Theories of Perception

On a straightforward view, we directly perceive the world as it is. The way that things look, feel, smell, taste, and sound is
the way that they are. We see colours, for example, because the world is coloured. This view of perception is called,
somewhat dismissively, naive realism.
Plausibly, perception is a lot more complicated than this. Though things may appear to be coloured to us, our experiences of
colour are merely representative of the surface properties of objects; the physical property of reflecting certain wavelengths
of light and the colour red as we experience it are two quite different things.
This has led to representative realism, which suggests that perception is not the passive process that the naive realist
suggests, that we do not simply receive information about the world through our senses. Rather, we are actively involved in
perception, supplying much of the content of our experiences, and must bear this in mind if we are to know what the world is
really like in itself.
More extreme than either naive or representative realism is idealism. Idealists, persuaded by the thought that we have direct
access only to our experiences of the world, and not to the world itself, have questioned whether there is anything beyond
our experiences. A more recent theory that bears some similarities to idealism has also been proposed: phenomenalism.

THE PERCEPTIVE APPARATUS

Perception is a process of the consciousness of an object. It is one of the means of valid knowledge in the world and consists
in an inseparable relation of the perceptive consciousness with its content. The objects that are seen in the world are
considered by the common man to be existing outside his body and the senses, and he feels that the objects are reflected, as it
were, in his mind in perception. The object itself does not enter the eye, for example, in the act of seeing, but there is a
transmission of vibration from the object, with which his consciousness comes in contact, which becomes a content of his
consciousness, and on account of which he is said to know the existence of the external object. This perception is caused by
the operations of a mind whose existence as a mediator between the Atman within and the object outside is evident from the
fact of the synthesis of sensations and of the possibility of the absence of perception at certain times. Sense-knowledge is
the product of the connection between the mind and the sensory organs. That is why there is no simultaneity of the
knowledge of the impressions received through the various sensory organs. People say: My mind was elsewhere, I did not
see that. The impossibility of this simultaneity of knowledge through various sensory organs is an indication of the
existence of the mind. Between the Atman and the organs of sense a connecting link is necessary. If we do not admit the
internal organ, there would result either perpetual perception or perpetual non-perception, the former when there is a
conjunction of the Atman, the senses and the object, the three constituting the causes of perception, and the latter when, even
on the conjunction of these three causes, the effect did not follow. But neither is the truth. We have, therefore, to
acknowledge the existence of an internal organ on whose attention and non-attention perception and non-perception take
place (Mind and Its Mysteries: p. 188). The mind is with parts and can move in space. It is a changing and differentiating
thing. It is capable of moving from place to place and assuming the forms of the objects of perception. This going out to an
object and taking its shape is actual. There is nothing static in Nature. Every modification of the root Natural Principle is
active and moving. The mind, in particular, is always undergoing conscious and unconscious modifications. The mind is a
radiant, transparent and light substance and can travel like a ray of light outside through a sense-organ. The mind is thus an
active force, a form of the general active Power or Sakti. As the brain, the organ of the mind, is enclosed in an organic
envelope, solid and in appearance closed, the imagination has a tendency to picture it as being isolated from the exterior
world, though in truth it is in constant contact with it through a subtle and constant exchange of secret activities. The mind is
not something static, passive and merely receptive. It takes an active part in perception both by reason of its activity and the
nature of that activity as caused by its latent tendencies (Samskaras). The following well-known illustration from
the Vedanta-paribhasha gives an account of the nature of perception: As water from a tank may flow through a channel into
a plot of land and assume its shape (square, triangular or any other form), so the radiant mind (Taijasa-Antahkarana) goes
out through the eye or any other sense-organ to the place where an object is, and gets transformed into the shape of that
object. This modification of the mind-stuff is called a Vritti (Practice of Yoga: Vol. I, pp. 107-108).
In his Sure Ways of Success in Life (pp. 94-99) Swami Sivananda gives an analysis of the apparatus of perception in the
following manner:
The senses are the gatekeepers of the wonderful factory of the mind. They bring into the mental factory matter for
manufacture. Light vibrations, sound vibrations, and the like, are brought inside through these avenues. The sensations are
first converted into percepts by the mind, which then presents these percepts to the intellect. The intellect converts these
percepts into concepts or ideas. Just as raw sugarcane juice is treated with so many chemicals and passes through various
settling tanks, and is packed as pure crystals; just as ordinary clay mixed and treated with plaster of Paris, etc. passes through
settling tanks and is made into jugs, jars, plates, cups, etc.; just as crude sand is turned into beautiful glassware of various
sorts in a glass factory; so mere light vibrations, sound vibrations, etc. are turned into powerful ideas or concepts of various
descriptions in the factory of the mind.The external senses are only instruments in the process of perception. The real
auditory, tactile, visual, gustatory and olfactory centres are in the brain and in the astral body. These centres are the real

