Differences and Similarities

According to Verma, structural conflicts can be resolved using procedural changes, personnel changes, resource changes, authority changes and layout changes. Interpersonal conflicts can be resolved using the conflict resolution techniques such as avoidance, give and take, problem-solving, collaboration and negotiation. Different researchers have used different terminology for mentioning conflict resolution techniques. Researchers such as Thomas and Kilmann, Robbins, Lippit, Stoner et al., Verma, Heldman, Mulcahy, and Lam et al., have given different conflict resolution techniques to be used in projects.

Asserting ensures the win to one party at the expense of other party. It is a one way solution. Domination and forcing create win-lose situation for the parties in conflict. Integrating style is effective approach for project performance and it creates win-win situation for the parties. Avoiding is most disruptive style of conflict management in projects. In this style of conflict resolution, one party is indifferent to feelings of other party and one party keeps away from participating in conflict at all. It leaves the conflict unresolved and creates anger or frustration in other party and it propagates the conflict further. In Accommodating, one party sacrifices their own needs, wants and expectation to satisfy the other party. In compromising style of conflict resolution, both the parties give and take and they win something and lose something. Confrontation or problem solving tries to satisfy all the parties in conflict by keeping all the facts and figures in picture and use scientific techniques in solving the problem. It creates win-win situation for all the parties in conflict. Understanding each parties standing through a pre-caucus is a foundation of conflict management.

One defensive approach is to change the topic. According to Heldman, smoothing technique results into lose-lose situation for both the parties. It does not provide a permanent solution to the conflict but it provides a temporary fix. Forcing creates a win-lose situation. The forcing party wins and the other party loses. But it did not give positive impact over long run. Negotiation is a process of interaction between both the parties using different communication channels in resolving conflict in a mutually beneficial way. Collaborating and accommodating are the cooperative styles of conflict resolution and avoiding and competingare uncooperative styles of conflict resolution. Collaboration in an attempt to satisfy all the parties creates a win-win situation for all the parties. It is the most valued strategy in the industry. Also competing and collaboratingare assertive styles and avoiding and accommodating are unassertive styles of conflict resolution. Using collaboration, one can create a win-win situation for the parties in conflict. Authoritative command is different from forcing because authoritative commands can only be given by the project manager; whereas , forcing (in different means) can be done by any team member or any other stakeholder. 

Cooperative styles of conflict resolution create positive emotions in the team leading to constructive conflict management in turn resulting into better relationships, performance, organizational environment, and innovation. Top management in organizations need integration style of conflict resolution. This style is positively associated with team performance. Cooperative conflict resolution styles such as integrating, accommodation and compromise are positively associated with higher levels of constructive conflicts, lower levels of destructive conflicts and increased innovation and performance. Non-cooperative and competitive conflict resolution strategies such as avoiding and forcing are negatively related to constructive conflicts and increase the destructive conflicts leading to reduced innovation and performance. According to Song et al., compromise is not effective at project level but it may be good at organization level. Collaborating is positively related to team performance and compromising is negatively related to team performance. While dealing with conflicts one has to avoid 'Tit for Tat' reactions in organizations.

Different ways of avoiding conflict as given by Appelbaum et al., are denial, flight, suspension, and relinquishment. Devils Advocacy (DA) is one technique used to resolve conflicts in group decision making in projects. While dealing with conflicts the managers have to separate

people from the conflict and have to concentrate on the issue not on the positions. The project manager who deals with fairness is respected much by the team members in long run. The specific conflict resolution technique has to be choosen based on the importance and type of conflict, time pressures, emphasis on task vs. relationships, and the position of the members involved in the conflict. The important point in resolving conflict is one has to balance between adjusting self and adjusting others. From the identified conflict resolution techniques in Table 3, top-5 frequently used conflict resolution techniques in projects are given in Table 4.

Table: Most Frequently used Conflict Resolution Techniques in Projects (Top-5)

People use avoiding and compromising more frequently than any other conflict resolution technique; followed by confronting, accommodating and smoothing. How to analyze the conflict is given in next section.