THOMAS KILMAN CONFLICT MODE INSTRUMENT
by
Kenneth L. Thomas
and Ralph H. Kilman
INSTRUCTIONS Consider situations in which you find your wishes differing from those of another person. How do you usually respond to such situations? On the following pages are several pairs of statements describing possible behavioral responses. For each pair, please circle the A or B statement which is mot characteristic of your own behavior. In many cases, neither the A nor the B statement may be very typical of your behavior, but please select the response which you would be more likely to use.
1. A There are times when I let others take responsibility for solving the problem. B Rather than negotiate the things on which we disagree, I try to stress the things upon which we both agree. 2. A I try to find a compromise situation. B I attempt to deal with all of his and my concerns. 3. A I am usually firm in pursuing my goals. B I might try to soothe the others feelings and preserve our relationship. 4. A I try to find a compromise solution. B I sometimes sacrifice my own wishes for the wishes of the other person. 5. A I consistently seek the others help in working out a solution. B I try to do what is necessary to avoid useless tensions. 6. A I try to avoid creating unpleasantness for myself. B I try to win my position. 7. A I try to postpone the issue until I have had some time to think it over. B I give up some points in exchange for others. 8. A I am usually firm in pursuing my goals. B I attempt to get all concerns and issues immediately out I the open. 9. A I feel that differences are not always worth worrying about. B I make some effort to get my way. 10. A I am firm in pursuing my goals. B I try to find a compromise solution. 11. A I attempt to get all concerns and issues immediately out in the open. B I might try to soothe the others feelings and preserve our relationship. 12. A I sometimes avoid taking positions which would create controversy. B I will let him have some of his positions if he lets me have some of mine. 13. A I propose a middle ground. B I press to get my points made. 14. A I tell him my ideas and ask him for his. B I try to show him the logic and benefits of my position. 15. A I might try to soothe the others feelings and preserve our relationship. B I try to do what is necessary to avoid tensions. 16. A I try not to hurt the others feelings. B I try to convince the other person of the merits of my position.
17. A I am usually firm in pursuing my goals. B I will let him have some of his positions if he lets me have some of mine. 18. A If it makes the other person happy, I might let him maintain his views. B I will let him have some of his positions if he lets me have some of mine. 19. A I attempt to get all concerns and issues immediately out in the open. B I try to postpone the issue until I have had some time to think it over. 20. A I attempt to immediately work through our differences. B I try to find a fair combination of gains and losses for 21 A In approaching negotiations, I try to be considerate of the other persons wishes. B I always lean toward a direct discussion of the problem. 22. A I try to find a position that is intermediate between his and mine. B I assert my wishes. 23. A I am very often concerned with satisfying all our wishes. B There are times when I let others take responsibility for solving the problem. 24. A If the others position seems very important to him, I would try to meet his wishes. B I try to get him to settle for a compromise. 25. A I try to show him the logic and benefits of my position. B In approaching negotiations, I try to be considerate of the other persons wishes. 26. A I propose a middle ground. B I am nearly always concerned with satisfying all our wishes. 27. A I sometimes avoid taking positions that would create controversy. B If it makes the other person happy, I might let him maintain his views. 28. A I am usually firm in pursuing my goals. B I usually seek the others help in working out a solution. 29. A I propose a middle ground. B I feel that differences are not always worth worrying about. 30. A I try not to hurt the others feelings. B I always share the problem with the other person so that we can work it out.
SCORING Circle the letters below which correspond to the letter your circled on each item of the questionnaire and then total the number of items circled in each column. Competing
(forcing) Collaborating
(problem solving)
Compromising (sharing)
Avoiding (withdrawal)
Accommodatin g
(soothing) 1. – – – A B 2. – B A – – 3. A – – – B 4. – – A – B 5. – A – B – 6. B – – A – 7. – – B A – 8. A B – – – 9. B – – A – 10. A – B – – 11. – A – – B 12. – – B A – 13. B – A – – 14. B A – – – 15. – – – B A 16. B – – – A 17. A – – B – 18. – – B – A 19. – A – B – 20. – A B – – 21. – B – – A 22. B – A B – 23. – A – B – 24. – – B – A 25. A – – – B 26. – B A – – 27. – – – A B 28. A B – – – 29. – – A B – 30. – B – – A _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ Competing Collaborating Compromising Avoiding Accommodating
GRAPHING YOUR PROFILE SCORES Your profile of scores indicates the repertoire of conflict handling skills which you, as an individual, use in the kinds of conflict situations you face. Your score profile can be graphed on the next page entitled, Your Scores on the Thomas-Kilman Conflict Mode Instrument. The five modes are represented by the five columns labeled competing, collaborating, and so on. In the column under each model label is the range of possible scores on that mode – – – from 0 (for every low use) to 12 (for very high use). Circle your own scores on each of the five modes. Each possible score is graphed in relation to the scores of managers who have already taken the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. The horizontal lines represent percentiles the percentage of people who have scored at or below a given number. If you had scored some number above the 80% line on competing, for example, that would mean that you had scored higher than 80% of the people who have taken the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument that you were in the top 20% in competition. The double lines (at the 25th and 75th percentiles) separate the middle 50% of the scores on each mode from the top 25% and the bottom 25%. In general, if your score falls somewhere within the middle 50% on a given mode, you are close to the average in your use of that mode. If your score falls outside that range, then your use of that mode is somewhat higher or lower than most of the people who have taken the instrument. Remember that extreme scores are not necessarily bad, however, since your situation may require high or low use of a given conflict-handling mode.
