When to use avoidance

Conflict style matters, part 3

Over the last couple of months we have looked briefly at the first two of five common ways we react when others can’t see we are right: being Assertive / Directive and Harmonising / Accommodating. Like all the five methods, each of these can work really well some times, not so well other times and overuse of any one technique can be disastrous for relationships. The skill lies in knowing which tool to use when.

The third one to consider is Avoiding or Deflecting. We tend to use this strategy when neither the dispute nor the relationship is top priority. Any parent will be familiar the inscrutable young family member who withdraws (suppressing emotion) or diverts attention. (S)he may assumes a poker face when confronted with an issue the parent really wants to “discuss”. The person employing this tactic may draw power from aloofness, and the benefits are obvious: it brings freedom from entanglement in what are seen as trivial or irrelevant issues. It also successfully blocks others without actually manifesting negativity. Silence is seen as golden by the user. In short, it has a lot going for it so it is no wonder it is so commonly employed not only at work, but in families too: frequently by teenagers, and sometimes by spouses!

Over use can lead to periodic explosions of pent up anger and frustration. Habitual, or continual use leads to a slow death of the relationship as interest and energy decline on both sides. There is a loss of engagement and accountability, leaving only a residue of bad feeling.

So if you are facing a dispute, when is a good time to select this method to responding? It works well if the issue is trivial and you don’t care about the relationship. Or when there isn’t time to discuss it on the spot and there is no harm in postponing the discussion. And, for any school age readers in particular: a skilful deflection works wonders if it is not safe to openly resist but you don’t want to actively go along with what is being proposed. “Deflection” might be as simple as responding to an aggressive approach or question with a mild question about something completely different. “Who’s that behind you?” is an obvious example, but I’m sure you can do a lot better.

And when is it not so useful? If you care about the issue and the relationship, sitting on it for too long will likely lead to an explosion. Also not useful when the other person would benefit from having a constructive confrontation (yes, there is such a thing). And finally, not a good idea if you are in a role that requires you to take a stand – even if you would prefer not to.

And if none of these apply, maybe one of the other techniques would be a better choice, so watch out next month for a brief discussion of compromise: when is this the best approach and when is it a really bad idea?

Previous ……….. Next