CONFLICT RESOLUTION

The Latest & Best Practices in Conflict Resolution

The Latest & Best Practices in Conflict Resolution

Introduction

Conflicts among stakeholders and organizations require attention and the problem-solving capabilities of public relations managers. Public relations scholars have suggested that these managers, functioning in the roles of organizational boundary spanners, often help an organization manage its response to conflict and to rapid environmental changes (Goldsmith & Cloke, 2005).

Two-Way Models of Public Relations

Conflict resolution in public relations evolved from the four models of public relations. The most sophisticated of the four models are the two-way asymmetrical and the two-way symmetrical models. As these two models of public relations evolved, Goldsmith & Cloke (2005) described the two-way symmetrical model as public relations efforts which are based on research and evaluation and that use communication to manage conflict and to improve understanding with strategic publics. In 1995, the new model of symmetry as two-way practices was developed, where the win/win zone uses negotiation and compromise to allow organizations to find common ground among their separate and sometimes conflicting self-interests. By doing so, it did not exclude the use of asymmetrical means to achieve symmetrical ends.

Mixed Motives

Although the two-way symmetrical model would seem to be the ideal for conflict management, it is difficult to determine the exact point for appropriate behavior on a continuous scale between two-way asymmetric and two-way symmetric communication. In 1991, Priscilla Murphy suggested that a “mixed motive” version of the two-way symmetrical model might better describe what is happening in the actual practice of public relations because it incorporates both asymmetrical and symmetrical strategies. More recent studies acknowledge the more frequently practiced model is the one termed mixed motives. (Goldsmith & Cloke, 2005)

In mixed motives, each side in a stakeholder relationship retains a strong sense of its own self-interests, yet each is motivated to cooperate to attain at least some resolution of the conflict. They may be on opposite sides of an issue, but it is in their best interests to cooperate with each other. Mixed-motive games provide a broad third category that describes behavior as most public relations people experience it: a multidirectional scale of competition and cooperation in which organizational needs must be balanced against constituents' needs (Schellenberg, 1996). These parties are really cooperative protagonists in the struggle to satisfy their own interests with the knowledge that satisfaction is best accomplished through satisfying each other's interests as well. In the context of this discussion, protagonists are the main characters in the play of negotiation who seek their own values or self-interests. The question is not one of mixed motives where short-term asymmetrical tactics are combined with long-term symmetrical tactics as advocated by Goldsmith & Cloke (2005), but rather one of discovering the priority level of importance for the common self-interests of the strategic parties.

Mixed Motive Model for Public Relations

Additionally, Goldsmith & Cloke (2005) established a number of negotiation strategies that fit into what Plowman and his group called a mixed-motive model for public relations that encompassed the entire spectrum between the two-way asymmetrical ...