How your natural talents affect the way you engage in conflict: The Influencing Strengths

By Dries Lombaard; Director: Strategic Engagement - Strengths Institute South Africa

(This article is a follow-up on a previous post which you should read first as an introduction to the topic of "Conflict")


Continuing the topic of Conflict Management within ourselves and others, let us now take a look at the Influencing Strengths.  I intentionally use the image of American president Donald Trump with this article, as I have been studying him with interest for the past two years from a Strengths perspective.  As far as celebrities go, he is the very best example in my view of someone who thrives on a multitude of the Influencing themes coming very natural to him.  How he manages the specific energy and need from each of his talents is another topic for another day as he may not always be the best example of well managed Strengths, but we can learn a lot from the Influencing Strengths reacting and responding in conflict by observing President Trump - both positive and negative.  You may find it helpful (and maybe at times even amusing) to keep him in mind as you read this article.


Alignment between Influencing Talents and the Conflict Styles:

The Influencing Domain of talent expresses itself with a need for reaction and response from others, which will directly affect their engagement in conflict. 

Activator:  The talent of Activator has a strong need for response from the perspective of being impatient, wanting to see and create action and movement, and getting others going.  Its energy flows through inspiration and motivation, causing them to often and directly step in or even interrupt with the contribution of "Okay, so when do we start this?" or "Let's get going!"  This energy will also cause them to make decisions fast, sometimes too fast, and be a strong player in turning discussion, debate or strategies into action and practice. 

The Activator theme plays strongly towards the natural Conflict styles of Competition, Collaboration and even at times Compromise - as long as they get action and movement from the outcome.  They are not hesitant to confront others in doing this.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate, Compromise or Compete.  

Command:  The "Jedi Knight" of probably all the talent themes when it comes to conflict and confrontation - simply because they get energized by conflict.  Command people are comfortable with confrontation and very seldom takes it personal.  They have the ability to separate the "personal" or "emotional" from the "cause" and be direct, clinical and extremely confrontational in their approach.  They need to be in control or in charge, and confronting issues head on gives them energy to achieve exactly that:  control and command. 

Command people are strongly energized by the Conflict styles of Competition mostly, although they will Collaborate to get their way.. 

How to best approach them in conflict:  Compete or Collaborate.

Communication:  The theme of Communication has an immense need to get reaction and response from others through communicating to them in some form.  Mostly verbal, they often love to talk and interact by sharing their thoughts and ideas openly.  They are often seen as "verbal thinkers", processing their thoughts out loud.  But Communicators are not necessarily verbal - they may also influence through other mediums like art, music, photography or writing.

When engaging in conflict they would lean towards a lot of discussion and talking. Their talking may or may not make sense or be to the point - the point is that they need to interact through communication strongly.

People with this talent strong will prefer to Collaborate and Accommodate mostly.

How to best approach them in conflict:  Collaborate, Accommodate or even (verbally) Compete.

Competition:  They need to win - and measure or compare that they actually are winning.  The winning mindset is what drives them, but with that they have the strong need to compare their performance against their competitors or rivals.  Although many other talents are also competitive in nature (like Achiever), Competition is driven by a strong emotion that hates losing and loves winning.  And to them, 2nd place is losing.
When in conflict they would obviously be strongly driven by the Competition style more than any other.  They would manoeuvre, strategize and push back in conflict until they feel that they have obtained a winning position.

How to best approach them in conflict:  Compete or Collaborate.

Maximizer:  Maximizers love to make a strong and immediate impact wherever they get involved.  They have a need to engage with, and work with others who show the best potential and they have a natural Strengths-based approach.  They need to take things from already good to great - and do it fast and with excellence.  
When it comes to conflict, Maximizers will have a natural tendency - just like when they engage in projects or with people - to "choose their battles" carefully.  They do not like to waste time or energy on trivial things or things that will not change the impact or result.  Therefor you may experience Maximizers as sometimes engaging with conflict very assertively, while at times even simply avoiding it.  It depends on their sense of importance or impact it will have.  Their natural tendency will be to engage with Accommodation, Collaboration or Competition - depending on the situation. If needed they will even be comfortable to Compromise or even Avoid.