senses which make perception possible. The intellect (Buddhi) receives material from the mind and presents them to the
Purusha or the Atman which is behind the screen. The intellect is like the prime minister; it is closer to the Purusha than the
mind is. As soon as facts are placed by the intellect before the Purusha, there flashes out egoism (Ahamkara). The intellect
receives back the message from the Purusha, decides and determines, and transmits it to the mind for the execution of orders.
The external organs of action carry out the orders of the master.The Antahkarana (inner psychical instrument) is a broad
term which includes the intellect, the ego, the memory, the subconscious and the conscious mind. The one Antahkarana
assumes all these names due to its different functions, just as a person is called a judge when he dispenses justice in a law
court, a president when he presides over a society or an association, a chairman when he superintends over a meeting, and a
storekeeper when he is in charge of goods. If one can clairvoyantly visualise the inner working of this mental factory one
will be dumbfounded. Just as in the telephone exchange of a big city various messages come from diverse houses and firms
to the central station, and the central operator plugs, connects and disconnects the various switches, so does the mind plug,
connect and disconnect sensory messages. When one wants to see an object the mind puts a plug into the other four centres,
viz. hearing, feeling, tasting and smelling. When one wants to hear something the mind plugs similarly the remaining four
centres. The mind works with a speed which is unimaginable.In ordinary persons the mental images are distracted and
undefined. Every thought has an image, a form or a shape. A table is a mental image plus an external something. Whatever
one sees outside has its counterpart in ones mind. The pupil of the eye is a small round construction. The retina is limited in
its structure. How is it that the image of a huge mountain seen through such a small aperture is cast in the mind? How does
this colossal form enter the tiny hole in the eye? The fact is that the image of the mountain already exists in the mind. Here
Swami Sivananda brings out the significant truth that the limited sense-organs are able to cast the image of an extensive
scene on the limited mind working in a body on account of the essentially omnipresent and all-comprehensive character of
the consciousness that is reflected through the mind. All perception suggests the marvellous working of this immanent
consciousness through the instrumentality of the mind, and later through the senses. The real seer and the senser of things is
this consciousness which is at the background of the perceiving subject as its existence and essence. The ultimate knower of
the world is an absolute being whose presence is established by the nature of knowledge itself. In order to know the world
fully, the knower must be independent of the laws governing the world; else, knowledge complete would be impossible. One
whose knowledge is controlled by external phenomena can never have real knowledge of them. The impulse for absolute
knowledge guarantees the possibility of such a knowledge. This shows that the knower is superior to the known to such an
extent that the known loses its value as being, in the light of the absoluteness of the knower (Gita Meditations: p. ix).
Q2 second part
Perceptual distortion is said to occur when the reported perception of a stimulus varies from a "normal response". This is a
function of individual differences, for example in perceptual style and is conceptually different

