By Ron Kraybill

Preliminary Info for the Trainer

There are many ways to work with this conflict style inventory. You can easily devote a full day workshop to it. Or you can work with it in an hour flat, if you have people take and score it on their own before the workshop.

In settings I work in, training time is always scarce. I consider about two hours to be the “sweet spot” of time devoted to it. That is enough for people to really feel they grasp the inventory and get some quite specific insights into themselves, even though there are plenty of other exercises you could do.

Which version to use?

Style Matters comes in two versions, Style Matters Basic and Style Matters Expanded. The Basic version is similar to most other conflict style inventories on the market in assuming that users come from individualistic cultural background, that is, white, Anglo-European cultural background.

For trainers who have worked with the Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Inventory, the Style Matters Basic Version can be handled in a very similar way. Of course, Style Matters has several additional features like "Hot Tips" for each style, the concept of Calm and Storm, and discussion questions. But because Style Matters and the Thomas Kilmann are both based on the Mouton-Blake Managerial Grid, they work with the same underlying logic.

Style Matters Expanded is for settings where people come from diverse backgrounds that include collectivist cultures (African American, Latin, Asian, indigenous cultures). People from these backgrounds instinctively pay attention to rank and role in determining their response to conflict. The Expanded version recognizes this reality and gives people one set of scores for Intimate settings and another for Public settings. In each setting they get scores for Calm and Storm (so if you work with both Intimate and Public settings, there are four sets of scores altogether).

Obviously the Expanded version is more complex, but it is not as complex as it sounds. More on that later.

You can easily ignore the cultural element of the Expanded version and use it as a Basic version if you wish. Instruct users to only take the test once (rather than twice as the instructions on page 2 say) and in your interpretation work only with the numbers in the “Intimate Settings” chart on page seven.

Why bother with the full Expanded version with its separate scores for Intimate and Public? For some users it is definitely valuable. For example, people from both individualistic and collectivistic backgrounds who spend a lot of time in institutional roles and group settings benefit from having both sets of scores.

People from “high-context” collectivist cultures (that is, cultures where someone of lower status determined by age, education, wealth, position is always expected to defer to someone of higher status or age) are likely to find the inventory more realistic to reality as they know it. The reality for people in these settings is that context (particularly roles and the relative status of the people involved) has a huge impact on how they respond to conflict. Their response to conflict will probably vary a lot depending on where they are and with whom they interact.

Here’s a summary of the differences between working with the Basic versus the Expanded approach:

Users can take and score the Basic inventory in 10-15 minutes. The Expanded takes 20-30 minutes.
The Basic has only one set of scores to consider and this makes it a little easier to do interpretation. However, working with two sets in the Expanded is not all that complex. I deal with it by ignoring the scores for Public Settings as I do the first part of interpretation. I explain the inventory and do exercises having people interact with their numbers in reference only to their scores for Intimate Settings. Getting a sense of the basic logic of the inventory, after all, is the primary learning challenge for people new to the inventory.
Only after people have worked with the numbers for Intimate Settings and gotten comfortable with the basic framework do I then bring in discussion about the numbers for Public Settings. Having already mastered the basic logic of the inventory and its five styles , people can quite easily understand how the Public Settings numbers relate to the Intimate Setting numbers. If time is short, I just point out the difference between the two scores and invite people to reflect on them. But if there is time, it is great to put people in small groups to discuss the two sets of numbers with others and reflect on their functioning in group/public settings.

Getting Started

Introductory comments (some ideas of what to say in getting the workshop started)

The bad news about conflict is that we can’t escape it. Conflict is a part of all human relationships. Yet we don’t teach how to deal with conflict. How many of you have had a course in conflict resolution? How many parents/couples get training in dealing with conflict? Teachers? Administrators? Religious leaders? Generally none.
The good news is very little growth and change takes place without conflict, and that it is not difficult to teach/learn basics about conflict that make a real difference. This conflict style inventory is a simple tool that teaches basic strategies. Millions of people have found inventories like this one a useful roadmap for thinking about conflict.

Administering the Inventory

Pass out the booklets. Suggested comments:

This is not a “test”. There are no right/wrong answers. Every person answers the questions differently.
What you get at the end is a set of scores that gives you a picture of yourself and your response to conflict. Is it an accurate picture? You decide. This is not a perfect measure of you.
The point is not the numbers but rather to give you a tool to start thinking about yourself.

Clear instructions are given on page one. Ask them to read them and begin.
Give the group about 15 minutes for the Basic version and 25-30 minutes for the Expanded version to take the inventory and score it. Clear instructions are given for self-scoring. As people begin finishing, have them read the instructions and fill in the numbers on pages 7 and 8.

