13 Pros and Cons of Avoiding Conflict Style

In any personal or professional setting, conflict is an inevitable part of human interaction. How we choose to manage these conflicts can significantly impact outcomes and relationships. One common approach is the “avoiding” conflict management style, where individuals deliberately steer clear of confrontational situations. While this approach can be beneficial in certain contexts, it also has its downsides. In this discussion, we will explore the various pros and cons of using the avoiding style in conflict management, delving into how and why this approach can be both advantageous and detrimental in different scenarios. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for anyone looking to navigate conflicts effectively in their personal and professional lives.

Advantages of “avoiding” conflict management style

The “avoiding” conflict management style, where an individual deliberately ignores or stays away from conflict, offers several advantages:

  1. Reduces Stress: By avoiding conflict, individuals can temporarily prevent the stress and anxiety that often accompanies confrontations.
  2. Buys Time: This approach can be useful when additional time is needed to think, gather more information, or cool down before addressing the issue.
  3. Minimizes Harm in Trivial Matters: For inconsequential conflicts, avoiding can be the best strategy, as it prevents unnecessary escalation over minor issues.
  4. Preserves Relationships: When maintaining a positive relationship is more important than the conflict itself, avoiding the issue can sometimes help in preserving harmony.
  5. Useful in Volatile Situations: In situations where addressing the conflict might lead to harmful repercussions or when the emotional state of the parties is too charged, avoiding can be a strategic move to prevent escalation.
  6. Good in Imbalanced Power Dynamics: If an individual is in a significantly weaker position, avoiding the conflict might be a safer option than confronting a more powerful opponent.

These benefits highlight why avoiding conflict can sometimes be a strategic and effective approach, particularly in situations where direct confrontation might lead to negative outcomes.

Cons of “avoiding” conflict management style

While the “avoiding” conflict management style can be beneficial in certain situations, it also has several drawbacks:

  1. Unresolved Issues: Avoiding conflict typically means that the underlying issues are not addressed, which can lead to unresolved problems that may worsen over time.
  2. Missed Opportunities for Improvement: By not confronting issues, opportunities for personal or organizational growth and problem-solving are missed.
  3. Build-up of Frustration: Continually avoiding conflict can lead to pent-up frustration, stress, and resentment, which might manifest in other harmful ways.
  4. Perception of Weakness or Apathy: Others may perceive this approach as a lack of assertiveness or care, potentially undermining respect or authority.
  5. Damages Relationships in the Long Run: Although it might seem like a relationship-preserving strategy, consistently avoiding important issues can erode trust and communication in relationships.
  6. Creates a Culture of Avoidance: In a team or organizational context, habitual avoidance can create a culture where issues are swept under the rug rather than addressed constructively.
  7. Escalation of Conflict: Sometimes, avoiding a conflict can inadvertently lead to its escalation, as unresolved issues can grow more complex or intense over time.

Understanding these disadvantages is crucial for knowing when the avoiding style might be counterproductive and when it’s necessary to adopt a more direct approach to conflict resolution.

Examples of avoiding conflict style

Example 1: Problem and Solution

Problem: A minor disagreement between two departments over the allocation of a shared conference room.

Avoiding as a Solution: Management decides not to intervene immediately. By avoiding the conflict, the issue resolves itself as the departments find an informal way to share the room without higher-level intervention. This approach prevents escalation and maintains a peaceful work environment.

Example 2: Problem and Solution

Problem: A project team member frequently expresses strong, controversial opinions during meetings, causing discomfort but not directly affecting project outcomes.

Avoiding as a Solution: The team leader chooses not to address this behavior directly, as it’s not impacting the project’s progress and confronting it might cause unnecessary tension. Over time, the team member naturally adjusts to the team’s dynamics without the need for a confrontation.

Example 3: Problem and Solution

Problem: A new, innovative idea is proposed that requires significant change in the company, but it’s met with resistance and skepticism.

Avoiding as a Solution: Leadership decides to postpone the discussion about implementing this new idea, recognizing that the organization is currently undergoing several other major changes and adding another might lead to conflict and resistance. This delay allows the company to focus on current changes and consider the new idea in the future when it might be more feasible.

Example 4: Problem and Solution

Problem: There’s a persistent but minor conflict between two employees over personal work styles, not significantly impacting their performance or teamwork.

Avoiding as a Solution: Management opts not to intervene, judging that this low-level conflict doesn’t warrant direct involvement and could be resolved by the employees themselves over time. This decision avoids the risk of escalating a minor issue into a major problem.

In each of these examples, avoiding the conflict serves as a strategic choice to prevent escalation, reduce tension, or allow time for a problem to resolve itself or become more manageable. However, it’s crucial to monitor such situations to ensure that the avoidance doesn’t lead to larger issues in the future.

Read more blogs from our experts