What Is Manifest Conflict

The stage of manifest conflict occurs when the two parties engage in behaviors that elicit responses from one another. Open aggressiveness, apathy, sabotage, retreat, and faultless conformity to norms are the most visible of these responses.

What is latent and manifest conflict?

Recognizing and addressing issues that generate conflict will usually result in a quick and efficient resolution. The issue is that answers aren't always straightforward. Conflict can flare up when both sides believe they have been wronged and expect their demands to be satisfied. Conflict erupts in a variety of places. The workplace is the most common site where the five stages of conflict can be seen. In the majority of situations, neither side wants to be there in the first place, and this period of increased stress is conducive to confrontation. You can take lessons in workplace conflict resolution to learn more about workplace conflict and how to resolve it. If one expects to resolve conflict quickly and efficiently, it is necessary to understand conflict on a psychological level. Early in the latency stage, one side, usually the less fortunate or aggrieved, is usually aware of conflict. Because conflict-starting events have no negative consequences, the more privileged side is frequently unaware that conflict occurs. The latent stage is perilous because the other stages might often present themselves all at once in a whirlwind of emotion and passion due to the extra stress. As a result, it's critical to spot indicators of conflict as soon as possible so that they can be resolved. People must be democratic, openly discussing their differences of opinion without fear of misunderstandings. Conflict can progress from latent to “manifest,” “erupted,” or “emerging” stages if problems are not resolved.

When latent conflict continues to grow until a triggering event occurs, emergent conflict arises.

This triggering event might induce an eruption that lasts for a short time or for a long time, depending on how severe it is.

Once a disagreement arises, it either resolves itself or grows until a stalemate is achieved or someone concedes.

Conflict can escalate for a long time, but it can also be resolved swiftly.

After a long period of dispute, players frequently reach a stalemate: a scenario in which neither side can win, but neither side wants to concede or accept defeat. Stalemates can occur for a variety of causes, including ineffective tactics, a lack of accessible resources to fuel the conflict, or a decrease in support for the fight by one or more parties. In other circumstances, the disagreement has been simmering for so long that the triggering event almost always results in violence.

Negotiation has either been neglected or is something neither party understands at this time, it must be said.

You can learn negotiation and dispute resolution strategies from instructors who have spent their entire lives negotiating.

All persons who want to progress through the ranks of management should take negotiating classes.

You can get the promotion you want and build good relationships at work if you have a better understanding of bargaining and negotiation abilities.

Conflicts eventually reach a point of equilibrium, where neither side is coming any closer to accomplishing its objectives, and neither one is content with the situation. They know that the expenses of continuing to fight outweigh (and frequently vastly outweigh) the rewards received. This is characterized as the “mutually suffering stalemate,” and it is typically ripe for the introduction of settlement offers.

When the fuel is depleted, de-escalation is unavoidable.

Conflict cannot last eternally, and one side or the other will eventually give in so that a resolution can be reached.

Isn't it aggravating?

Argue, battle, and suffer until you or the other person decides to give up.

That does not appear to be a feasible method of conflict resolution.

Understanding effective negotiating techniques can help you resolve issues more quickly and in your advantage.

After de-escalation, the settlement, or resolution, phase occurs, in which the conflict's dominant party makes compromises to appease the non-dominant party.

To ensure that conflict does not resurface, it is necessary to make a small sacrifice.

When a quarrel is resolved, neither party is truly satisfied, yet neither is aggrieved.

The most crucial aspect of conflict resolution is ensuring that both parties can continue to work or live in peace.

If this is not possible, the disagreement has not been totally resolved.

Peace-building is the final step in the five-step conflict resolution process that can bring the process to a close. When there are only two persons involved in a quarrel, it is much easier to keep the peace as long as both parties follow the rules. It becomes more difficult with groups, but it is still possible with good, strong leadership and trust-building. Using intermediaries to monitor the parties and police the situation is the simplest way to create confidence. To function properly, it must be agreed upon and mutually enforced.

“How is it that humans are so prone to war?” one might wonder, given all of these options for resolving conflict and achieving peace.