Interpreting the Inventory

Now, the fun part!
Everyone take a look at the diagram on page 10.

Explain the Diagram

In any situation of conflict, there are two things going on.
One is that people have an agenda, their own goals or expectations. Sometimes we don't care very much whether our own agenda is met and we are not assertive about it. But sometimes we care a lot and are very assertive. The vertical axis, on the left side of the diagram, shows this, ranging from low to high commitment to one's own agenda.

A second thing that is going on in any conflict is that there is a relationship of some kind. Sometimes we are very committed to that relationship and our response communicates that to others. Sometimes we are not very committed to that relationship, or at least in that moment we feel and act as though we don’t care. On the diagram, the relationship is charted on a horizontal line, showing that we may have a low focus on the relationship or a high focus.

If we put these two dynamics together in a diagram, we can identify five different styles of responding to conflict. Notice in the diagram how the styles differ according to whether we emphasize our own agenda or the relationship.

Each style has strengths and weaknesses. We manage conflict well when we are able to use each style well. The goal is flexibility so that we can use each style appropriately.

Here's the problem: many of us learn to rely on one or two styles and use it too much. For example, in a family, big brother learns that conflict is no problem – he just uses a Directing style and little brother falls into line. It works great – until big brother gets married to a woman who doesn’t Harmonize like little brother did. She wants to use a Cooperative style to work out differences and she gets really angry when big brother always insists on things his way. Now he’s in a life crisis! Can he adapt and learn to use other styles well?

A Quick Intro to Each Style

Working off the diagram on page 10, make a few comments about each style, highlighting the emphasis of each. Suggested order for going through the styles: Directing > Harmonizing > Avoiding > Cooperating > Compromising.

People need to hear/feel the tone of each style to really grasp it. Reading the sample quotes for each style with proper expression does that to some extent.

An alternative is to talk about a simple conflict like two partners trying to decide what to do on a Friday night.   As you describe the Directing style, cite such an example, and show what it would sound like if someone is using Directing style. Something like, “We’re going to go to a movie. You say walk in the park? Don’t be stupid!” Point out that the personal agenda of the Director is prominent and no sense of commitment to the relationship comes through.

Harmonizing in this example might sound like, “Oh, whatever, I just want to be with you…..”

For Avoiding, I often ask the group what an Avoiding response might be, and they usually correctly guess that there’d be no discussion, or just a few mutters but no real discussion.

Cooperating: “There’s a new movie in town that I’d really like to see.   I’d love to go with you.   But I want to do something we’re both happy with.   What were you thinking about for tonight?”

Compromising: “I thought about seeing that new movie, but I guess mainly I want to do something that helps me forget the week. You want to stay home? Ok, how about if we rent a video…..

Another alternative to help people get a feel for the styles: Prepare in advance to have two people do a 60 second demo roleplay after you introduce two styles. Eg:

after you’ve introduced Directing and Harmonizing, have two people demonstrate the use of these two styles in a two minute conversation with each other.
Avoiding is so obvious it hardly requires a demo. Maybe sitting alone doing their own thing.
Introduce Cooperating and do a demonstration of Cooperating and Harmonizing (perhaps noting that Cooperators tend to get uncomfortable when someone is overly Harmonizing because the assertiveness of the Cooperator appears to be Directing even though this is not intended.)
Introduce Compromising and then perhaps do a demo showing Compromising and Directing interacting …..

Scoring

Suggested strategy for interpretation: Begin by taking the group to page 7 and look at the numbers at the bottom of the page. First…..

Explain difference between Calm and Storm.

Calm conditions

our response when we first realize there are differences.
We are not yet upset or anxious; it is just our natural response.
It is what we use for day-to-day decision-making and problem-solving that has not stirred emotions strongly.

Storm conditions

after we’ve made some effort to resolve things without success.
emotions have risen; we are anxious, upset, worried, etc.

Some people stay the same in Calm and Storm. But some people have sharp differences between the two. For example: a Directing person who in Calm conditions is very assertive might suddenly go quiet, or back off and say, “Well, if you feel that strongly about it, let’s do it your way…..” This would be a Storm shift from Directing to Harmonizing.

Or, it can go the other direction. A Harmonizer who in Calm is easy-going might suddenly turn sharp and angry: “Look, I’ve had enough of this. I insist that…..” This would reflect a Storm shift into Directing.

People who show little difference in Calm and Storm are usually perceived as steady and predictable. People who have a sharp contrast between the two may surprise or alarm others and themselves. It is important to be self-aware if we have a sharp shift in styles so we can manage our response better.

