providing a more detailed analysis of the encounter. If you do, write that as a separate post.
    That said, this post is a good start!

    ReplyDelete