This is article 8 of the series on Conflict Resolution
Dealing with and addressing conflicts in the workplace is undoubtedly one of the most difficult challenges faced by employees and managers. Friedrich Glasl’s nine-stage conflict escalation model is a good place to start when it comes to conflict resolution. This article will discuss the sixth stage, which discusses threats as a strategy.
What Occurs During the Sixth Stage of Conflict Escalation?
The threshold to the sixth stage is perceived as less dramatic than the fifth. This stage is marked by ultimatums and calculated threats from both sides.
Due to the lack of alternative means of influencing the other side, conflicting parties use threats of harmful acts. There are major differences between the Stage 6 strategic threats and Stage 4’s deniable punishment behaviours. The latter is primarily used to let out bottled-up resentment. On the other hand, strategic threats are deliberately employed to compel the other party to make compromises of a given nature.
The escalation of strategic threats takes place in three stages:
- Threats are exchanged between the parties to demonstrate their resolve. These are the goals that the threatening group is trying to achieve:
- Bring the attention of the public upon themselves and their concerns
- Prove their autonomy and capacity to set their agenda
- Compel the opposing party to comply with a given requirement or rule using threats
- Next, the threats become more specific, clear, and forceful. To increase the gravity of their threats, each side makes unreserved declarations of commitment from which they can never back out without losing face.
- Finally, ultimatums are used to push the other party to make an either/or judgement.
One effect of this interaction is that the participants gradually lose their ability to influence the situation’s outcome. They create a sense of pressure and urgency with their own behaviours.
Situational perception is becoming increasingly inaccurate. In the eyes of the threatening party, the threat is a vital deterrent to keep the other side from resorting to violence. The opposite party is expected to comply with the demand. On the other hand, the threatened group perceives the negative repercussions of the threat and organises to deliver a counterthreat. Anxiety, dread, and even fury can result from a feeling of powerlessness.
It becomes progressively difficult to comprehend and regulate the dispute at this stage. Because they are putting time constraints on one another, the parties are less able to analyse the pros and cons of many options in the urgent and uncertain atmosphere. For the sake of maintaining some degree of control, each side insists on dealing with their own concerns and viewpoints exactly as they have presented them.
Panic-inducing impulses are becoming more and more likely to influence behaviours. It’s hard to resist any activity that promises a big payoff. Taking one’s complaints to the public is somewhat typical at this point.
The success of any threat is dependent on its credibility. Those making threats should thus attempt to persuade the opposite party and onlookers that their threats aren’t empty. A threat can be made more credible by openly committing oneself to carry them out if the other side does not comply with demands. When a threat’s credibility is in doubt, it can be reinforced via public declarations or smaller-scale acts of aggression. Other parties take this as evidence of the counterpart’s hostility and attempt to counterattack as a result. When parties are bound to threat strategies, they severely limit their ability to pursue other options on conflict resolution.
Stage 6 presents a significant possibility that the parties will disintegrate into smaller, autonomous groups because of increased instability and complication. These conflicts will not be stopped even by agreements made with their leaders.
Common Signs of Conflict at Stage 6
Among the warnings to look out for during Stage 6 are:
Verbal Threats
Verbal abuse, aggressive body language, and harassment are all forms of threat. Some employees may even sabotage their colleagues’ belongings or work. It is not uncommon for others to make threats of physical violence. These risks are most common among a big workforce, especially when the staff works closely under stressful conditions. This is also a sure-fire sign of conflict in Stage 6.
Public Quarrels
Making complaints about the party to other people in public is a threat strategy often employed by conflicting parties. These declarations also prove that the threat is real and severe. If you’ve received any reports or made any observations of individuals publicly denouncing another, you need to act quickly.
Groups Splitting into Smaller Factions
Due to the extreme stress at this point, parties might break off to smaller groups. Notice changes in the interaction of employees who were previously confidantes. This may be a sign that the conflict has escalated to Stage 6.
De-escalation Techniques
At some point, conflict mediators will encounter threats between disagreeing parties. What should you do if one party threatens to disengage, launch a lawsuit, or harm the other side’s reputation? In these situations, direct counter threats are not advised. These tips can help mediate the conflict without escalation and refocus the conversation on both party’s interests:
● Threat diagnosis: Threats can come in various forms, from overt assertions to more subtle indications. Nevertheless, knowing what sparked the threat is crucial for the response.
● Express understanding: Showing empathy can help ease tensions and lessen the likelihood of further threats, but be cautious not to encourage outbursts with compromises.
● Ask questions: You’ll learn more about issues and avoid giving in to irrational demands by probing with inquiries. The objective should be to discover the extent to which the adversary’s threat is based on power or limits.
● Identify the threat to negotiation: An entirely different strategy should be used if the threat is nothing but subtle intimidation. Identifying and categorising a threat reduces its impact and gives a greater sense of control over the situation.
In some cases, an aggressive party will only respond with violence, no matter how hard you try. In this case, to avoid a stalemate in the conflict, the other side should be advised to deliver a counter threat followed by a quick shift in attention to recognizing each other’s interests.
The Bottomline
There will always be conflict in the workplace because of the wide range of personalities, work habits, and viewpoints represented by the people there. We’ve discussed a few strategies for resolving conflicts that involve threats as a strategy. However, there are times when things go worse rather than better. Next up in this series, we will cover the seventh stage of escalation: limited destructive blows.
0 Comments