Interpreting Specific Scores

Work first with Calm scores.
(If time is very short, you might want to go straight to Storm scores, since these are the Storm styles are what we are likely to be use when we are stressed and not at our best. These are the responses most likely to get us into difficulty)

Tell people to look at their numbers in Calm on the bottom of page 7. They should note which style is their preferred style, ie: their highest score. This is the style they are likely to use when things are “normal”. It is like “everyday clothes”, familiar and relaxed. Have them go to the page that explains more about their preferred style and read quietly for a minute or two about it (pp11-13).

At this point give people a chance to begin processing their scores with others. Options:
Option A: Mixed Groups
You could have people talk in groups of threes with whomever is close by.
a) Have each person share with their partners which styles they scored highest in in Calm conditions. Using pp 11-13, they should make some comments on that style. Do they recognize some of the costs and benefits of that style in their own relationships? Give at least 10 minutes for this.
b) Now instruct them to share the style they scored lowest in. Do they recognize that they miss some of the benefits of this style (since they seem not to use it very much)

Option B: Same-Style Groups
You could have people gather in groups of the same style. Directors in one group, Avoiders in another, etc. Keep the groups small, 3-4 in each, so everyone has a chance to talk. They can just find others of that style or if the total group is small, you can designate a spot for each style. Instructions: Using pp. 11-13, each person should comment about whether they recognize this style in their behavior and whether they recognize some of the costs and benefits of that style in their own relationships. This will take at least 3 minutes per person in the groups.

Look at Storm.
Now give people a chance to get acquainted with their Storm scores.
If you used the Mixed Group approach above they can stay in the same small groups, and use the same instructions as in first round of discussion.

If you used the Same-Style Groups you will need to form new groups. Again, they should go to the group that is their highest score in Storm. If their highest Storm style is the same as their highest Calm style you can give them the option of going to their second highest Storm style (so they get to explore another style). Alternatively they could go to a newly formed group for people who have the same style in Calm and Storm. The instructions are the same as in Option B.

Commenting on Scores

Somewhere in here I usually make a point of asking several people to volunteer to call out their scores. Watching the trainer reflect on the numbers seems to help people to do the same for themselves. I do this for either Intimate or Public Setting scores but not both, as it gets unwieldy and time-consuming. Unless someone prefers to give Public Setting Scores for comment, I prefer Intimate Setting Scores as I think these come closer to automatic, deep-rooted patterns.

I list the scores on the board (basically replicating the chart at bottom of page 7) and comment. Some suggestions:

It is generally pretty easy to see which style or styles are most preferred and least preferred.
Begin by highlighting the strengths of the preferred style or styles in Calm conditions. Empowerment is always the place to begin! You can have the whole group turn to the pages that show strengths and weaknesses of each style. Comment on the things that people who score high in this style usually do well. Then you might wish to note the dangers that people who use this style need to be alert to (costs of over-use).
If there is quite a strong preference for a style (I consider 2-3 points above other styles to be a rather clear preference and and more than that a strong preference), you might note that with a strong preference for a given style the odds are rather high that such a person will tend to over-use the style. Review the costs of over-use of the style and encourage the person to think about whether they see any signs of these in their own relationships.
If there is a style or styles that are quite low, you might encourage the person to explore that style more, and try to get more comfortable with it.
If the numbers are quite even, it is a “flat profile”. Point out that this is viewed as desirable, as it indicates flexibility. The one disadvantage is that others may experience you as unpredictable. They never know which style you will use!
After commenting on Calm scores, I turn to Storm scores. It is particularly interesting to note which direction people go – towards relationship or towards task/agenda. If people stay pretty much the same in Calm and Storm, it is more likely that they will over-use their preferred style. Encourage such people to think carefully about the "costs of over-use" listed with each style.
I try to phrase comments along the lines of “people with this style preference often ….”, rather than “you are …..” Trainers facilitate reflection, we do not do astrology!
If someone is not certain how they function, you might encourage them to ask people who know them well. A style inventory is a really great tool to invite and assist honest, non-anxious conversation about how someone functions.
A sidenote following from the above point: The most thorough approach to getting feedback (for settings where someone repeatedly gets into difficulties interpersonally) is to give copies of the inventory to several people who know the target person well. Ask them to fill out the inventory with them (the target person) in mind. These numbers are then brought together for reflection by the target person, perhaps in conversation with a colleague or supervisor. This is called a "360", for it gives feedback from all sides. This should never be done covertly. Ie: the target person should do this themselves (ie: passing out the inventories) or at least be in open conversation with a supervisor or colleague while setting this up.
I like to ask people with whom I make interpretive comment whether they think the interpretation fits. The user always gets the last word!
Encourage people to take the numbers lightly. No test is perfect. And besides, no human being is set in stone. Really, the purpose of this inventory is not to give anyone a number. It is to give people a tool to think about themselves and others and their choices. The numbers give you something to think about, but what matters is what you do tomorrow, not yesterday, not how your numbers came out.

