Think back to a time when you had a conflict with a person in the workplace. It could be a coworker, patient, supervisor or a family member. How did you handle the situation? Was it appropriate and professional?
As your initial post, respond to the following questions.
1. Briefly describe the conflict and your response.
2. Which of the five sources of power listed in Sherpath (Chapter 10) did the person hold?
3. Was your response consistent with your conflict assessment style? Why or why not?
4. If you had the chance to replay the conflict, what would you do to better resolve the conflict?
Sample Answer
Modeled Conflict Scenario
1. Conflict Description and Response
The conflict was with a senior colleague over the prioritization of shared resources. We both needed immediate access to a specialized, high-demand piece of analysis software to meet separate, time-critical project deadlines. My colleague insisted that their project, which was for a long-standing, high-profile client, naturally took precedence, even though my project had an earlier external deadline.
My response was to accommodate the situation initially, allowing them to use the software first while I tried to find an alternative solution (like a less-capable secondary tool or manual workarounds). However, when the alternative proved inadequate and my deadline loomed, I became assertive, requesting a clear, time-bound commitment for when they would relinquish the resource, escalating the issue to a mutually respected team lead when the colleague was non-committal.
2. Sources of Power
The senior colleague primarily held Legitimate Power and Expert Power.
Legitimate Power: This stemmed from their higher rank/seniority within the organization and the fact that their project was directly connected to a client highly valued by leadership. This gave their claim for the resource perceived organizational backing.
Expert Power: They had more years of experience with the specific analysis software and the client's industry. Their depth of knowledge meant their analysis was often perceived as more valuable or reliable than mine, strengthening their position.
3. Consistency with Conflict Assessment Style
My initial response was not consistent with my usual conflict assessment style, but my subsequent action was.
My preferred style is typically Collaborating or Compromising (high assertiveness, high cooperation, or moderate levels of both).
Initial Response (Accommodation): I was initially highly cooperative and unassertive, prioritizing the relationship and avoiding confrontation. This was driven by the perceived legitimate and expert power of the colleague. This avoidance/accommodation was inconsistent with my usual style.
Later Response (Assertiveness/Escalation): When the initial accommodation failed to protect my own project's interests, I shifted to a more Collaborating/Competing approach—becoming assertive about my need and bringing in a third party (the team lead) to enforce a solution. This latter part was consistent with my underlying style of seeking a fair and effective resolution, even if it required higher assertiveness.
4. Better Resolution
If I had the chance to replay the conflict, I would have immediately pursued a Collaborating style before accommodating, and involved the team lead sooner, but only to mediate a joint solution, not to escalate.