A perceptual distortion occurs when a person's

response to stimuli varies from how it is commonly perceived. Perceptual
distortions can relate to either sensory or psychological perception and can
occur as a result of cognitive bias, psychological disorders, medication or drugs,
or physical damage to the brain or sensory organs. An example of perceptual
distortion is found in people suffering from an eating disorder. People afflicted
with anorexia nervosa holds a distorted self-image. They see their bodies as
overweight and unsightly, whereas other people see the sufferer as
malnourished and underweight.
Another example of perceptual distortion is commonly found in people with the
mental illness schizophrenia. When a person is unable to recognize that he has
an illness, then he is said to have lack of insight. Perceptual distortions can
result from cognitive biases, or patterns of thought and deviations in judgment
in particular situations. Common examples are the observer expectancy effect,
known also as the selective perception bias, which skews interpretation of
results to be in line with a theory one already believes, and attention bias, which
is the tendency for ones emotions to determine or affect one's focus.
from hallucinations and optical illusions.

Q3fi

The Content Theories of Motivation

Content theories are also called needs theories, because they are generally associated with a view that concentrates on the
importance of determining 'what' motivates us. In other words they try to identify what our 'needs' are and relate motivation
to the fulfilling of these needs.

Maslows Hierarchy of Needs

"Management Assumptions" (Theory X and Theory Y)
ERG Theory
McClellands Need for Achievement, Affiliation and Power
Herzbergs' Two Factor Theory

Maslows Hierarchy of Needs

This is the most widely known theory of motivation and was hypothesised by American psychologist Abraham Maslow in
the 1940s and 1950s. Maslow put forward the idea that there existed a hierarchy of needs consisting of five levels in the
hierarchy. These needs progressed from lower order needs through to higher level needs. The basic premise of the theory is
that we all have these five levels of needs and that starting at the lowest level we are motivated to satisfy each level in
ascending order. As each level is sufficiently satisfied we are then motivated to satisfy the next level in the hierarchy. The
five different levels were further sub-categorised into two main groups, these being:
Deficiency needs - Maslow considered these the very basic needs required for survival and security. These needs include:
physiological needs
safety needs
social needs
Growth needs - These are needs associated with personal growth and fullfilment of personal potential.
esteem needs
self-actualisation needs
In Maslow's theory we can never run out of motivation because the very top level, self-actualisation, which relates to the
achievement of our full potential, can never be fully met.
Maslows theory has been widely embraced and taught within the business world and few people who have attended a
company supervision or basic management training course are unlikely not to be familiar with this theory.

"Management Assumptions" (Theory X and Theory Y)

Douglas McGregor further developed the needs concept of Maslow and specifically applied it to the workplace. McGregor
maintained that every manager made assumptions about their employees and adopted a management approach based upon
these assumptions. He maintained there were two main categories and that managers adopted one or the other.
The first category, which he termed Theory X, he maintained was the dominant management approach and assumed:

the average human being has an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it if possible,
because of this most people needed to be coerced, controlled, directed and threatened with punishment to get them
to put adequate effort into the achievement of organisational objectives, and
the average person prefers to be directed, wishes to avoid responsibility, has very little ambition and wants security
above all else.

McGregor maintains that the application of this approach, as well as misunderstanding the real needs of employees, creates a
self-fulfilling outcome because it forces people to become like thisthey have no alternative.
McGregor proposed an alternative set of assumptions which he called Theory Y. The assumptions here are virtually the
opposite to Theory X. They are :

Work is as natural as play or rest.

External control and threat of punishment are not the only means of bringing about effort towards organisational
objectives. People will exercise self-direction and self-control towards the achievement of objectives they are
committed to.
Commitment to objectives is a function of the rewards associated with their achievement.
The average person learns under proper conditions to not only accept responsibility but also seek it.

The ability to seek and develop innovative problem solving approaches is widely, not narrowly distributed across
the whole population.
In most work organisations the abilities of most employees is only partially utilised.

