COSA Professional Development Program
Crowne Plaza Hotel
October 5, 2012
Presented by
Dr. Roger W. Sorochty, Vice President for Enrollment and Student Services, The University of Tulsa roger-sorochty@utulsa.edu






To understand the behaviors and “hot buttons” associated with conflict that can improve or worsen situations involving conflict
To learn how to use the Conflict Dynamics Profile (CDP) to minimize destructive behaviors, maximize constructive behaviors, and manage one’s “hot buttons” for positive outcomes in conflict situations
To describe how the CDP can be used in professional staff training and student leadership programs
Provide attendees with a sample of the CDP-I results, reviewing them using the Development Guide, and discussing its application on their campuses
Give attendees the chance to take the CDP-I for themselves

Any situation in which people have apparently incompatible goals, interests, principles or feelings

 Focuses explicitly on specific behavioral responses to conflict, and how they might be changed
 Starts with the assumption that conflict is inevitable; it cannot, nor should it, be completely avoided
 The goal of successful conflict management is not its elimination, but to reduce its harmful effects and maximize its useful ones

 Focuses on ideas, not personalities
 Can occur during times of creativity and productivity
 Affect is neutral, or positive
 Unrelated, or positively related, to group functioning

 Focuses on people, not ideas
 Can occur at any time
 Affect is negative
 Negatively related to group functioning
 Can escalate rapidly

Precipitating Event and/or Hot Buttons
Initiate Conflict
Constructive Responses
Behaviors which keep conflict to a minimum
Destructive Responses
Behaviors which escalate or prolong conflict
Task-Focused Conflict
(Cognitive)
•
Focus on task and problem solving
•
Positive effect
•
Tension decreases
•
Group functioning improves
Person-Focused Conflict
(Affective)
•
Focused on personal
•
Negative emotions (anger, frustration)
•
Tension increases
•
Group functioning decreases
CONFLICT DE-ESCALATES CONFLICT ESCALATES

 Win-win solutions


Open & honest communication of feelings
Both parties’ needs are met
 Non-judgmental actions
 Not sticking adamantly to one position
 Actively resolving conflict (not allowing conflict to continue)
 Thoughtful responses (not impulsive)
 Team performance improves

 Feelings of anger and frustration
 Judgmental actions
 Getting even and keeping score
 Other party does not have needs met
 Closed channels of communication
 Refusing to deal with issues
 Decreased self-confidence
 Tasks not completed
 Team performance decreases

Research has further demonstrated the usefulness of classifying conflict-related responses into two additional categories:
 Active

Behaviors which involve overt responses, taking action, or making an effort. The outcome can be either constructive or destructive.
Passive
Behaviors which involve withholding a response, not taking action, or not making an effort. The outcome can be either constructive or destructive.

Constructive
Perspective Taking
Creating Solutions
Expressing Emotions
Reaching Out
Reflective Thinking
Delay Responding
Adapting
Destructive
Winning at All Costs
Displaying Anger
Demeaning Others
Retaliating
Avoiding
Yielding
Hiding Emotions
Self Criticizing

Those in which the individual takes some overt action in response to the conflict or provocation, and as a result there is a beneficial effect on the course of conflict:
 Perspective Taking – Putting yourself in the other person’s position and trying to understand that person’s point of view.
 Creating Solutions – Brainstorming with the other person, asking questions, and trying to create solutions to the problem.
 Expressing Emotions – Talking honestly with the other person and expressing your thoughts and feelings.
 Reaching Out – Reaching out to the other person, making the first move, and trying to make amends.

Those in which the individual responds to the precipitating event in a less active way —in fact, some passive responses consist largely of the decision to refrain from some act —and as a result there is a beneficial effect on the course of the conflict:



Reflective Thinking – Analyzing the situation, weighing the pros and cons, and thinking about the best response.
Delay Responding – Waiting things out, letting matters settle down, or taking a “time out” when emotions are running high.
Adapting – Staying flexible, and trying to make the best of the situation.

Those in which the individual takes some overt action in response to the conflict or provocation, but which has a negative, destructive effect on the course of conflict:




Winning at All Costs – Arguing vigorously for your own position and trying to win at all costs.
Displaying Anger – Expressing anger, raising your voice, and using harsh, angry words.
Demeaning Others – Laughing at the other person, ridiculing the other’s ideas, and using sarcasm.
Retaliating – Obstructing the other person, retaliating against the other, and trying to get revenge.

Those in which the individual responds to the precipitating event in a less active way, or fails to act in some way:
 Avoiding – Avoiding or ignoring the other person, and acting distant and aloof.
 Yielding – Giving in to the other person in order to avoid further conflict.
 Hiding Emotions – concealing your true emotions even though feeling upset.
 Self-Criticizing – Replaying the incident over in your mind, and criticizing yourself for not handling it better.

People who, or situations which, may irritate you enough to provoke conflict by producing destructive responses
The “hotter” the hot button, the more likely it is to produce:
◦
Strong negative emotions
◦
Feelings of personal provocation
◦
Automatic and impulsive responding
◦
Increased tension

 A case study summary of utilizing the
CDP-I with professional staff
Followed by
 A case study summary of utilizing the
CDP-I with student leaders

 CDP-I administered to professional
Residence Life staff and then debriefed in a two hour program
 CDP-360 could also be used
 Goal was to identify 1 or 2 behaviors and Hot Buttons that, if addressed according to the CDP Development
Guide, would enhance their ability to work together and with their residents

 140+ active organizations including:
Numerous honor societies including Phi Beta Kappa;
Association of Black Collegians; American Chemical
Society; Student Bar Association; TU Student Nurses
Association; Amnesty International; Numerous fraternities and sororities; Habitat for Humanity;
Angolan Student Association; Muslim Student
Association; TU Big Brothers Big Sisters; Numerous
Religious Groups, Music Organizations, Governing
Bodies and Intramural Sports Teams

 CDP-I administered to students in a variety of leadership positions and then debriefed in a two hour program
 Goal was to identify 1 or 2 behaviors and Hot Buttons that, if addressed according to the CDP Development
Guide, would enhance their ability to work with others in their organizations

 Campus Police/Security Officers
 HR Staff Development Program
Offerings
 Counselors Working with Students
 Alumni and/or Volunteer Advisors

 After determining which behaviors and hot buttons one wishes to address, one uses pages 38 – 40 of the
Development Guide to lay out an action plan
 One can also utilize other resources available from the Center for Conflict
Dynamics

Selected Comments from Participants

I learned that I’m not good at looking at situations from another’s perspective.


I would delay my responses to avoid displaying anger or frustration and think about what to say.
I can now recognize my “hot buttons” and I have the tools to approach those people & situations.
 Lessons learned can be applied to my career.
 It will help me work with the girls in my sorority where personal opinions often clash.
 What I learned will help me in my leadership role in a campus ministry.