YOUR SCORES ON THE THOMAS-KILMANN CONFLICT MODE INSTRUMENT
Competing Collaborating Compromising Avoiding Accommodating 100%
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
100% 12 12 12 12 11 11 11 12 11 10 10 High 25% 90% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 90%
9 10 8 7 80% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 80% ===== ===== ======== = 9 = ======== ====== = 6 = ===== 70% – – – 7 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 70% 60% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 60% 6 8 5 7 6 Middle 50% 50% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 50%
5 7 40% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 40%
4 6
5 4
30% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 30% 6 5 ===== ===== ======== ======== ======== ====== ======== ===== 3 4 3 20% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 20% 5 4 2 3 Low 25% 10% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 10%
1 0
4 3 2 1 0
3 2 1 0
2 1 0
2 1 0
0% – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – 0% Scores are graphed in relation to the scores of the practicing managers at middle and upper levels in business and government organizations.
FIVE CONFLICT HANDLING STYLES The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument is designed to assess an individuals behavior in conflict situations. Conflict Situations are the situations in which the concerns of two people appear to be incompatible. In such situation, we can describe a persons behavior along two basic dimensions: (1) assertiveness, the extent to which the individual attempts to satisfy his own concerns, and (2) cooperativeness, the extent to which the individual attempts to satisfy the other persons concerns. These two basic dimensions of behavior can be used to define five specific methods of dealing with conflicts. These five conflict-handling modes are shown below:
Forcing Collaborating
Compromising
Avoiding Accommodating
Assertive
Unassertive
Uncooperative Cooperative
COOPERATIVENESS (attempting to satisfy the other partys concerns)
A SS
ER TI
VE N
ES S
(a tte
m pt
in g
to s
at is
fy o
ne s
o w
n co
nc er
ns )
Forcing Collaborating
Compromising
Avoiding Accommodating
Assertive
Unassertive
Uncooperative Cooperative
COOPERATIVENESS (attempting to satisfy the other partys concerns)
A SS
ER TI
VE N
ES S
(a tte
m pt
in g
to s
at is
fy o
ne s
o w
n co
nc er
ns )
Competing is assertive and uncooperativean individual pursues his or her own concerns at the other person’s expense. This is a power-oriented mode in which one uses whatever power seems appropriate to win one’s own position: ability to argue, rank, economic sanctions, etc. Competing might mean “standing up for your rights,” defending a position which you believe is correct, or simply trying to win. Accommodating is unassertive and cooperativethe opposite of competing. When accommodating, an individual neglects his/her own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other person; there is an element of self-sacrifice in this mode. Accommodating might take the form of selfless generosity or charity, obeying another person’s order when one would prefer not to, or yielding to another’s point of view. Avoiding is unassertive and uncooperativethe individual does not immediately pursue his or her own concerns or those of the other person. He or she does not address the conflict. Avoiding might take the form of diplomatically sidestepping an issue, postponing an issue until a better time, or simply withdrawing from a threatening situation. Collaborating is both assertive and cooperativethe opposite of avoiding. Collaborating involves an attempt to work with the other person to find some solution that fully satisfies the concerns of both persons. It means digging into an issue to identify the underlying concerns of
the two individuals and to find an alternative that meets both sets of concerns. Collaborating between two persons might take the form of exploring the disagreement to learn from each other’s insights, attempting to resolve some condition that would otherwise have them competing for resources, or confronting and trying to find a creative solution for an interpersonal problem. Compromising is intermediate in both assertiveness and cooperativeness. The objective is to find some expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties. It falls on a middle ground between competing and accommodating. Compromising gives up more than competing, but less than accommodating. Likewise, it addresses an issue more directly than avoiding, but doesn’t explore it in as much depth as collaborating. Compromising might mean splitting the difference, exchanging, making concessions, or seeking a quick middle-ground position.