McGregor advocated that the application of Theory Y, would not only meet the needs of the organisation but also those of
the employee. He believed that Theory X at best only met Maslows Deficiency needs, whilst Theory Y also met the Growth
Needs. You would thus have more motivated employees if you adopted Theory Y.

Process theories explain how workers select behavioral actions to meet their
needs and determine their choices. The following theories each offer advice and
insight on how people actually make choices to work hard or not work hard based on
their individual preferences, the available rewards, and the possible work outcomes.

Equity theory
According to the equity theory, based on the work of J. Stacy Adams, workers compare the reward potential to the effort
they must expend. Equity exists when workers perceive that rewards equal efforts (see Figure 1).But employees just don't
look at their potential rewards, they look at the rewards of others as well. Inequities occur when people feel that their
rewards are inferior to the rewards offered to other persons sharing the same workloads.
Employees who feel they are being treated inequitably may exhibit the following behaviors:

Put less effort into their jobs

Ask for better treatment and/or rewards
Find ways to make their work seem better by comparison
Transfer or quit their jobs

The equity theory makes a good point: People behave according to their perceptions. What a manager thinks is irrelevant to
an employee because the real issue is the way an employee perceives his or her situation. Rewards perceived as equitable
should have positive results on job satisfaction and performance; those rewards perceived as inequitable may create job
dissatisfaction and cause performance problems.
Every manager needs to ensure that any negative consequences from equity comparisons are avoided, or at least minimized,
when rewards are allocated. Informed managers anticipate perceived negative inequities when especially visible rewards,
such as pay increases or promotions, are allocated. Instead of letting equity concerns get out of hand, these managers
carefully communicate the intended values of rewards being given, clarify the performance appraisals upon which these
rewards are based, and suggest appropriate comparison points.
Expectancy theory
Victor Vroom introduced one of the most widely accepted explanations of motivation. Very simply, the expectancy
theory says that an employee will be motivated to exert a high level of effort when he or she believes that:
1. Effort will lead to a good performance appraisal.
2. A good appraisal will lead to organizational rewards.
3. The organizational rewards will satisfy his or her personal goals.
The key to the expectancy theory is an understanding of an individual's goals and the relationships between effort and
performance, between performance and rewards, and finally, between the rewards and individual goal satisfaction. When an
employee has a high level of expectancy and the reward is attractive, motivation is usually high.
Therefore, to motivate workers, managers must strengthen workers' perceptions of their efforts as both possible and
worthwhile, clarify expectations of performances, tie rewards to performances, and make sure that rewards are desirable.
Reinforcement theory
The reinforcement theory, based on E. L. Thorndike's law of effect, simply looks at the relationship between behavior and its
consequences. This theory focuses on modifying an employee's onthejob behavior through the appropriate use of one of the
following four techniques:

Positive reinforcement rewards desirable behavior. Positive reinforcement, such as a pay raise or promotion, is
provided as a reward for positive behavior with the intention of increasing the probability that the desired behavior
will be repeated.

Avoidance is an attempt to show an employee what the consequences of improper behavior will be. If an employee
does not engage in improper behavior, he or she will not experience the consequence.
Extinction is basically ignoring the behavior of a subordinate and not providing either positive or negative
reinforcement. Classroom teachers often use this technique when they ignore students who are acting out to get
attention. This technique should only be used when the supervisor perceives the behavior as temporary, not typical,
and not serious.
Punishment (threats, docking pay, suspension) is an attempt to decrease the likelihood of a behavior recurring by
applying negative consequences.

The reinforcement theory has the following implications for management:

Learning what is acceptable to the organization influences motivated behavior.