How to best approach them in conflict:  Accommodate, Collaborate.

Self Assurance:   The "I'll go it alone" theme.  Full of confidence in their own ability they will go ahead and follow their own direction with certainty.  Contrasting strongly with the Deliberative theme they are risk taking and will not be interested to look at potential risks or pitfalls first, but rather go ahead with their plans, because they can.  
Engaging conflict for them is a matter of "my way or the highway" in many cases, very much like Command.  But they are not confrontational in nature, much rather just prone to do it their own way.  The Competition style works well for them.  The "my way" tendency will at times even avoid conflict and just do their own thing.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Compete, Accommodate or Collaborate.  

Significance:  If you really want to understand this theme, just think of Donald Trump, for both the well- and mismanaged tendencies.  This theme is all about a brand, about being rewarded and being in the spotlight.  They love to be seen as significant or important, and surround themselves with significant people, brands, projects and ideas - even if controversial.  They need to leave their mark and in the longer term leave a legacy.  Well managed Significant talent will make people, projects or planning around them more significant.
Their style in conflict would therefor also tend to play towards their significance or importance, like their position, authority or rank.  In some instances this works well to make them strong in conflict by taking the significant lead and making needed, even if controversial, decisions.  The Competition style works well for them but they will easily Collaborate or even Accommodate as long as it is with significant people or organizations.

How to best approach them in conflict:  Collaborate, Accommodate or at times even Compete.


Woo:  The need to "win others over" is the driving energy behind this talent theme.  They may use charm, discussion, facts or many other preferred ways to do this.  Mostly outgoing and social, they love to interact and convince others towards their products, convictions or arguments.  This does not mean that they are confrontational - actually very seldom.  They mostly have a tendency to be liked and accepted by others.  But they do love the interaction with people in order to win them over.
The are very comfortable with the conflict styles of Collaboration, Accommodation and at times even Competition, as long as they can get their way in the end without offending others, and keeping the relationship open for another day.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate, Accommodate and at times, yes, even Compromise.




In a next post I will unpack the Relational talents, and their approach towards conflict. Experienced as the "softer" themes, they are very often brilliant in managing conflict!



Dries Lombaard is the co-owner of Strengths Institute South Africa, and has more than 7000 hours of Strengths Coaching experience over the last decade.  He is leading a vibrant and growing network of Strengths Coaches in Southern Africa, and works with corporate and multinational leadership and management teams and C-level leaders as a Strengths Coach and training facilitator. 

How your natural talents affect the way you engage in conflict: The Executing Strengths

By Dries Lombaard; Director: Strategic Engagement - Strengths Institute South Africa

(This article is a follow-up on a previous post which you should read first as an introduction to the topic of "Conflict")


As explained in the previous article, each one of us has a unique approach towards conflict.  When we view this through the lens of your natural Strengths, it provides even more clarity on how you would most naturally engage in conflict.

First of all, an understanding of the alignment between the four Talent Domains and the five Conflict Styles should be observed. 

A simplified understanding of the four Talent Domains:

Executing Domain:  a natural energy and need for tangible results and realities.
Influencing Domain: a natural energy and need for response and reaction from others.
Relational Domain:  a natural energy and need for relationships and reassurance.
Thinking Domain:  a natural energy and need for reasoning and reflection.  

A simplified understanding of the five Conflict Styles:

Avoidance:  a predominant need not to engage in conflict at all.
Competition:  a predominant need to win when engaging in conflict.
Compromise:  a predominant need to let go and follow the trend when engaging in conflict.
Accommodation:  a predominant need to listen and create a solution for others when engaging in conflict.
Collaboration:  a predominant need to work together towards the best outcome possible when engaging in conflict.

Alignment between Executing Talents and the Conflict Styles:

When we study the needs of different talents, we see that not all Talent Themes will directly gravitate towards a single Conflict Style.  There is no exact scientific way to connect this.  The other, even more important factor, to keep in mind is that we have a unique mix of talents within our dominant needs (as translated well in the Top 5 to 10 talent theme sequence of the Clifton StrengthsFinder Report).  To know which combination of talent themes in your dominant mix will direct the need towards a specific Conflict Style can only accurately be determined through a Coaching discussion with someone.  One should never try to predict a persons approach by simply and exclusively using the StrengthsFinder sequence. (Read here for more clarity). 