INTERPRETING YOUR SCORES ON THE THOMAS-KILMANN CONFLICT MODE INSTRUMENT
Usually, after getting back the results of any test, people first want to know: What are the right answers? In the case of conflict-handling behavior, there are no universal right answers. All five modes are useful in some situations: each represents a set of useful social skills. Our conventional wisdom recognizes, for example, that often two heads are better than one (Collaborating). But it also says, Kill your enemies with kindness (Accommodating), Split the difference (Compromising) Leave well enough alone (Avoiding), Might makes right (Competing). The effectiveness of a given conflict-handling mode depends upon the requirements of the specific conflict situation and the skill with which the mode is used. Your profile of scores indicates the repertoire of conflict-handling skills which you, as an individual, use in the kind of conflict situations you face. The following ranges indicate the percentile scores based on others who have taken the test. Remember that extreme scores are not necessarily bad, since your situation may require high or low use of a given conflict handling style.
Competing: High scores: 8-12; Middle scores: 4-7; Low scores: 0-3 Collaborating: High scores: 9-12; Middle scores: 6-8; Low scores: 0-5
Compromising: High scores: 9-12; Middle scores: 5-8; Low scores: 0-4 Avoiding: High scores: 8-12; Middle scores: 5-7; Low scores: 0-4
Accommodating: High scores: 7-12; Middle scores: 4-6; Low scores: 0-3 Each of us is capable of using all five conflict-handling modes; none of us can be characterized as having a single, rigid style of dealing with conflict. However, any given individual uses some modes better than others and therefore tends to rely upon these modes more heavily than others, whether because of temperament or practice. The conflict behaviors which an individual uses are therefore a result of both his personal predispositions and the requirements of the situation in which he finds himself. The Thomas- Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument is designed to assess this mix of conflict-handling modes. To help you judge how appropriate your utilization of the five modes is for your situation. We have listed a number of uses for each modebased upon lists generated by company presidents. Your score, high or low, indicates its usefulness in your situation. However, there is the possibility that your social skills lead you to rely upon some conflict behaviors more or less than necessary. To help you determine this, we have also listed some diagnostic questions concerning warning signals for the overuse or underuse of each mode.
Competing Uses:
When quick, decisive action is vital. On important issues where unpopular courses of action need implementing. On issues vital to company welfare when you know you are right. To protect yourself against people who take advantage of noncompetitive behavior.
If you scored High:
Are you surrounded by “yes” men? Are others usually in agreement with you? Is it because they have learned that it is
unwise to disagree with you, or have given up trying to influence you? This closes you off from information.
If you scored Low:
Do you often feel powerless in situations? Do you have trouble taking a firm stand, even when you see the need? (Sometimes
concerns for others feelings or anxieties about the use of power cause us to vacillate, which may mean postponing the decision and possibly adding to the suffering and/or resentment of others.)
Collaborating Uses:
To find an integrative solution when both sets of concerns are too important to be compromised.
When your objective is to learn. To merge insights from people with different perspectives on a problem. To gain commitment by incorporating others concerns into a consensual decision. To work through hard feelings that have been interfering with an interpersonal
relationship. If you scored High:
Do you spend time discussing issues in depth that do not seem to deserve it? (Trivial problems do not require optimal solutions and not all personal differences need to be hashed out. The overuse of collaboration and consensual decision-making sometimes represents a desire to minimize risk by diffusing responsibility for a decision or by postponing action.)
Does your collaborative behavior fail to elicit collaborative responses from others? (You may be projecting something that would indicate the presence of defensiveness, strong feelings, impatience, competitiveness, or conflicting interests.)
If you scored Low:
Is it hard for you to see differences as an opportunity for joint gain or as an opportunity to learn or solve problems?
Compromising Uses:
When goals are moderately important, but not worth the effort or potential disruption of a more assertive mode.
When two opponents with equal power are strongly committed to mutually exclusive goals, e.g., labor management bargaining.
To arrive at expedient solutions under time pressure. To achieve temporary settlement to complex issues. As a backup mode when collaboration or competition fails to be successful
If you scored High:
Do you concentrate so heavily upon the practicalities and tactics of compromise that you sometimes lose sight of large issues, e.g., principles, values, long-term objectives?
Does an emphasis on bargaining and trading create a cynical climate of gamesmanship?
If you scored Low:
Do you find yourself too sensitive or embarrassed to be effective in bargaining situations?
Do you find it hard to make concessions?
Avoiding Uses:
When an issue is trivial, of only passing importance, or when other more important issues are pressing.
