The conflict situation I encountered involves a professional disagreement with a vendor who requested a

second deadline extension for a network infrastructure project with the Addis Ababa innovation Technology
development bureau. This situation can be analyzed using the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument
(TKI), which identifies five conflict-handling styles: competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and
accommodating.

The causes of this conflict may include differing opinions on project timelines, miscommunication, or unclear
expectations. To minimize relationship conflict while addressing task-related issues, Me and my team mates
could have employed the following strategies:

1. Collaborating: Work together with the vendor to find a mutually beneficial solution that meets both parties'
(my bureau’s and company’s) needs. This approach encourages open communication, active listening, and
brainstorming creative solutions.
2. Compromising: Find a middle ground where both parties (my bureau and the contractor) make concessions
to reach an agreement. This style is useful when time is of the essence, and a quick resolution is needed.
3. Accommodating: Me and my team mates try to analyze vendor's request is weather reasonable or not and
for the best interest of the project, then we decided to consider accommodating their needs. This approach
prioritizes relationship maintenance over task completion.

In this scenario, collaborating and compromising would have been the most effective strategies, as we promote
open communication and mutual understanding. By working together, we and the vendor could have found a
solution that respects both parties' interests and maintains a positive working relationship.
The application of different conflict-handling styles could have significantly influenced the resolution process.
For instance, if we had used a competing style, the conflict might have escalated, leading to a more adversarial
relationship. On the other hand, if we had accommodated the vendor's request without considering the project's
impact, this could have set a precedent for future extensions, potentially leading to project delays and increased
costs.
Conflict can have both positive and negative consequences. In this scenario, the positive outcomes include
improved communication, increased understanding of each other's perspectives, and the development of
creative solutions. The negative consequences might include temporary tension, potential delays in the project,
and increased costs.
Ethical considerations during the conflict resolution process include being transparent about project
expectations, demonstrating respect for the vendor's perspective, and making decisions that are in the best
interest of the project and the organization. It is essential to maintain open communication, ensure fairness, and
avoid taking advantage of the vendor's situation. By handling the conflict ethically, we can strengthen the
relationship and build trust, leading to a more successful project outcome.

Reference

1. Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (1974). Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)
2. Kilmann, R. H., & Thomas, K. W. (1974). Developing a Forced-Choice Measure of Conflict-
Handling Behavior: The “Mode” Instrument .
3. Kilmann, R. H., & Thomas, K. W. (2018). Technical Brief for the THOMAS-KILMANN
CONFLICT MODE INSTRUMENT .