Based on my own research and Strengths Coaching experience, I do see certain patterns within specific talent themes playing out in conflict engagement - and the observations I make on that is what I explain below.

Within the Executing Domain of talent, we see a need for results and reality which will influence the engagement in conflict. Let us observe the different Executing Themes from this perspective. (It may also be helpful to click on the specific Talent name which will direct you to a page where some specific challenges of managing the energy and need of that theme is explained.)

Achiever:  The theme of Achiever is all about a clinical drivenness towards reaching goals and achieving objectives. Achiever-emotions are directly linked towards the frustration of not being able to reach a goal or objective within a pre-set time frame, or the elation when goals and objectives are met accordingly.
This will give Achievers the tendency to gravitate more towards the Conflict Styles of Competition or Collaboration, simply because it is most hands-on and will lead to the achievement of goals.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Compete.

Arranger:  Arrangers need to stay busy, work on many things at once and create results in an organized manner.  Their emotions are linked to the frustration that may come from not having many things on their plate at once, or not having the resources to get things done.  Their fulfillment and joy is also directly linked towards a "well-executed plan" where things are working and progress are made over the total project perspective.  Therefor I have seen Arrangers to gravitate towards Accommodation, Compromise and Collaboration styles of conflict depending on which one will be most productive in the broader scheme of things. 

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Compromise.

Belief:  The theme of Belief is a talent that acts and executes from strong conviction.  I like to call it a "conditional" talent as its execution will be conditional according to values, beliefs and conviction.  They can become extremely upset and completely disengage when things are going against their values or beliefs - and will be just as committed if it aligns with what they believe in.
I experience people with this talent to alternate between the Conflict Styles of Competition and Avoidance - depending on their convictions.  Expect strong, emotional push-back when they stand up for their convictions!

How best to approach them in conflict: Accommodate.

Consistency:  A very clinical and clear-cut approach to execution. People with Consistency will tend to follow the rules, the policies, the procedures and the regulations.  Some may see this as a "Black-and-White" approach.  Consistency have a sense for right and wrong that they simply back up with the rules or policies, and can therefor be extremely difficult to persuade to go beyond it.
The Conflict Styles that aligns with Consistency best will also be Competition and Avoidance - very much in the same way as Belief, but much more clinical and backed with rules and regulations.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate.

Deliberative:  As a natural investigator and extremely risk averse, the theme of Deliberative is naturally cautious and skeptical. They are brilliant at asking tough questions and exploring the risks and dangers.  They have a strong need to be heard, rather than to make the final decision.  If they feel they are not being heard, they simply withdraw.  If the engage, expect meticulous criticism.
With this in mind, the Deliberative theme will be most comfortable in the Competition, Avoidance or the Collaboration styles - the latter especially when they feel they are taken seriously and being heard.

How best to approach them in conflict: Collaborate or Compromise.

Discipline:  This is the talent of "structure".  People with this talent will have a calm, orderly, structured and routinized approach towards conflict.  They tend to also think very structured and even possess structured and calm emotions.  With them you know what to expect...they are in a way refreshingly predictable.
This structured approach and even-keeled interaction will tend to make them gravitate towards Collaboration, Compromise and Accommodation styles of conflict - unless it means they have to collaborate with chaos, accommodate unstructured behaviour consistently or compromise towards unplanned change all the time. 

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Compromise.

Focus:   When I think of this talent I think of a Sniper:  tenacious, accurate and meticulous in execution. They are single minded, focused and always have a specific outcome in mind. You can see them as Achievers with exact coordinates. 
This may have the effect in conflict of them being focused on very specific details of the argument, addressing it point-by-point before moving on.  They will most probably have a tendency towards the styles of Competition and Collaboration.   

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Compete. 