When you perceive no chance of satisfying your concerns. When the potential damage of confronting a conflict outweighs the benefits of its
resolution. To let people cool down, to reduce tension to a productive level, and to regain
perspective and composure. When gathering more information outweighs the advantages of an immediate decision. When others can resolve the conflict more effectively. When the issue seems tangential or symptomatic of another, more basic issue.
If you scored High:
Do people have trouble getting your input on issues? Sometimes an unnecessary amount of energy can be devoted to caution and the
avoiding of issues, indicating that issues need to be faced and resolved. Are decisions on important issues made by default?
If you scored Low:
Do you find yourself hurting peoples feelings or stirring up hostilities? (You may need to exercise more discretion in confronting issues or more tact in framing issues in non- threatening ways.)
Do you often feel harried or overwhelmed by a number of issues? (You may need to devote more time to setting priorities, deciding which issues are relatively unimportant, and perhaps delegating them to others.)
Accommodating Uses:
When you realize that you are wrong, to allow a better position to be heard, to learn from others, and to show that you are reasonable.
When the issue is much more important to the other person than to you, to satisfy the needs of others, and as a goodwill gesture to help maintain a cooperative relationship.
To build up a social credit for later issues that are important to you. When continued competition would only damage your cause, when you are outmatched
and losing. When preserving harmony and avoiding disruption are especially important. To aid the managerial development of subordinates by allowing them to experiment and
learn from their own mistakes. If you scored High:
Do you feel that your own ideas and concerns are not getting the attention they deserve? (Deferring too much to the concerns of others can deprive you from influence, respect, and recognition. It also deprives others of your potential contributions.)
Is discipline lax? (Although discipline for its own sake may be of little value, there are often rules, procedures, and assignments where implementation is crucial for you or the organization.)
If you scored Low:
Do you have trouble building goodwill with others? Do others often seem to regard you as unreasonable? Do you have trouble admitting when you are wrong? Do you know when to give up?
CONFLICT STYLE: WHEN TO USE WHICH STYLE
Competing Collaborating Often appropriate when: ? An emergency looms. ? You are not sure you are right and being right
is more important than preserving relationships.
? The issue is trivial and others do not really care what happens.
Often inappropriate when: ? When Collaboration or cooperation have not
yet been attempted. ? Cooperation from others is important. ? Used routinely for most issues. ? Self-respect of others is diminished
needlessly.
Often appropriate when: ? The issues and relationships are both
significant. ? Cooperation is important. ? A creative end is important. ? Reasonable hope exists to meet all concerns. Often inappropriate when: ? Time is short. ? The issue is unimportant. ? You are overloaded with “processing.” ? The goals of the other person are certainly
wrong.
Compromising
Often appropriate when: ? Cooperation is important but time or
resources are limited. ? Finding some solution, even less than the
best, is better than a complete stalemate. ? Efforts to collaborate will be misunderstood
as forcing. Often inappropriate when: ? Finding the most creative solution possible is
essential. ? You cant live with the consequences.
Avoiding Accommodating Often appropriate when: ? The issue is trivial. ? The relationship is insignificant. ? Time is short and a decision not necessary. ? You have little power but still wish to block the
other person. Often inappropriate when: ? You care about both the relationship and the
issues involved. ? Used habitually for most issues. ? Negative feelings may linger. Others would benefit from hearing information.
Often appropriate when: ? You really dont care about the issue. ? You are powerless and have no wish to block
the other.
Often inappropriate when: ? You are likely to harbor resentment. ? Used habitually in order to gain acceptance
(outcome: depression and lack of self- respect).
? Others wish to collaborate and will feel like enforcers if you accommodate.
MATCHING THE CONFLICT MANAGEMENT APPROACH WITH THE SITUATION Situational Considerations
Competing (Forcing)
Collaborating Compromising Avoiding Accommodating
Issue Importance
High High Med Low Low
Relationship Importance
Low High Med Low High
Relative Power
High Low-High Equal-High Equal-High Low
Time Constraints
Med- High Low Low Med-High Med-High
Ralph H. Kilman
INSTRUCTIONS
Five Conflict Handling Styles
Applied Sciences
Architecture and Design
Biology
Business & Finance
Chemistry
Computer Science
Geography
Geology
Education
Engineering
English
Environmental science
Spanish
Government
History
Human Resource Management
Information Systems
Law
Literature
Mathematics
Nursing
Physics
Political Science
Psychology
Reading
Science
Social Science
Home
Blog
Archive
Essay
Reviews
Contact
google+twitterfacebook
Copyright © 2019 HomeworkMarket.com
