Final answer:
The competing style of conflict management is used in emergency situations or when an individual is certain about their stance. It contrasts with compromise which is common in situations where parties with shared goals need to negotiate on specifics to reach a collective decision. The competing style implies a firm and unilateral approach, while compromise necessitates partial concessions from all involved parties.
Step-by-step explanation:
When faced with a conflict situation, individuals may choose different styles to manage the situation depending on their goals, urgency, and the importance of the outcomes. One such style is the competing style of conflict management. This style is likely to be used if there is an emergency situation, where quick and decisive action is required, or in cases where an individual is certain that they are correct and it is important to stand firm on their position.
Considering the context of collective decision-making, an approach that may contrast with the competing style is compromise. Compromise usually happens when parties involved in a decision-making process have common goals but different preferences on the details to reach those goals. If an agreement must be obtained and no single entity can unilaterally impose a decision, stakeholders are more likely to make concessions to reach a middle ground that partially satisfies everyone's interests.
For instance, in international negotiations on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, if no country can dictate the terms alone and all countries share the common goal of emission reduction, they may opt for a compromise, such as agreeing on a reduction percentage that is between their initial proposals. This ensures that each country makes progress towards the shared goal, even if the final decision doesn't fully match their original demands.
In conclusion, when analyzing styles of conflict management, the competing style is relevant in scenarios that require a firm stance or swift action, often used in contrast to avoiding, compromising, or collaboration styles which may be suitable under different circumstances.