Making Good Style Choices

Pages 14-16 give useful information about when and when not to use each style. It is important as a trainer to nurture a sense of respect for each style. There is a tendency in groups, for example, to belittle the nasty Lion (Director) or the pokey Turtle (Avoider) These two styles when used excessively have the most obvious flaws of all the style. However, every style really is necessary for successful human relationships.

As a parent, if my 4 year old is running towards a busy street, the only loving response is a Directing one. It would be absurd to Avoid, Harmonize, or even Cooperate. When a ship is sinking, we don’t want a captain who gathers the crew and says, let’s negotiate….. In emergencies, we need someone to take charge. This is why military and police structures are set up on very hierarchical structures. They exist to function in emergencies.

But on other hand, every style has serious flaws if over-used. For example, Cooperating sounds wonderful. It is wonderful in the right place and time. But people who insist on a Cooperating style all the time get burned out. Too many meetings, too much talk, too much time wasted on trivial issues, etc. There are many issues that aren't worth the time and energy to do a full-fledged cooperative conversation. Burger King vs. McDonald's for lunch? Just flip a coin. Or just smile and harmonize. Hey, avoiding won't be bad either with those two as the options! Just go for a walk and get some fresh air and fruit at the grocery....

The challenge is for all of us to get good at all of the styles.

How to work with this section? Options:

You can always do a lecture/walk through of these pages. If there’s time, you could ask people to call out examples with each style from their own lives of appropriate/inappropriate use.
You could bundle this section in with the previous section. That is, when people are in small groups, you could ask them to use pp 14-16 as a resource in looking at their own styles.
You could have another round of small group discussion focused specifically on appropriate choice of styles. Have people share in small groups on: "A time when I used a style inappropriately." Encourage them to make reference to info on pp14-16 as they do this. Or in an appreciative tone, you could have them share on: "A style I am particularly good at; an example of a time when it worked well for me; why this style was appropriate."

Hot Tips

This is probably the most rewarding and empowering part of the inventory. The tips are detailed and people find them fascinating. Note: the tips are written to help a reader see how to bring out the best in others. But of course, a reader can learn a lot about what he or she actually needs to function well themselves. Options for this section:

As always, you can simply review it orally with the group. If you keep things moving you can review key hot tips for all five styles in 10 minutes or so.
This section is clear and self-explanatory, and I like to have people interact with it on their own steam. A good option is to have each person find one or two other people with different styles. In this small group, each person goes through the hot tips for their own preferred style with the others in the small group and comments. Eg: “yes, the first hot tip would really work if you tried it on me. The second, not so well……”
A variation on the above is to have people who work together in normal life do this in pairs or teams. They sit in a circle (assuming it is a team) and each person uses this section to make some comments about self. “I am high in Directing and Cooperating. Here are a couple tips you should know about me that would really help me if you get in a conflict with me…..
You can form style caucus groups (one group is Directing, another Harmonizing, etc.). Give the groups 15 minutes to discuss the hot tips and then give a reportback to the large group. “These are things we really want the rest of you to know about our style….”

What I like about this section is that people will tell you the next time they see you about how a tip they got in this section helped them get through a conflict with someone....

Intimate versus Public Setting Scores

After doing all the above is when I prefer to devote a bit of time to the difference between these two sets of scores. By now people have really “gotten” the framework and it is not difficult to grasp the additional information that some of us respond differently in some settings than in others. Options to work with this section:

Put people in small groups and have them share both sets of numbers. If the numbers are pretty different, invite them to reflect on why. What factors cause them to choose the differing responses?
If the group is culturally diverse, this is a great opportunity for people from high-context collectivist cultures to share a bit about the expectations for dealing with conflict within their own culture. What do they like about these patterns? What is difficult? What does it feel like to move back and forth between collectivist and individualist cultures?

Closing

Often time is so short that I don’t get to do any of the following! But if you have time….

Exercise number 7 on page 21 is an empowering way to end.

You could have people write a memo of advice to themselves. What are the things they want to work on in the coming month? Be specific, when, where, how….

You could do a closing circle. Stand in a large circle (or several smaller ones). Go around the circle and invite each person to share one thing they will take away from this workshop.

Go to home page of Style Matters
Compare Style Matters with the Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument
Free Trainer's Guide for Style Matters