Final answer:
Brad should opt for the competing conflict resolution style to assertively stand his ground for the regional manager position against Tom's challenge. He should balance this approach with the potential repercussions in professional standing and relationships. Competing is necessary when amicable approaches like accommodating don't suffice in 'win-lose' situations. c. Compromise
Step-by-step explanation:
In the scenario where Brad is often a pushover in meetings and may not assert himself for the regional manager position when challenged by Tom, Brad should consider employing a different conflict resolution style to address the situation effectively. In tackling workplace dynamics and advancement opportunities, it's crucial to assess the conflict resolution styles at one's disposal. These include competing, collaborating, compromise, accommodating, and avoiding. Since Brad's usual accommodating approach may lead to him missing out on the opportunity, he may need to adopt the competing resolution style. This style is assertive and uncooperative, which is opposite of his standard approach. It's about standing one's ground and pursuing one’s own goals at the expense of others, which in this case could mean asserting his interest in the regional manager position resolutely. Competing can often be seen in 'win-lose' situations, such as when a promotion is at stake and multiple parties want the job.
However, it is necessary to understand the possible repercussions. If the status quo prevails, those like Brad who sought change may be perceived as weak, while if a compromise is found, participants may be seen as selling out their policies or principles, also known as logrolling. It's essential to navigate these dynamics carefully to ensure that one's professional integrity and relationships are maintained during the conflict resolution process.