“THERE WAS NEVER a major confrontation but things were in total upheaval. You could not work with this man. He did subtle things that made it impossible to move forward. It got to the point where it was unbearable. When you and another person are in a position where you just don’t have mutual respect and mutual trust over time you can barely work together because you are going nowhere and it is never going to change.”

Conflict consumes an enormous amount of time, energy, and money in organizations. The costs of conflict include low morale, high employee turnover, and loss of productive work time. Employees use more sick time, go to work late, or leave work early to avoid conflict. The personal costs of conflict often involve stress, damage to relationships, loss of sleep, and low motivation [Isenhart and Spangle 2000]. Conflict can be viewed as either constructive or destructive. While constructive conflict can promote growth, destructive conflict can lead to bad feelings, damaged relationships, depression, aggression, anxiety, and substance abuse [Deutsch 1991 and Frone 2000]. Historically, scholarship in the area of destructive conflict emerged from a legal rather than an empirical tradition. More recently, consumer empowerment and self-help movements have stimulated practitioners and researchers to look closely at the effects of conflict on mental health and to seek ways to minimize the effects of destructive conflict and maximize those of constructive conflict.

Destructive conflict can be traced to interpersonal communication difficulties. Conflict resolution depends on effective communication, and people often seek advice from friends and colleagues on how to deal with challenging relationships. These conversations frequently involve the parties sharing stories of frustration and helplessness about how to respond. Important questions for clinical inquiry or investigation are, “What do these experiences have in common,” and “Why do people come to an impasse?” Contemporary literature describes how to work with “difficult” people, but these works are limited in their usefulness when it comes to more complex, intractable or impossible situations. Tactics for dealing with difficult people suggest that a correct communication technique can solve most problems. Seminars on the topic of dealing with difficult people suggest that truly intractable situations are rare, and when encountered, individuals should either leave or move on. However, people who have experienced such a situation report these recommendations underestimate and oversimplify the complexity of their situations. In support of this assessment, clinical works in psychiatry suggest there are indeed intractable people who create intractable or seemingly impossible situations. It is a therapist’s role to help patients work through the underlying issues in such situations and eliminate the need for conflict [Strean 1998]. Intractable people infrequently seek mental health treatment, and if they do, the psychotherapeutic approach focuses on intrapersonal aspects. Such an approach has limited application for people outside the field of mental health. This study was designed to investigate the processes involved in understanding and responding to impossible situations and ultimately, to help people who are dealing with intractable individuals learn new ways of responding which will enhance their capacity for coping.

Enhancing these coping responses is extremely important for a number of reasons. First, many believe that conflict in our society is a major public health problem. Second, people have an aversion to addressing conflict until it reaches an intractable or impossible point. Third, we live in a culture with ongoing changes in organizations, communities, and families that have led to dramatic increases in conflict [Johnston and Klandermans 1995]. And fourth, if we do not learn new ways to address conflictual situations, conflict will escalate and can lead to aggression, violence and, loss of life.

Study purpose

The purpose of this grounded theory study was to explore the processes involved in intractable conflicts or “impossible situations” and to identify ways of responding that promote change and/or resolution. The term impossible situation was initially coined by a study participant and used over intractable to aid in participants’ understanding. Although the investigators were interested in all aspects of these situations, a subpurpose was to elicit descriptions of how participants recognized and responded to impossible situations at their workplace. Impossible situations were defined as, “reoccurring patterns of ineffective communication where conflicts are not resolved and issues build over time.”In addition, the person experiencing the impossible situation is overwhelmed by a sense of hopelessness and feels powerless to effect a change in their situation.

Method

This study used a grounded theory approach to guide data collection and analysis [Glaser and Strauss 1999. B.G. Glaser and A.L. Strauss. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine de Gruyter, New York (1999).Glaser and Strauss 1999]. Study participants’ experiences of being in an impossible situation were explored through an evolving interview guide. Questions were designed to construct an understanding of participants’ experiences in all aspects of destructive work situations, including their recognition and responses. Data were analyzed by the constant comparative method which involved comparing incidents applicable to each category, integrating categories, delimiting the theory, and writing the theory [Glaser 1992].

Setting and sample

To frame the context and boundaries on inquiry, interviews focused on impossible situations within the workplace using a snowball sampling methodology. This type of sampling is frequently used to study hidden populations, difficult-to-observe phenomena, and/or sensitive issues [Fauiger and Sargeant 1997]. Snowball sampling does not allow for the use of probability statistical methods, as elements included as a part of the sample are not randomly drawn. However, “without allowing people to speak freely we will never know what their real intentions are, and what the meaning of their words might be” [Back and Champion 1976]. Initially, the snowball sample was drawn from prior acquaintances of the investigators (a psychiatric nurse clinician and a psychiatric social worker) who had identified themselves as having been involved in impossible situations. As the interviews progressed, sampling moved from a nominated to a theoretical approach to more fully develop emerging categories until data saturation was achieved. Participants lived in Western, Midwestern, and Eastern regions of the United States and included 15 participants, seven women and eight men. The age range of participants was 29 to 64 years (M=49). Education ranged from a high school diploma to a graduate degree. The impossible situations encountered involved managers, colleagues, business associates, community members, and/or leaders.

Data collection

Before contacting potential participants the study was reviewed and approved by the university’s internal review board (IRB). After IRB approval, the principal investigator initially contacted acquaintances by telephone that had previously identified themselves as feeling as if they were in an impossible situation. The seven acquaintances that expressed an interest in participating in the study were scheduled for an interview, which was tape-recorded. Informed consent was obtained before the interview. Either the prinicipal investigator or research assistant conducted interviews. The semistructured interview guide was used to initiate discussion on issues related to the impossible situation, and participants were encouraged to add information not covered by the guide. The interviewers explored issues, clarified statements, and validated responses of the participants during the interview. The interview guide continued to evolve as more fully identified categories emerged that allowed the researcher to expand the research questions. This process led to more fully developed categories as both interviews and data analysis progressed.