The solution is straightforward.

People are either not well-versed enough in conflict resolution and negotiation to perceive conflict early enough, or they simply do not care.

Let's hope it's the first option.

Latent Stage

The possibility for confrontation characterizes the latent stage. Pondy discovered three fundamental categories of latent conflict in the present literature when he identified this stage.

• Participants' demand for resources exceeds available resources, resulting in competition for scarce resources.
• Autonomy Drives: One party wants control over an activity that another considers to be his or her own sphere.
• Subunit Goals Divergence: Two parties who must collaborate on a common activity cannot agree on what they should do.

There was something missing: role conflict. Someone getting mismatched role demands or expectations from others, according to Pondy. “The disadvantage of this paradigm is that it sees the focus person as a passive receiver rather than an active participant in the interaction,” he noted. In all three types of latent conflict, role conflict can play a role.

No one, not the participants, not the outsiders, can see the latent conflict conditions. It's also possible that the latent conflict will go on for a long period without progressing to the next stage, particularly in circumstances where conflict is purposefully avoided.

Perceived Stage

One or more parties become aware of actual disagreement during the perceived stage. It's worth noting that there could not be any latent conflict conditions present in the apparent stage. In that instance, resolving disagreement may be as simple as enhancing communication between the parties involved. One caveat is that if the parties' opinions are diametrically opposed, open communication might exacerbate the conflict.

The apparent stage of conflict, like latent conflict, can last for a long time. Parties may just adapt, for better or worse, if they do not feel the need to bring up minor disagreements.

Felt Stage

The felt stage of conflict focuses on the impact of emotions on the parties involved. In other words, two persons are aware that they are involved in a working conflict. Tension, stress, and worry are all exacerbated by it.

Those feelings were dubbed the “personalization of conflict” by Pondy. The end outcome is frequently a dysfunctional kind of conflict, which scholars and practitioners are concerned about. Why does this happen? One hypothesis is that anxiety is caused by the inconsistency of organizational and individual growth demands. A second reason is that the affected person's entire personality is affected.

Manifest

Conflict is out in the open in the manifest stage. In this stage, one approach to characterize conflict is behavior that disrupts the aims of another participant. In other words, one individual actively obstructs the achievement of another's purpose.

The nature of the disagreement can vary greatly. The most visible forms of open aggressiveness, such as physical and verbal violence, are prohibited by organizational rules, according to Pondy. Covert attempts to disrupt or obstruct the other person's plans are more common. Lower-level members, for example, may display apathy and strict devotion to the rules in order to avoid mistreatment from those higher up in the organization.

The majority of conflict resolution approaches focus on behavior that has progressed to the manifest stage. The behavior can transition directly from the perceived to the manifest stage, or from the felt to the manifest stage.

Aftermath

The consequence of a conflict incident is referred to as the aftermath, and it can be favorable or negative.

On the plus side, a true resolution might result in happy parties who are better able to collaborate. It's also possible that the aftermath of an episode will cause participants to focus on latent tensions that they haven't noticed or addressed before.

Conflict may be suppressed and not resolved on the negative side. This can lead to latent conflict conditions escalating and exploding in more dangerous forms. Either the problem is resolved or the partnership ends.

What are the types of conflict?

It takes two (or more) to tango, and it takes two (or more) to generate strife. What you select to pit your characters against will have a big impact on the story you end up telling. Many stories involve numerous sorts of conflict, but the major focus is usually on one.

1. Self vs. Character

This is an internal struggle, which means that the character is up against internal opposition. This could include a battle to determine what is the moral or “correct” choice, as well as mental health issues. All other kinds of conflict are external, which means that a character is pitted against an external force that causes the conflict.

2. Personality vs. Personality

This is a common sort of conflict in which one character's demands or desires collide with the needs or desires of another. A character conflict might be as simple as a fist fight or as complex and subtle as the ongoing power struggle in the HBO series Game of Thrones.

