How would you manage conflict in a group to move toward healthy and successful results? describe in detail three methods listed in the textbook and how these methods affect the health and results of the group.

Step 2: Resolving Issues Once emotions have been vented and acknowledged, there are five basic approaches that can be used to address the underlying issue: 1. Avoid 2. Accommodate 3. Compromise 4. Compete 5. Collaborate Offer members the option of placing the issue in the parking lot to be addressed later. Avoiding does not solve anything. Ask both parties whether either one of them can simply accept the other's ideas and give in. Help members create a middle position that combines elements from each of the original positions. This is a form of resolution that asks each person to give up some of what he or she originally wanted in order to receive other things. This is a form of conflict resolution in which people debate until one party wins. Results in a win/lose. Both parties explore the issue or challenge together. Both take part in analyzing the facts and proposing solutions. They jointly identify the criteria for sorting solutions and agree to support the implementation actions. This results in a solution that all can live with and provides a feeling of win/win. The Five Conflict Options: Pros and Cons Each of the aforementioned approaches can work in specific situations. Facilitators need to understand each one and choose the one that suits the situation. 1. AvoidingWhen conflict is avoided, nothing is resolved. Yet this is the right approach to use if the issue at stake is very trivial, can't be solved, or will result in a total lose/lose situation for the group. Avoiding is sometimes a wise interim strategy to give people a chance to calm down before addressing issues. The main consequence of avoiding is that issues aren't resolved and there's no creativity applied toward finding a solution. The problem remains to fester and can crop up later. While avoiding has its place, groups become ineffective if they avoid too many issues. 2. AccommodatingThis is a social response aimed more at keeping the peace than solving the problem. This approach can involve asking everyone to just get along or asking one party in a dispute to give in to the other party. Accommodating is the appropriate approach in situations in which one person is only slightly interested in the issue, while the other party cares deeply. It's also the right approach to take when exploration of the issue reveals that one party is wrong. This style is most applicable to family and other social gatherings in which tolerance and civility may be of greater importance than finding the right answer. The consequence of accommodating is that the underlying issues are often left unexplored in the interest of keeping the peace. 3. CompromisingThis is a mediated approach to managing conflict that is used when two people or two groups have formulated strong positions. Neither party feels he or she can accept the position of the other, so a neutral middle option needs to be developed. The good thing about compromising is that it does yield a solution. The problem is that both parties must give up some things they want in order to get others. The process of compromise also tends to be adversarial. People know what they want so they feel dissatisfied when they have to give up parts of their proposals. At the end of a compromise, people feel that they've both won and lost. They may also harbor negative feelings toward the other party because there often is some resentment over giving up key elements of a proposal. Compromise leaves people feeling like: \"I'm going to have to live with it!\" 4. CompetingThis is a strategy of defending oneself and debating one's point of view in order to score a win over another person. Competing has its place in those situations that are clearly defined as competitive, such as sports and war. In these situations, the winner doesn't worry about the feelings of the loser. Since competing is combative and adversarial, facilitators never use this approach to settle issues. 5. CollaboratingIn this approach the group strives to build consensus. It involves naming the issue and then engaging group members in analyzing the facts of the current sitnation, generating creative ideas, objectively sorting through potential solutions, and agreeing on a course of action. Collaborating means helping people work together to explore the issue and develop a solution that is the result of ideas for everyone. People listen actively and build on each other's points. Solutions are generated through the use of non-competitive processes such as brainstorming. The best course of action is determined by applying a set of criteria to the choices available. At the end of a collaboration, everyone feels that he or she was heard and that the final strategy reflects his or her thinking. While the final outcome may not be exactly what someone would have decided on his or her own, all members feel that they have had a say. Because collaboration emphasizes working together for a win/win, it creates a consensus. At the end of a conflict resolved through collaboration, people's feelings about the solution are: \"I can live with it!\" The main drawback to collaboration is that it requires a great deal of time and thus may result in a waste of energy if used on an insignificant issue