LEARN TO LEAD - Civil Air Patrol

shows how the four cultural patterns intersect with thefour conflict resolution styles.The Discussion, Engagement, Accommodation, and DynamicConflict Styles form the ominous, yet oddly appropriateacronym DEAD. If one pays only scant attentionto differing communication patterns and styles of conflictresolution, talks are more likely to end up “dead inthe water.”Because the other parties in a negotiation cannot becounted on to be sensitive to our own preferences, it isdoubly important that we understand how they handleconflict and negotiation. Such knowledge gives us a powerfulnegotiating tool.Discussion Style. As the word discussion implies, peoplecomfortable with this style prefer to talk through problems,positions, issues, and interests. The Discussion style isdirect, but calm. “Say what you mean and mean what yousay,” is an American saying that describes this style. Factsand figures presented in a logical format are strong persuadersfor individuals using this conflict style. Remainingcalm while clearly describing issues, positions, andinterests is the hallmark of this style. Proponents of thisstyle believe that discussion reduces the possibility ofmisunderstanding while a “businesslike” atmospherekeeps everyone focused on issues and not personalities.The Discussion style aims for an expeditious completionof the negotiation. Unfortunately, this method for enhancingunderstanding is most effective when workingwith those who favor the same style. Negotiators fromcultures where other styles predominate may find aDiscussion-style negotiator either too direct or overlycold and calculating. They may feel that relationships aresacrificed just so the talks can proceed quickly. This styleshould seem familiar to most readers. It is the conflictand negotiation style that predominates in the U.S.Engagement Style. Like the Discussion style, Engagementalso has a preference for verbal directness in a negotiationor conflict situation. These two styles diverge in the waythey handle displays of emotion. The Engagement style isdirect and emotional. We might describe people who arecomfortable with the Engagement style as “wearing theirhearts on their sleeves.” They are comfortable sharingtheir feelings, showing both commitment and sincerity. 34Engagement-style negotiations tend to be animated andhighly emotional when compared with Discussion-styleinteractions. Displays of emotion by Engagement-stylenegotiators can make their Discussion-style counterpartsuncomfortable. On the other hand, anyone comfortablewith an Engagement style may read the Discussion styledemeanor as insincere or unwilling to acknowledge orengage with the intense feelings generated by the conflictor negotiation.DirectIndirectEmotionally RestrainedDiscussion Conflict Style• Direct• Emotionally RestrainedAccommodation Conflict Style• Indirect• Emotionally RestrainedEmotionally ExpressiveEngagementConflict Style• Direct• Emotionally ExpressiveDynamic Conflict Style• Indirect• Emotionally ExpressiveFigure 1. Intercultural Conflict Styles (ICS), also known as “TheDEAD Model.”Accomodation Style. The Accommodation style, like theDiscussion style, is emotionally restrained, but peoplepreferring this style tend to be indirect in the way theyapproach conflict resolution. This style relies on context,ambiguity, metaphor, and third party intervention toimprove any verbal confrontations between parties. 35Relational harmony is typically maintained by hidingone’s emotional discomfort. Those who are comfortablewith this style are adept at reading ambiguous high contextmessages. As previously stated, use of third partyintermediaries are common. In discussing conflict resolutionin Korea, the late L. Robert Kohls, a cross-culturaltraining pioneer, suggests one should locate a go-betweenearlier on in the process than you would in the U.S.According to Kohls, “the use of mediators is common inKorea and does not imply the extremity of conflict it doesin the United States.” 36 A person accustomed to a directstyle is likely to suffer from mind-blindness and may beunaware that a problem even exists. In such cases, a conflictmay suddenly burst forth “like a volcano exploding.” 37When the bewildered American asks the aggrievedparties what happened, they are likely to say, “We WEREtelling you very loudly,” but not in words.Dynamic Style. The last style in the ICS-DEAD frameworkis Dynamic. Like the Accommodation style, Dynamicnegotiators and disputants tend to use indirect messagesto settle disagreements, but with a more emotionally intenseverbal style. Hammer explains that the Dynamicstyle is marked by “strategic hyperbole, repetition of one’sposition, ambiguity, stories, metaphors, and humor alongwith greater reliance on third party intermediaries.” 38Dynamic negotiators are accustomed to working withintermediaries and are quite at home with displays ofanger or emotion. As indirect communicators, they arelikely to describe themselves as good observers of behaviorcapable of providing helpful solutions to all parties ina dispute.Discussion-style negotiators may view a Dynamic-stylecounterpart as an overly emotional person who rarelygets to the point. To discern underlying values, arrangingfor a third-party intermediary or go-between may be thebest way to uncover the underlying causes while still145