3. Nature vs. Character

A character is pitted against nature in a nature conflict. The weather, the wilderness, or a natural disaster are all examples of this. In Ernest Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea, for example, the main character, Santiago, finally catches a fish after months of horrible luck. He fights against sharks who try to steal his prized catch, but they eventually consume it, leaving Santiago with nothing but a carcass. The man vs nature fight boils down to this: man struggles with human emotions, while nature marches on unabated. Our comprehensive guide to the character vs. nature conflict may be found here.

4. Supernatural vs. Character

By pitting characters against supernatural beings like as ghosts, gods, or monsters, the stakes of a fight are raised. Supernatural conflict also refers to characters having a fate or destiny, such as Harry Potter or Odysseus, who struggle to accept the sacrifices that come with it. Our comprehensive guide to character vs. supernatural conflict may be found here.

5. Personality vs. Technology

In this example, a character is at odds with some sort of technological advancement. Consider the legend of African American folk hero John Henry. Henry was a former slave who worked as a steel-driver on the rail line, according to American mythology. He won a race against a steam-powered rock drilling machine to demonstrate his mastery over new technology. However, after winning the race, he suffered a heart attack. Our comprehensive guide to the character vs. technology conflict may be found here.

6. Personality vs. Society

A character vs. society conflict arises in literature when the protagonist is pitted against society, the government, or some cultural tradition or societal norm. A necessity to survive, a moral sense of right and wrong, or a yearning for happiness, freedom, justice, or love can all lead characters to act against their society. Our comprehensive guide to the character vs. society conflict may be found here.

What is a latent conflict?

When conflict experts enumerate the “stages of conflict,” the first phase is frequently referred to as “latent conflict” or “unstable peace.” It exists whenever individuals, groups, companies, or governments have disagreements that annoy one another but aren't significant enough to prompt one side to act.

What is conflict and process of conflict?

The conflict resolution process is made up of five processes that help organizations cope with friction, disagreement, issues, and fighting. Potential opposition or incompatibility, cognition and personalizing, intentions, behavior, and outcomes are the five phases.

What are the two stages in overcoming conflict?

The Five Steps to Resolving a Conflict

• Step 5: Come to an agreement. Courses, seminars, and workshops offered by the American Medical Association. Author Information (s)

How do you explain conflict resolution?

Conflict resolution is a process that allows two or more parties to work out a peaceful solution to a problem. The conflict could be personal, economical, political, or emotional in nature. When a conflict emerges, the best course of action is frequently to negotiate a solution.

What are the 5 conflict resolution strategies?

Conflict is an inevitable aspect of any job, yet it can lead to absenteeism, lost productivity, and mental health difficulties. Conflict, on the other hand, can be a motivation for new ideas and innovation, as well as enhanced flexibility and a better understanding of working relationships. Conflict, on the other hand, must be skillfully managed in order for organizations to succeed.

Understanding that each of us has our unique manner of coping with conflict is a key skill for today's working professionals. There are five basic styles of conflict management, according to the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI), which is used by human resource (HR) experts all over the world: collaborating, competing, avoiding, accommodating, and compromising.

Five Major Conflict Management Styles*

Knowing when and how to employ each style can assist manage conflict and create a better working environment, all of which contribute to a higher bottom line.

Collaborative Style: Combining assertiveness and cooperation, collaborators seek to work with others to find a solution that truly addresses everyone's concerns. This method, which is the polar opposite of avoidance, allows both parties to get what they want while minimizing bad feelings. “Collaboration works best when the long-term relationship and outcome are crucial,” Dr. Benoliel explains. “For example, planning to merge two departments into one, where you want the best of both in the newly created department.”

Competing Style: Competitors are outspoken and uncooperative, and they are eager to pursue their own objectives at the expense of others. Dr. Benoliel adds that this technique is effective when the relationship is unimportant but the outcome is critical, such as when competing for a new client with another company. “Do not use competition within your organization; it does not foster connections,” she warns.

