Conflict resolution practices are quite important for sustainable development growth in any organization. To realize this, there are five negotiator styles, which are commonly used in buffering the interaction of the mediator and conflicting parties. The first style is the attack style, which serves to win (Charles, 2003). This style is mainly employed by aggressive negotiators with the sole aim of negating the view of the opposing parties as a way of ensuring victory for their client in the conflict.
Here the negotiator can use threats, insults, and even corrupt information so as to press for a one-sided bargaining. Another negotiator style is employing appeasement. These types of negotiators are out to strike a fair and just agreement (Charles, 2003). This is the negotiation style employed in resolving conflicts involving equally aggressive parties. Such are closely attributed to the fact these parties can only realize a solution to the problem by compromising part of their individual demands.
To achieve this form of style, the process is marked with taking of realistic position and the free sharing of necessary information between the conflicting parties. Just to be appreciated that such a negotiator might engage in one-sided decision making, but are usually open to get a feedback from the opposing party. Avoiding the conflict causing problem is also a negotiator style (Charles, 2003). According to available information, this style involves the negotiator aiming to win but with uncertainty.
They are simply seeking a solution, thus mitigating their chances of loosing in the conflict negotiation process. In this style, the negotiator engages in practices like hiding or delaying the negotiation process due to fear of losing in the process. Such are also aimed at allowing the opponents to cool their tempers, a factor that greatly influences the potential realization of a smooth negotiation or a give up by the opponent. A negotiator can employ displacing of analyzing style to the conflict causing problem. In this style, the negotiator strives to get a clear understanding of the problem (Charles, 2003).
Such a process is commonly conducted in absence of the conflicting parties. This technique is mostly employed when the negotiator cannot trust the information given by the conflicting parties whether cooperative or not. The negotiator thus strives to employ objective criteria to ensure they have many options to a sustainable solution. The last negotiator style is seeking for the ultimate truth behind the conflict. For these negotiators, the sole aim is to identify justice regardless of the human factors influencing the conflict (Charles, 2003).
Here, the negotiator has a single truth on the conflict which guides their behavior and decision not withstanding any rational considerations that might be argued for or against their stand. The negotiator is usually marked with sincerity and dedication. However, their stands in the conflict are quite inflexible and ideal. In my opinion, the most effective negotiator style is the employing appeasement. The aim of a conflict resolution process is to ensure that both parties are given a fair and just treatment. This is quite important in the realization of sustainable conflict solutions.
Therefore, to ensure that both parties accept and appreciate the mediation process, the negotiator should engage the conflicting parties in striking a compromise between their individual demands. This does not only hasten the negotiation process but also mitigates potential breaking of the negotiation agreement after the process. Such is the only style which respects the right of expression of the parties involved in the conflict resolution process. References Charles, C. (2003). Negotiation Styles: The Impact on Bargaining Transactions. Retrieved May 18, 2010, from http://findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_qa3923/is_200302/ai_n9224490/