15
conflicts that appear to be approach-approach conflict are actually double approach- avoidance conflicts.
The second kind of conflicts is interpersonal conflict. There are two kinds of interpersonal conflict based on which side wins or loses.
The first type is zero-sum conflict. This conflict means that one’s winning is the other’s loose, since individuals think that if they cannot obtain the goal, the other side
will win. Therefore, each side wants to obtain everything he wants. The second type is non-zero-sum conflict. This conflict is also called as a mixed-
motivation conflict. In this type, there are two important things. The first one is one’s winning is not the other’s loose. The second one involves cooperation and
competition. In this type, it can be concluded that individuals in conflict are beneficial for each other.
b. Conflict Resolutions
People have different ways in resolving their conflicts. Isenhart and Spangle state that people have different reactions in perceiving opinion and interference from other
people. Some people become aggressive and assertive. They will threaten and make demands. Others will become quiet and passive and avoid talking about their
concerns 26. Isenhart and Spangle give five types in resolving conflicts. Those types are
influenced by some factors. Those factors are the importance of issue to the party, contextual or cultural norms for how conflict should be approached, how one
16
anticipates that others will react, and personal goals. Those resolutions are avoiding, accommodation, compromising, competitive, and collaborative 26.
1. Avoiding In this type, one party denies that there is a conflict, changes topics, and avoids
discussion. This style is effective in situation in which there is danger of physical violence, the issue is not important, there is no chance of achieving goals, or the
complexity of the situation prevents solutions. 2. Accommodation
In this type, one party sacrifices its interests and goals and lets the other party achieve their interests and goals. This type is effective when there are no any chances
to achieve the interests, when the outcome is not important, or when there is a belief that satisfying one’s own interests will in some ways alter or damage the relationship.
3. Compromising In this type, all parties make concessions for partial satisfaction of interests. There
is an agreement for all parties to sacrifice their interests in order to gain the best solution for both parties. This type is effective in situations that require quick
resolution of issues, when other parties resist collaboration, when complete achievement of goals is not important, or when there will be no hard feelings for
settling for less than expected. 4. Competitive
This type is characterized by aggressive, self-focused, forcing, verbally assertive, and uncooperative behaviors that strive to satisfy one party’s interests at the expense
17
of the interests of others. This type is effective in situations in which decision must be made quickly, options are restricted, there is nothing to lose by pushing, other parties
resist cooperation, and there is no concern about potential damage to the relationship. 5. Collaborative
This type is characterized by active listening and issue-focused, emphatic communication that seek to satisfy the interests and concerns all parties. It is effective
in situations in which power is reasonably balanced; the long-term relationship is valued; both parties display cooperative behaviors; and there is sufficient time and
energy to create a solution that will satisfy both parties.
C. Review of Types and Reasons of Suicide
