BY NICK RABER
The members of a fire depart-ment constitute a team of individuals who have come together for the common goals of protecting and serving the citizens. Despite the commonality of goals, however, conflict can arise in any organization. If the organization is to succeed, such conflicts must be resolved quickly and in a manner that respects the dignity of all individuals involved.
TYPES OF CONFLICT
In “Conflict Colloquium,” a seminar presented at the University of Southern Indiana, Scott H. O’Daniel identified three building stages of conflict:
- Latent. Most participants are unaware that there is conflict.
- Perceived. All participants are fully aware of the conditions. This is the point in the conflict when resolving the problem can prevent increased tensions and further misunderstanding.
- Felt. Venting the frustrations with the other party in an open and nondestructive environment.
Let’s apply this information to the following fire service scenario: Your local volunteer fire department is dispatched to an accident. You are the acting officer in command (OIC). One of your firefighters isn’t performing up to the standards you expect. This member attends training only when he feels like it and has a bad attitude when someone tries to point out his faults in a constructive manner.
You are upset with this individual for not being up to par with his firefighting skills and are trying to figure out a way to deal with the problem. Being human, you may decide to let the individual know something is wrong in some way other than telling him. You are short tempered with him and try to ignore him, hoping he will get the message that he did something to upset you. Resolving the conflict at this stage can prevent increased tension and additional misunderstanding. If there is no resolution, the situation will enter the Felt stage: You need to let the individual know that something is wrong before the situation gets out of control.
By this time, the other party has probably noticed that there is a problem and may have confronted you and asked what the problem is. At this point, you need to sit down together and address the problem.
CONFLICT AFTERMATH: A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS TIME
Conflict aftermath refers to the point at which the two parties attempt to analyze the conflict’s outcome. The participants, who may still be angry even though the matter has been settled, may argue over who won and who lost, leading to a new conflict.
BEHAVIORS
Individuals may approach conflicts in various ways.
- Nonassertive. The individual tries to avoid the situation or may give in instead of standing up for his beliefs. In the fire service scenario above, the OIC may have said, “Maybe I was a little hard on you” after having confronted the firefighter about his inadequate performance. This approach accomplishes nothing: The OIC backed down, and the original problem remains.
- Direct aggression. The individual presents his point of view in a violent manner and refuses to compromise. In the example scenario, the OIC calls the person into the office, slams his fist into the desk, and yells, “If you would come to training more often, you would know what to do. Your skills are horrible.” The OIC didn’t even give the other person a chance to explain himself. It’s possible the individual had a legitimate excuse for not attending training.
- Assertion. The “offended” individual explains the problem to the “offending” party in a manner that allows for compromise. Obviously, this is the most effective type of behavior.
METHODS
Problems may be resolved in four ways:
- Win-Lose. This is the least effective method. The individual uses nonassertive behavior and lets the other party win. Nothing is accomplished.
- Lose-Lose. Both parties argue; each loses some ground. Nothing is solved.
- Compromising. Both parties try to work out the conflict; each gives in to arrive at a solution.
- Win-Win. This is the most effective method.
WIN-WIN METHOD
You can accomplish the Win-Win method in six steps, according to O’Daniel:
- Identify your unmet needs. Determine whether the issue is a need or a want before you bring it up to the other party. A need is something that must be achieved to rectify the situation. A want is something you would like to see happen to correct the situation.
- Make a date to meet with the other party. This strategy is effective because it avoids the sneak attack. Both parties can cool down, collect their thoughts, and be in a good state of mind when discussing the conflict.
- Describe your problem and needs with the other individual. Use phrases such as “I feel that” instead of “You did this.” This will help to alleviate some of the tension in the conversation. Also, while discussing your problems and needs, tell the other individual why you are upset-for example, “I feel this behavior is causing the problem.”
- Consider the other point of view. You might use statements such as, “Do you see now why I am upset?” Follow up with, “Now, what can I do to help you with this problem?” Listen to any feedback.
- Negotiate a solution. Be fair and respectful.
- Follow up on the situation. Ask the person how he is dealing with the situation and if there is anything you can do to help.
Resolving conflict in a timely manner prevents the situation from getting out of hand and individuals’ emotions from becoming aroused-and is especially important in a volunteer department because the two parties may not see each other often, which may cause tension to mount.
NICK RABER has been a member of the German Township Volunteer Fire Department in Evansville, Indiana, for more than three years. He is a certified Firefighter II and first responder and is studying electrical engineering technology at the University of Southern Indiana.
