Confronting Without Offending: Positive and Practical Steps to Resolving Conflict

In Luke 17:1, Jesus told his disciples that in any relationship, “It is impossible that no offenses should come.” 1 In Confronting Without Offending, Deborah Smith Pegues uses this biblical perspective to emphasize the essence of positive interpersonal communication strategies and their impact on human relations. Pegues uses the premise that when a miscommunication occurs, an offense is generated, and this offense has the potential to permanently breach any relationship. She calls this offense an entrapment, a sheet of delusion created by Satan in his attempt to sow discord between men. Therefore, the two groups created in an offensive situation: “those who have been treated unjustly” and “those who believe they have been treated unjustly” should emulate non-offending confrontation strategies to avoid exacerbating the negative energies that generated the offense in the first place.

Pegues differentiates the meaning of confrontation, which is “coming together face to face” to resolve an issue and retaliation. 2 Confrontation is not an admission of defeat, but the display of boldness in a situation that threatens peace. Jesus’ teaching against retaliation was “turning the other cheek,” a symbol of not returning the punishment, but letting it cool down and seeking an alternative resolution strategy. Pegues’ perspective of retaliation is that it is “ungodly” and denies one the opportunity to rebuke the evil action, by fueling it. On the other hand, Pegues encourages positive confrontation, describing it as a permissible godly act of addressing a conflict. According to Pegues, coming “face to face” with the offender is the first step in addressing a conflict. 3

Confrontation takes two forms: one in which we are the offender, and the other in which we are offended. In the case when we are the offender, the option is to humble ourselves and accept the imperfection in our deeds. In the instance when we are offended, we must employ the “David versus Saul” strategy, preserving respect for the offender and opening our hearts to their sincere approach to mend the harm done. Using the “Dictator” approach is not guaranteed to create harmony or mend the situation, and although there are instances when it may yield results, these situations are few, and thus, an exception, not a rule. The most commendable way is accommodating the needs of both parties, the offended and the offender. Pegues emphasizes that the focus should be on the future of our relationships, and we must not be consumed by the emotional responses of the instance.

Response

I agree with Pegues on the elaboration on the difference between obedience and submission and how they affect conflict resolution. Pegues notes that obedience is the “performance of a request but submission comes from the heart.” 4 Indeed, being obedient does not translate to submitting and following the will of the one in question wholeheartedly. On the other hand, submission translates to better fellowship, creates a good leader, and nurtures the right spirit and attitude for a positive interpersonal relationship within any social situation. I strongly agree with Pegues because I have witnessed and became part of a situation that showed great contrast in the success of a dictatorial leader who demanded obedience, and another team with a servant leader who led by example without sacrificing his position as the leader, and to great success.

During one instance during our class group work, we were divided into four teams of six. It was a social experiment to define which style of leadership yielded better results. In the four teams, each leader was given a manuscript of leadership that aligned with dictatorial, servant, democratic, and laissez-faire leadership styles. I was in a team where the leader was instructed to be a servant leader. On the other hand, we were assigned to note the success of the authoritative dictatorially-led team. The goal was for the leaders to coordinate each team to complete a group research project of identifying a vulnerable group within the community, visiting them, studying their challenges, and coming up with suggestions that can be implemented to provide long-term solutions to their issues. As expected, the dictatorial team that I was observing barely made a progress in identifying a vulnerable group because their leader assumed the command of choosing the group, and commanding the team to wait for his suggestion to proceed. As they obediently waited, two days elapsed. In these two days, our leader had allowed us to brainstorm on many options, and we had selected not one, but two vulnerable groups. This situation shows the difference in addressing a leadership situation and communication and the positive effects of each strategy.

Reflection

Pegues's analysis of confrontation is a great addition to the subject of confrontation and building interpersonal relationships. One of the areas of social significance that Pegues addresses are leadership. In her anecdotal example, she notes that sometimes, those who believe in dictatorial leadership use this tough stance to hide their vulnerabilities. She also comments that “in spite of the problems with the Dictator style of managing conflict, it can sometimes be the wisest option.” 5 She then proceeds to give the example of Jesus, who, in the moment of frustration, resorted to a hard stance and forcefully removed the traders who were violating the desecrated temple through business and ungodly deeds. However, Jesus was known as a servant leader, the epitome of godly leadership. My question thus is: how can leaders know what situations require a switch of their leadership strategies from their definitive styles to a more aggressive style that will produce better results? And when they have switched to this leadership style, for how long should they sustain it? I ask this second question because a democratic leader who may employ a dictatorial effort and witness the immediate success that it may bring may be tempted to sustain the dictatorial tendencies at the expense of their long-known democratic approaches.

I think the book would have been better and wholesome if Pegues elaborated more on leadership. Her inferences to conflict resolution in situations where there is power imbalance are many, yet, she chooses to examine personal relationships and familial conflict in the majority of the text. I feel that leader-servant conflict resolution is lacking proper address and thus, the book would be wholesome if it delved deeper into these elements.

Action

This book has informed my understanding of the value of the interpersonal relationship. The changes that I am going to make in my life are: first, I want to seek training on interpersonal communication to enhance my understanding of the essence of communication and conflict resolution, and secondly, I will start practicing positive confrontation techniques in all situations that offend me instead of being silent and hoping that time will resolve the differences.

My first approach in seeking training in communication strategies is informed by the revelations that I am relatively introverted and although I communicate more often, I do not summon my feelings to reflect on what I always want to say. I will therefore dedicate about six weeks to taking training in this area to enhance my communication skills. I also hope that this training will inform me about effective leadership communication techniques and how to communicate when I am a follower in a team, and when I am a leader.

My second action may not take a specific timeframe because it is an effort that I hope to apply throughout my life, but I hope that within the first six months of addressing issues and not postponing them, I will have nurtured better interpersonal relationships. I will measure this by evaluating the cases that were offending or offensive to me, and examining if I resolved them well and maintained a great relationship with the other parties, or if these confrontations did not lead to a peaceful resolution. My goal is to enhance my interpersonal relations and by the end of this year, become more agreeable, conscientious, and neurotic.

Reference

Pegues, Deborah Smith.  Confronting without offending: Positive and practical steps to resolving conflict . Harvest House Publishers, 2009.

"The Holy Bible." (2015).