Managers who are trying to motivate their employees should be sure to tell individuals what they are doing wrong
and be careful not to reward all individuals at the same time.
Managers must tell individuals what they can do to receive positive reinforcement.
Managers must be sure to administer the reinforcement as closely as possible to the occurrence of the behavior.
Managers must recognize that failure to reward can also modify behavior. Employees who believe that they deserve
a reward and do not receive it will often become disenchanted with both their manager and company.
Goal-setting theory
The goalsetting theory, introduced in the late 1960s by Edwin Locke, proposed that intentions to work toward a goal are a
major source of work motivation. Goals, in essence, tell employees what needs to be done and how much effort should be
expanded. In general, the more difficult the goal, the higher the level of performance expected.
Managers can set the goals for their employees, or employees and managers can develop goals together. One advantage of
employees participating in goal setting is that they may be more likely to work toward a goal they helped develop.
No matter who sets the goal, however, employees do better when they get feedback on their progress. In addition to
feedback, four other factors influence the goalsperformance relationship:

The employee must be committed to the goal.

The employee must believe that he is capable of performing the task.
Tasks involved in achieving the goal should be simple, familiar, and independent.
The goalsetting theory is culture bound and is popular in North American cultures.

If the goalsetting theory is followed, managers need to work with their employees in determining goal objectives in order to
provide targets for motivation. In addition, the goals that are established should be specific rather than general in nature, and
managers must provide feedback on performance.

Change management process

The change management process is the sequence of steps or activities that a change management team or project leader
would follow to apply change management to a project or change. Based on Prosci's research of the most effective and
commonly applied change, they have created a change management process that contains the following three phases:
Phase 1 - Preparing for change (Preparation, assessment and strategy development)
Phase 2 - Managing change (Detailed planning and change management implementation)
Phase 3 - Reinforcing change (Data gathering, corrective action and recognition)

Defining change management

It is important to note what change management is and what change management is not, as defined by the majority of
research participants.
Change management is not a stand-alone process for designing a business solution.
Change management is the processes, tools and techniques for managing the people-side of change.

It is normal to experience resistance whenever there is change. Understanding that there will be resistance to change will
help you anticipate resistance, identify its sources and reasons, and modify your efforts to manage the issues of change to
ensure the success of your change efforts.
Resistance is actually healthy. Try not to react against it defensively. It is good for you because it makes you check your
assumptions and it forces you to clarify what you are doing. You must always probe the objections to find the real reason for
resistance. Many times, it comes down to personal fear.
As the leader, you must take the time to understand resistance and you may have to come at it from several different angles
before it is conquered. You must understand what your employees are feeling, as well as thinking.
Ways to reduce resistance to change:
1.

Involve interested parties in the planning of change by asking them for suggestions and incorporating their ideas.

2.
3.

Clearly define the need for the change by communicating the strategic decision personally and in written form.
Address the "people needs" of those involved. Disrupt only what needs to be changed. Help people retain
friendships, comfortable settings and group norms wherever possible.

4.

Design flexibility into change by phasing it in wherever possible. This will allow people to complete current
efforts and assimilate new behaviours along the way. Allow employees to redefine their roles during the course of
implementing change.

5.

Be open and honest.

6.

Do not leave openings for people to return to the status quo. If you and your organization are not ready to commit
yourselves to the change, don't announce the strategy.

7.

Focus continually on the positive aspects of the change. Be specific where you can.

8.

Deliver training programs that develop basic skills as opposed to processes such as: conducting meetings,
communication, teambuilding, self-esteem, and coaching.

Change management is not a process improvement method.

Change management is a method for reducing and managing resistance to change when implementing process,
technology or organizational change.
Change management is not a stand-alone technique for improving organizational performance.
Change management is a necessary component for any organizational performance improvement process to
succeed, including programs like: Six Sigma, Business Process Reengineering, Total Quality Management,
Organizational Development, Restructuring and continuous process improvement.
Change management is how we drive the adoption and usage we need to realize business results.

