Security guards play an important role in maintaining safety, enforcing policies and managing conflict in a variety of settings. Dealing with conflict is an unavoidable part of the job, whether it means dealing with an aggressive shoplifter, de-escalating a confrontation between customers, or mediating disagreements between employees or management.
The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) identifies 5 distinct modes, or methods, of dealing with conflict. While we all utilize a combination of all of them, each of us are more dominant in one particular mode. To be effective at conflict management, security guards need to understand how to approach different types of conflicts in a way that aligns with legal guidelines, their employer’s policies, and de-escalation best practices. Understanding the TKI can help security guards to assess and improve their conflict resolution strategies.
This post will explain what the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) is, outline its five conflict-handling styles, and demonstrate how security guards can apply this knowledge to real-world situations.
What is the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)?
The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) is a well known and widely used framework for understanding how people handle conflict. Developed by Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph H. Kilmann, it categorizes conflict resolution into five categories, based on two dimensions.
The Two Dimensions
- Assertiveness: The extent to which a person tries to satisfy their own needs and interests.
- Cooperativeness: The extent to which a person tries to satisfy the needs and interests of others.
The Five Conflict-Handling Modes
- Competing (High Assertiveness, Low Cooperativeness): A win-lose approach where one party pursues their own interests at the expense of others.
- Collaborating (High Assertiveness, High Cooperativeness): A win-win approach that seeks mutually beneficial solutions.
- Compromising (Moderate Assertiveness, Moderate Cooperativeness): A balanced approach where both parties give up something in order to reach an agreement.
- Avoiding (Low Assertiveness, Low Cooperativeness): A withdrawal approach where the conflict is sidestepped or ignored.
- Accommodating (Low Assertiveness, High Cooperativeness): A lose-win approach where one party gives in to maintain harmony.
Security guards can benefit by recognizing the mode being utilized by the parties, as well as when they should use each mode based on the situation. Let’s take a look at some examples of how each conflict mode can be used in a security role.
Applying the TKI Conflict Modes in a Security Role
Competing (High Assertiveness, Low Cooperativeness)
This approach is most suitable for situations where a security guard must take control of the situation quickly and enforce rules, either to prevent harm or enforce legal/policy obligations.
Example: Dealing with an Aggressive Shoplifter
Imagine a retail security guard observes a shoplifter exit the store without paying. When confronted, the shoplifter becomes aggressive and tries to push his way past the security guard.
- To manage this situation, the security guard must assert authority and take control of the situation. Depending on store policy, this may mean arresting and detaining the shoplifter.
- In this situation, there is little room for cooperation, given the safety and legal enforcement required.
- With the objective of thwarting the theft, the security guard should use clear verbal commands, maintain a defensive position, and if necessary (and authorized), use reasonable force to take the shoplifter into custody and/or prevent harm.
While this competing mode is crucial for high-risk situations, it should not be the default approach for addressing every conflict. Doing so can lead to a pattern of unnecessary hostility.
Collaborating (High Assertiveness, High Cooperativeness)
Collaboration is ideal for finding long-term solutions to conflict where all parties have valid concerns.
Example: A Dispute Between Employees
A corporate security guard is called to intervene in a heated dispute between two employees over several workplace issues.
- Rather than taking sides or blindly enforcing a particular rule, the security guard can encourage open discussion of the issues. When each employee is given an opportunity to state their perspective, mutually beneficial solutions often present themselves.
- By remaining neutral and listening actively, the security guard can help facilitate a problem solving discussion where potential solutions are explored together. This can lead to a win-win outcome.
This approach builds trust and rapport between security and the employees, and can help frame them as problem solvers rather than just enforcers.
Compromising (Moderate Assertiveness, Moderate Cooperativeness)
Compromise is a useful strategy when both parties must make concessions to resolve a dispute.
Example: Handling a Noise Complaint
A security guard in a residential building responds to a noise complaint relating to a party in one of the units. The resident hosting the party says that they have the right to enjoy their space, while the complaining resident says that they have the right to enjoy their living space in relative peace and quiet.
- The security guard validates both party’s perspectives and then seeks a compromise by suggesting that the party host reduce the volume by a certain time, or relocate the party to the common room in the lobby.
- This approach allows both residents to feel heard and validated, while ensuring compliance with building policies.
Compromise is effective when all parties to a dispute are willing to give a little to get a little. It is less effective when strict enforcement of the rules are required.
Avoiding (Low Assertiveness, Low Cooperativeness)
Avoidance can be a useful strategy when direct intervention isn’t necessary, or may inflame the situation, or when tempers are raised and time is needed to cool down.
Example: A Dispute Over a Parking Space
A mall security guard observes two individuals arguing loudly over a parking space. While the argument is heated, no laws or rules have been broken.
- Rather than immediately stepping in, the security guard radios for assistance and monitors the situation from a distance.
- If the argument escalates into threats or physical aggression, the security guard is ready to intervene.
- However, once each party has vented their frustration and opinions to one another, they part ways and the situation resolves itself.
Avoidance should not be used in situations where safety is at risk, but can be useful when observing situations with a high likelihood of resolving on their own.
Accommodating (Low Assertiveness, High Cooperativeness)
Accommodating is most suitable for situations where maintaining peace is more important than getting your way.
Example: De-Escalating an Angry Customer
A frustrated customer begins yelling at store employees because an item they want is out of stock. Security is called to intervene.
- Rather than risk an escalation by strictly enforcing store policies around abuse of staff, the security guard acknowledges the customer’s frustrations and shows empathy.
- The security guard then offers information such as restocking timelines, and alternatives such as similar in-stock items, effectively defusing tension and making the customer feel heard and supported.
Accommodating is an effective strategy when there is no serious safety or security threat. For many retail businesses, excellent customer service is a priority for maintaining good relationships with their customers.
Conclusion: Choosing the Right Conflict Mode
Understanding the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument helps security guards develop their situational awareness and assessment skills. This helps them to quickly adapt their conflict resolution strategies based on the circumstances of the situation.
- Competing is necessary for enforcing rules and laws, and when safety is an immediate concern.
- Collaborating is valuable for finding mutually agreeable solutions to complex issues requiring long-term solutions.
- Compromising is helpful when solutions need to be found quickly, and all parties are willing to give a little to make it happen.
- Avoiding can be appropriate when the conflicts are minor, or likely to resolve themselves quickly.
- Accommodating is preferred when maintaining relationships and goodwill are more important than winning the dispute.
By becoming competent in adopting these conflict modes, security guards can enhance their professionalism, improve outcomes, and ensure safety for the people they serve and protect. Ensure you start your career right by completing our online Security Guard training course.