Responsibility: The talent of Responsibility can be seen as Achiever with strong emotion towards taking their work or results personal.  The absolutely need to deliver, and if possible they prefer to deliver to a person - not just complete a task.  This talent often need very strong management of their energy as it could easily hijack the owner with it's sense of ownership and responsibility.  
People with this strong talent may choose the conflict styles of Collaboration, Competition or Accommodation in order for them to deliver.  

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate or Accommodate.

Restorative:  The fixer or healer.  Restorative people love problems and want to be actively engaged in fixing it or getting a solution.  The essence here is that the need to be actively involved in fixing - it should not be a strategic or analytical process for them only.
This energy may even cause them to see the weakness firts and engage with it.
People with this talent may tend to move towards a style of conflict that will get them to fix the issue, therefor it may most likely be Collaboration, Competition or, if it will fix the issue, even Compromise.

How best to approach them in conflict:  Collaborate, Accommodate or Compromise.


In the next post I will unpack the talents that most probably love conflcit most of all, the Influencing Talent Themes, and their approach towards conflict. 



Dries Lombaard is the co-owner of Strengths Institute South Africa, and has more than 7000 hours of Strengths Coaching experience over the last decade.  He is leading a vibrant and growing network of Strengths Coaches in Southern Africa, and works with corporate and multinational leadership and management teams and C-level leaders as a Strengths Coach and training facilitator. 

How talented are you to manage conflict? You may be surprised...

By Dries Lombaard; Director: Strategic Engagement - Strengths Institute South Africa


Conflict. As much a part of life as breathing.

Conflict is not a popular subject for many.  It is seen as destructive many times, although it may actually be one of the most productive allies you have.  (Read about it in a blog post I wrote.)   

It all depends on the "HOW".  The style and skill in which you engage with conflict will make all the difference in the world.

There are five well know conflict managing styles.  They are:

• Avoiding,
• Accommodating,
• Compromising,
• Collaborating and
• Competing.

You probably chose one of the above as your style the moment that you read it.  Or, you saw a face of someone that personalise one of the styles for you.

Which one of these styles are the best way to approach conflict?

That all depends on the situation.  Conflict is always extremely contextual. Therefor each of the five different styles of conflict management will have results and benefit within a specific context.  The same applies for using it in the wrong context: you can then expect results that may have no effect, or even make things a lot worse.

You should be able to determine two levels of energy before you engage into conflict.  The level of Cooperation, and the level of Competitiveness.  The degree in which each of these two levels combine, is an indicator to which style will fit best in the context.

Have a look at the graph below to see it illustrated.

As you can see above, the level of cooperation and competitiveness is key to understanding where the specific style fits in best.

• Low on both cooperation and competitiveness, and you may just as well avoid the conflict, as there are no interest or energy involved in any case.  
• High on cooperation but low on competitiveness, and you know that there will be room for accommodating differences.
• Average levels of cooperation and competitiveness means compromise may well be needed, and that style will achieve success.
• High on competitiveness but low on cooperation, and a competitive style will take the lead and win the argument.
• High on both cooperation and competitiveness - collaboration is the key to resolving the issue at hand.

Projecting your style - judging the other style

Humans are natural projectors.  We cannot help it.  It comes completely natural to us simply because we view the world through our natural lens of unique "wiring".  This fact was researched and studied in psychology, neurology, philosophy, theology and many other human sciences.  We do not see the world as it is. We see the world as we are.
When it comes to conflict and interaction between people we cannot help but project our own emotions, thoughts, beliefs, values and experience onto the situation we find ourselves in.  Maybe a better word than "projection" would be "perspective".  You argue from your own perspective - or at least from a perspective we adopted from someone or something else.

There is not a problem with projecting or arguing your perspective - on the contrary, this is what makes each one of us unique. The problem comes in when we cannot understand, accommodate or respect the projection and perspective of someone else and the, unfortunately, we often make the error of judging someone unfairly or incorrectly.  Judgment is not the same as discernment.  Judgment is final. Judgment means the end of the argument has been reach.  In a court of law judgment follows the closing arguments.  In the very same manner, if we judge unfairly and prematurely based on solely our own projection and perspective, we fall in the trap of shutting down the creative process of a conflict situation.