Group conflict, or hostilities between different groups, is a feature common to all forms of social organization (e.g., sports
teams, ethnic groups, nations, religions, gangs).[1] Although group conflict is one of the most complex phenomena studied by
social scientists, the history of the human race evidences a series of group-level conflicts that have gained notoriety over the
years. For example, from 1820 to 1945, it has been estimated that at least 59 million persons were killed during conflicts
between groups of one type or another.[2] Literature suggests that the number of fatalities nearly doubled between the years
1914 to 1964 as a result of further group conflict.[3]
Group conflict can be separated into two sub-categories of conflict: inter-group conflict (in which distinct groups of
individuals are at odds with one another), and intra-group conflict (in which select individuals a part of the same group clash
with one another). Although both forms of conflict have the ability to spiral upward in severity, it has been noted that
conflict present at the group level (i.e., inter-group rivalries) is generally considered to be more powerful than conflict
present at an individual level a phenomenon known as the discontinuity effect.[4]

1. Conflict within the individual:

The conflict within the individual is usually value related, where role playing expected of the individual does not conform
with the values and beliefs held by the individual. For example, a secretary may have to lie on instructions that her boss is
not in the office to avoid an unwanted visitor or an unwanted telephone call.
This may cause a conflict within the mind of the secretary who may have developed an ethic of telling the truth. Similarly,
many Indians who are vegetarians and come to America and find it very hard to remain vegetarians may question the
necessity of the vegetarian philosophy thus causing a conflict in their minds.
In addition to these value conflicts, a person may be faced with a role conflict. For example, a telephone operator may be
advised and required to be polite to the customers by her supervisor, who may also complain that she is spending too much
time with her customers. This would cause a role conflict in her mind.
Similarly a police officer may be invited to his brothers wedding where he may find that some guests are using drugs which
are against the law. It may cause conflict in his mind as to which role he should play as of a brother or as of a police
officer. Conflict within an individual can also arise when a person has to choose between two equally desirable alternatives
or between two equally undesirable goals.
2. Interpersonal Conflict:
Interpersonal conflict involves conflict between two or more individuals and is probably the most common and most
recognized conflict. This may involve conflict between two managers who are competing for limited capital and manpower
resources.
This conflict can become further acute when the scarce resources cannot be shared and must be obtained. Similarly, if there
are two equally deserving professors and they are both up for promotion, but only one of them can be promoted because of
budget and positional constraints, then this could result in interpersonal conflict between the two professors.
Another type of interpersonal conflict can relate to disagreements over goals and objectives of the organization. For
example, some members of a board of directors of a school may want to offer courses in sex education while others may find
this proposal morally offensive thus causing interpersonal conflict among the members of the board.
Similarly a college or a university may have a policy of quality education so that only top quality students are admitted while
some members of the organizational board may propose open admission policy where all high school graduates are to be
considered for admission. Such a situation can cause conflicts among the members of the governing board. In addition to
conflicts over the nature and substance of goals and objectives, the conflicts can also arise over the means for achieving
these goals and objectives.
For example, two marketing managers may argue as to which promotional methods would result in higher sales. These
conflicts become highlighted when they are based upon opinions rather than facts. Facts are generally indisputable, resulting
in agreements. Opinions are highly personal and subjective and may provide for disagreements and criticism.
These interpersonal conflicts are often the results of personality clashes. People with widely different characteristics and
attitudes are bound to have views and aims that are inconsistent with the views and aims of others.
3. Conflict between the individual and the group:
As has been discussed before, all formal groups and informal groups have established certain norms of behaviour and
operational standards which all members are expected to adhere to. An individual member may want to remain within the
group for social needs but may disagree with the group goals and the methods to achieve such goals.

For example, in some restaurants, all tips are shared equally by all waiters and waitresses. Some particular waitress who may
be overly polite and efficient may feel that she deserves more, thus causing conflict between her and the group. Similarly, if
a group is going on strike for some reasons, some members of the group may not agree with these reasons or simply may not
be economically able to afford to go on strike, thus causing conflict with the group.
This conflict may also be between the manager and a group of subordinates or between the leader and the followers. A
manager may take a disciplinary action against a member of the group causing conflict with the group and this may result in
reduced productivity.
Mutiny on the Bounty is a classic example of rebellion of the crew of the ship against their leader, based upon the
treatment that the crew received at the hands of their leader. The conflict among the armed forces is taken so seriously that
the army must obey their commander even if the command is wrong and in conflict with what others believe in.

