Typical mistakes when using conflict management methods and techniques include:
The desire to resolve a confrontation without diagnosing and clarifying the reasons for its occurrence
Quite often, the administration does not try to understand the true reasons for the conflict of interests, but tries to simply extinguish the conflict on a personal level, having achieved verbal reconciliation of the parties. Such a policy will not give positive results for one simple reason - the opponents, who were essentially forced to interact with each other, will stumble upon the main problem every time and start a similar situation again.
Premature "freezing" of a conflict without clarifying its objective causes
Separating the opposing parties mom database and transferring them to other departments may provide a temporary respite in the development of the incident, but will in no way stop it. If the objective reasons for the conflict situation remain, then replacing employees will simply change the current composition, and the clash itself will continue.
Premature "freezing" of a confrontation is simply a short pause in its development; it will soon resume in an even more acute form. It is possible to "freeze" a conflict only if it has been completely resolved, or, for example, after the signing of a peace treaty between the parties.
The subject of the conflict and opponents are incorrectly defined
He who does nothing makes no mistakes. Even if the components of the conflict have been diagnosed, there is a possibility that the subject of the incident and its parties have been identified incorrectly. It happens that opponents who are actively acting actually act on the instructions of the main participants who, for some reason, have decided to remain in the shadows. To avoid such a mistake, the diagnosis should be carried out in as much detail as possible and the answer to the main question should be sought: who benefits from this?
Mistakes in Conflict Management
Delay in taking action
Even if the conflict was caused by objective reasons, sooner or later it will still move to interpersonal relations. If this indicator has acquired a chronic form, then no administrative decisions will be able to change it. The parties to the conflict will treat each other with hostility for a long time.
Lack of comprehensive measures – forceful or diplomatic
Experience shows that a combination of conflict management methods using stress with other measures to resolve the situation most effectively solves the task at hand and allows for the actualization of the opponents’ multi-level motives.
Poor choice of intermediary
The choice of a candidate to negotiate with both parties must be approached fairly carefully, there should be no accidents here. The mediator must be at an equal distance from either side. It is good if part of his biography intersects with each of the opponents, so that they consider him one of their own. Otherwise, the asymmetrical position of the mediator will reduce the opponent's trust in him