The problem with judgment is that it effectively ends any argument - even if only in your own mind - and even though we may continue the discussion or even pretend to still be listening and engaging, our mind has been made up.  We judged.

When it comes to managing conflict we should be very aware of our natural tendency to project from the essence of our own style, and judge a different or opposing style.  It is actually a natural defence mechanism.  We want to protect our own secure perspective.  But it also limits us from learning and growing - and often reaching a best solution....or even from building a truly great relationship based on respect and understanding.  This is probably the one most detrimental aspect when it comes to bad conflict management.

How not to judge

Actually there is nothing wrong with judging.  It is judging from the wrong perspective, or judging prematurely that causes detriment in relations, situations and interactions.  So a better statement should probably be "How not to judge prematurely or falsely".

Our attempt should not be directed towards not judging but towards when and why we choose to judge in a specific manner.

In attempting this, one of the most powerful tools we have, is self awareness.  Being aware of where our own emotions, intentions and perceptions originate and the behaviour it creates.  Being aware of our natural Style of Conflict that we will default towards - Accommodating, Collaborating, Compromising, Avoiding or Competing.

My first advice on this is that you spend some time thinking about the five styles, and through honest introspection choose your most natural one or two styles that you would act out in a conflict situation.  You may find that your reaction within a specific style could be determined by the context and situation, which is a good sign of self awareness and a mature approach within conflict.  Sometimes avoiding a situation is the wisest move, but at other times you may absolutely need to compete.

I will soon write a follow-up blog post on which of the 34 StrengthsFinder Talent Themes most naturally prefer a specific conflict style.  This will be even more helpful to you in both self awareness and in growing within your ability to manage conflict wisely.


Dries Lombaard is the co-owner of Strengths Institute South Africa, and has more than 7000 hours of Strengths Coaching experience over the last decade.  He is leading a vibrant and growing network of Strengths Coaches in Southern Africa, and works with corporate and multinational leadership and management teams and C-level leaders as a Strengths Coach and training facilitator. 

Listen to Reply, not to Respond

By Dries Lombaard

Director: Strategic Engagement; The Strengths Institute

I am not generally a fan of "10-Point Solutions", but I got hold of the active listening skills below a couple of years ago, and I have been applying them ever since with great effect.  I think everyone should take note of this - especially managers, leaders or coaches.  (Unfortunately I cannot remember the original author.)

1. Face the speaker. Sit up straight or lean forward slightly to show your attentiveness through body language.

2. Maintain eye contact, to the degree that you all remain comfortable.

3. Minimize external distractions. Turn off the TV. Put down your book or magazine, and ask the speaker and other listeners to do the same.

4. Respond appropriately to show that you understand. Murmur (“uh-huh” and “um-hmm”) and nod. Raise your eyebrows. Say words such as “Really,” “Interesting,” as well as more direct prompts: “What did you do then?” and “What did she say?”

5. Focus solely on what the speaker is saying. Try not to think about what you are going to say next. The conversation will follow a logical flow after the speaker makes her point.

6. Minimize internal distractions. If your own thoughts keep horning in, simply let them go and continuously re-focus your attention on the speaker, much as you would during meditation.

7. Keep an open mind. Wait until the speaker is finished before deciding that you disagree. Try not to make assumptions about what the speaker is thinking.

8. Avoid letting the speaker know how you handled a similar situation. Unless they specifically ask for advice, assume they just need to talk it out.

9. Even if the speaker is launching a complaint against you, wait until they finish to defend yourself. The speaker will feel as though their point had been made. They won’t feel the need to repeat it, and you’ll know the whole argument before you respond. Research shows that, on average, we can hear four times faster than we can talk, so we have the ability to sort ideas as they come in…and be ready for more.

10. Engage yourself. Ask questions for clarification, but, once again, wait until the speaker has finished. That way, you won’t interrupt their train of thought. After you ask questions, paraphrase their point to make sure you didn’t misunderstand. Start with: “So you’re saying…”

Read more about Dries Lombaard

Build your strengths and stop focusing on fixing weaknesses. Strengths Scribbles is brought to you by the The Strengths Institute - a world-class provider of strengths-based training, coaching and development.