4. Intergroup conflict:
An organization is an interlocking network of groups, departments, sections or work teams. The intergroup conflicts are not
so much personal in nature as they are due to factors inherent in the organizational structure. For example, there is active and
continuous conflict between the union and the management.
One of the most common conflict is between the line and the staff members of the organization. The line managers may
resent their dependence on staff for information and recommendations. The staff may resent their inability to implement
directly their own decisions and recommendations. This interdependence causes intergroup conflict.
These inter-unit conflicts can also be caused by inconsistent rewards and differing performance criteria for different units
and groups. For example, sales people who depend upon their commission as a reward for their efforts may promise their
customers certain quantity of the product and delivery times which the production department may find impossible to meet
thus causing conflict between the two units.
Different functional groups within the organization may come into conflict with each other because of their different specific
objectives. There are some fundamental differences among different units of the organization both in the structure as well as
operations and processes and thus each unit develops its own organizational sub-structure. These sub-structures according to
Lawrence and Lorsch, differ in terms of (a) goal orientation which can be highly specific for production but highly fluid for
research and development, (b) time orientation which is short run for sales and long run for research, (c) formality of
structure which is highly informal for research and highly formal in production and (d) supervisory style which may be more
democratic in one area as compared to another area.
A classic example of inter-unit conflict is between sales and production as described earlier. The sales department is
typically customer-oriented and wants to maintain high inventories for filling orders as they are received which is a costly
option as against the production department which is strongly concerned about cost effectiveness requiring as little inventory
of finished product at hand as possible.
Similarly, intergroup conflict may arise between day shift workers and night shift workers who might blame each other for
anything that goes wrong from missing tools to maintenance problems.
5. Inter-organizational conflict:
Conflict also occurs between organizations which are dependent upon each other in some way. This conflict may be between
buyer organizations and supplier organizations about quantity, quality and delivery times of raw materials and other policy
issues.
Such conflict could also be between unions and organizations employing their members, between government agencies that
regulate certain organizations and the organizations that are affected by them.
Forcing
Also known as competing. An individual firmly pursues his or her own concerns despite the resistance of the other person.
This may involve pushing one viewpoint at the expense of another or maintaining firm resistance to another persons actions.
Examples of when forcing may be appropriate

In certain situations when all other, less forceful methods, dont work or are ineffective
When you need to stand up for your own rights, resist aggression and pressure
When a quick resolution is required and using force is justified (e.g. in a life-threatening situation, to stop an
aggression)
As a last resort to resolve a long-lasting conflict

Possible advantages of forcing:

May provide a quick resolution to a conflict

Increases self-esteem and draws respect when firm resistance or actions were a response to an aggression or
hostility

Some caveats of forcing:

May negatively affect your relationship with the opponent in the long run
May cause the opponent to react in the same way, even if the opponent did not intend to be forceful originally
Cannot take advantage of the strong sides of the other sides position
Taking this approach may require a lot of energy and be exhausting to some individuals

Win-Win (Collaborating)
Also known as problem confronting or problem solving. Collaboration involves an attempt to work with the other person to
find a win-win solution to the problem in hand - the one that most satisfies the concerns of both parties. The win-win
approach sees conflict resolution as an opportunity to come to a mutually beneficial result. It includes identifying the
underlying concerns of the opponents and finding an alternative which meets each party's concerns.
Examples of when collaborating may be appropriate:

When consensus and commitment of other parties is important

In a collaborative environment
When it is required to address the interests of multiple stakeholders
When a high level of trust is present
When a long-term relationship is important
When you need to work through hard feelings, animosity, etc
When you don't want to have full responsibility