Avoiding Confrontation Style: When diplomatically sidestepping an issue or just withdrawing from a frightening circumstance, those who avoid conflict tend to be unassertive and disagreeable. “Use this when it's safer to put off dealing with a situation or you don't care as much about the outcome, such as if you're having a disagreement with a coworker about using FaceTime at work.”

When adapting to satisfy the other person, there is an element of self-sacrifice, which is the polar opposite of competing. While it may appear to be generous, it may be exploiting the vulnerable and causing animosity. “You can utilize accommodating when you don't care about the outcome but want to maintain or strengthen the relationship,” Dr. Benoliel explains. “For example, going out to lunch with the boss and agreeing, ‘If you want to go for Thai food for lunch, that's OK with me.'”

Compromising Style: This approach seeks to create a quick, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties while preserving assertiveness and cooperation. “This method is excellent to utilize when the conclusion is not critical and you are wasting time,” Dr. Benoliel explains. “For example, when you just want to make a decision and move on to more important things and are prepared to sacrifice a little to get the decision made.” “However, be aware that no one is truly content,” she says.

“It's critical not to be fearful when conflict happens because there are things you can do to lessen conflict, such as becoming more trained and qualified by developing a repertoire of conflict-resolution strategies,” says Dr. Benoliel.

What are the 6 stages of conflict?

Six phases are identified by Alker, Gurr, and Rupesinghe: Conflict Stages: disagreement (similar to conflict emergence); crisis (equal to escalation);

What are the 3 stages of conflict?

The majority of disagreements are swiftly resolved. Some confrontations, on the other hand, intensify and take on a larger role in the lives of those involved. To better understand how disputes evolve over time, it's important to think of them as a succession of stages, each of which is defined by different aspects of the conflict and the circumstances around it.

In his book The Mediation Process, Christopher Moore identifies three stages of conflict.1 The involved parties' awareness and engagement in the dispute, how the conflict is being addressed, and the degree to which the conflict has escalated are all characteristics of each stage.

Underlying tensions experienced by one or both sides that have not matured into a clear dispute characterize this stage of conflict. Tensions arise from an issue that is not fully defined and is known by some, but not all, of the persons who will be affected by the situation and who will engage in the argument in latent conflicts. Woodstock, Vermont, for example, has severe zoning laws that are well-supported by the town's residents. A latent conflict might arise if a real estate corporation began pressing the city's planning commission for a new downtown development that would necessitate certain exceptions to planning rules. In this case, some people who will be involved in the disagreement are aware of the situation, but there is no complete characterization of the problem or identification of all parties.

Emergent Conflict: Most, if not all, of the points in contention have been specified, and the parties have been recognized and are aware of the conflict at this level. Despite the fact that the issue has been characterized, conflicts in the emerging stage lack a clear resolution procedure and, as a result, have the potential to escalate further. A budget disagreement between an organization's finance and operations divisions is an example of a growing conflict. The problem is specified in this case, and the persons who are affected by it have been identified, but no mechanism for fixing the problem has been devised.

Manifest Conflict: An emergent conflict becomes manifest when it is not successfully addressed. This stage is characterised by a protracted conflict in which both parties engage in combative methods. The parties may have sought to negotiate their issue but came to a stalemate, or they may have never attempted to resolve it at all. The Northern Ireland Troubles, which lasted thirty years and saw the two main groups in Northern Ireland disputing the island's constitutional status, among other concerns, are an example of a manifest conflict. Over a thirty-year period, the Troubles were characterised by both regular violence (a divisive approach) and blocked discussions.

In The Third Side, William Ury employs a similar three-step paradigm to identify the stages of a conflict's development.

Latent tensions, overt conflict, and power struggles are among Ury's stages. The difference between Ury's and Moore's work is that Ury considers overt conflicts to be those that do not have the potential to cause widespread destruction, whereas Moore's definition of manifest conflict (the parallel between the two models) includes conflicts that include, but are not limited to, destructive, violent tactics.

• The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict, by Christopher Moore (Jossey-Bass Publishers, 2003)
• The Third Side: Why We Fight and How We Can Stop, by William Ury (Penguin Books, 2000)