All relationships have conflict. It is the norm. Admittedly, many of us do wish to live a conflict-free existence, but this sort of thinking is unrealistic. It often leads to disappointment and frustration. In fact, one could surely admit a relationship without conflict would be quite boring and meaningless. It is from the management of conflict relationships develop the potential for growth, and, in the long run, become more lasting and durable.
Ronald Adler, Lawrence Rosenfeld, and Russell Proctor condition there are four, conflict styles we use in our interpersonal relations with others. The following categories have developed from years of extensive research. As your read these, remember, each style may be unique, but not all styles are beneficial in terms of the given relational climate.
Nonintimate-Aggressive: In this relational style, “Partners dispute issues without dealing with one another on an emotional level” (352). In other words, any real sense of intimacy is nonexistent. Partners will outright attack and express disagreement without expressing their own personal feelings. Again, it is fairly obvious there is a dispute–conflict is acknowledged–but the intimate and emotional reasons underlying the conflict are never made known.
Nonintimate-Nonaggressive: Here, “The partners avoid conflict–and one another–instead of facing issues head-on” (352). This style disregards issues of both disagreement and intimacy. Since intimacy and disagreement are seldom expressed, partners who practice this style may achieve lastingness in their relationships; yet, their relationships remain distant and often unfulfilling.
Intimate-Aggressive: This is a particularly interesting style in that it “combines aggression and intimacy in a manner that might seem upsetting to outsiders, but it can work well in some relationships. Lovers may fight like cats and dogs but then make up just as intensely” (352). Notice, unlike the first two, this style does involve intimacy. However, for these partners, positive and negative feelings are open for discussion in equal proportion. Point being, nothing is hidden, nothing is kept in check, and anything goes. Unfortunately, due to the aggressive nature of such relationships, conflict is not easily resolved or managed.
Intimate-Nonaggressive: Finally, and in my mind the healthiest, “This sort of relationship has a low amount of attacking or blaming. Partners may confront one another directly or indirectly, but one way or another they manage to prevent issues from interfering with their relationship” (352). This style involves intimacy and nonaggressive management. A key point of this style is that it acknowledges people are different. Negative forms of expression are not often utilized in this type of relationship. When disagreements do arise, partners are extremely careful in how they choose to express disagreement. This sort of relationship does require a bit of work, but the benefits far exceed the costs. As a whole, this style can be deeply rewarding and beneficial.
To conclude, regardless of whatever conflict style we might choose, we should always remember each and every one of us have interpersonal needs. We are social creatures. Also, don’t forget the fact conflict management is a lifelong process, and it does require some effort.
Works Cited
Adler, Ronald B., Rosenfeld, Lawrence B., and Proctor, Russell F. Interplay: The Process of Interpersonal Communication. New York: Oxford, 2007.