Possible advantages of collaborating:

Leads to solving the actual problem

Leads to a win-win outcome
Reinforces mutual trust and respect
Builds a foundation for effective collaboration in the future
Shared responsibility of the outcome
You earn the reputation of a good negotiator
For parties involved, the outcome of the conflict resolution is less stressful (however, the process of finding and
establishing a win-win solution may be very involed see the caveats below)

Some caveats of collaborating:

Requires a commitment from all parties to look for a mutually acceptable solution
May require more effort and more time than some other methods. A win-win solution may not be evident
For the same reason, collaborating may not be practical when timing is crucial and a quick solution or fast
response is required
Once one or more parties lose their trust in an opponent, the relationship falls back to other methods of conflict
resolution. Therefore, all involved parties must continue collaborative efforts to maintain a collaborative
relationship

Compromising
Compromising looks for an expedient and mutually acceptable solution which partially satisfies both parties.
Examples of when compromise may be appropriate:

When the goals are moderately important and not worth the use of more assertive or more involving approaches,
such as forcing or collaborating
To reach temporary settlement on complex issues
To reach expedient solutions on important issues
As a first step when the involved parties do not know each other well or havent yet developed a high level of
mutual trust
When collaboration or forcing do not work

Possible advantages of compromise:

Faster issue resolution. Compromising may be more practical when time is a factor
Can provide a temporary solution while still looking for a win-win solution
Lowers the levels of tension and stress resulting from the conflict

Some caveats of using compromise:

May result in a situation when both parties are not satisfied with the outcome (a lose-lose situation)
Does not contribute to building trust in the long run
May require close monitoring and control to ensure the agreements are met

Withdrawing
Also known as avoiding. This is when a person does not pursue her/his own concerns or those of the opponent. He/she does
not address the conflict, sidesteps, postpones or simply withdraws.
Examples of when withdrawing may be appropriate:

When the issue is trivial and not worth the effort

When more important issues are pressing, and you don't have time to deal with it
In situations where postponing the response is beneficial to you, for example When it is not the right time or place to confront the issue
When you need time to think and collect information before you act (e.g. if you are unprepared or taken
by surprise)
When you see no chance of getting your concerns met or you would have to put forth unreasonable efforts
When you would have to deal with ostility
When you are unable to handle the conflict (e.g. if you are too emotionally involved or others can handle it better)

Possible advantages of withdrawing:

When the opponent is forcing / attempts aggression, you may choose to withdraw and postpone your response until
you are in a more favourable circumstance for you to push back
Withdrawing is a low stress approach when the conflict is short
Gives the ability/time to focus on more important or more urgent issues instead
Gives you time to better prepare and collect information before you act

Some caveats of withdrawing:

May lead to weakening or losing your position; not acting may be interpreted as an agreement. Using withdrawing
strategies without negatively affecting your own position requires certain skill and experience
When multiple parties are involved, withdrawing may negatively affect your relationship with a party that expects
your action

Smoothing
Also known as accommodating. Smoothing is accommodating the concerns of other people first of all, rather than one's own
concerns.
Examples of when smoothing may be appropriate:

When it is important to provide a temporary relief from the conflict or buy time until you are in a better position to
respond/push back
When the issue is not as important to you as it is to the other person
When you accept that you are wrong
When you have no choice or when continued competition would be detrimental

Possible advantages of smoothing:

In some cases smoothing will help to protect more important interests while giving up on some less important ones
Gives an opportunity to reassess the situation from a different angle

Some caveats of smoothing:

There is a risk to be abused, i.e. the opponent may constantly try to take advantage of your tendency toward
smoothing/accommodating. Therefore it is important to keep the right balance and this requires some skill.
May negatively affect your confidence in your ability to respond to an aggressive opponent
It makes it more difficult to transition to a win-win solution in the future
Some of your supporters may not like your smoothing response and be turned off