Cycle+of+Conflict

__ Cycle of Conflict __ Stage 1: Something’s Wrong Stage 2: Role Dilemma Stage 3: Injustice Gathering Stage 4: Confrontation Stage 5: And the Winner Is… (1) Personal Grid Every person has a grid though which they process information. This grid will be more open with people you trust as compared with people you don’t trust. For example, if you have been hurt or betrayed by a person, your grid is closed off to almost anything that person says and you are easily offended by him/her. Even things that are innocent become diabolical because you have difficulty with receiving any information from that person. Oppositely, a person who you believe loves you and you trust can say a number of things and you will give them the benefit of the doubt because your grid is very open. They may even say something hurtful but you don’t receive it that way because of how you perceive that person.
 * The development of tension between people
 * Not always able to put your finger on it – can have a vague notion
 * Personal Grid (1)
 * Not sure who should act first
 * Allowing time to elapse from the initial realization that something is wrong
 * Motives vs. Methods (2)
 * Making a mental list to prove the other person is bad
 * Contacting people with stories about the other person
 * Rehearsing what you will do when the other person says, “_.”
 * The fight stage
 * When this stage is reached, one or both people have already settled the matter in their minds and there is virtually no avoidance of loss.
 * Typically, the language used here is all, “You did…” etc. All the focus is on the other person and no responsibility is owned by you.
 * There is no winner that emerges out of the fight stage
 * One or both parties are done and the relationship has moved backward significantly
 * While a relationship can be salvaged after Stage 5, it will take an extraordinary amount of work to do so

(2) Motives vs. Methods Motive is defined as a reason for doing something, especially one that is hidden or not obvious. A person’s motives for their behavior is not able to be determined clearly by other people. We can assume that we have an idea of what that person was thinking or what motivated them to say a certain thing or do a certain thing, but that is rarely accurate. Methods are defined as orderliness of thought or behavior; systematic planning or action. What this means in personal relationships is that methods are what we see and we can rightly access. People sometimes try to do good things in the lives of other but the methods they use are not effective. They can come across as hurtful or insulting even though the person meant well. We are right in confronting others on the methods they use with us. What we cannot do, is make a judgment on other people’s motives. Again, a person could have right motives but use really poor methods and screw the whole thing up. Conversely, a person could use a right method to accomplish something that came from wrong motives. When dealing with conflict, we have to deal with methods rather than motives so we do not escalate the conflict. For example, when another person does or says something that causes a conflict, your approach could be to say, “I realize that you may have meant well with what you did, but the way you did it kind of made me upset.” You can give the person’s motive that benefit of the doubt but still deal with the poor way they approached you.