High avo­iders try to avo­id con­fron­ta­tio­nal aspects of nego­tia­ti­on. As a posi­ti­ve attri­bu­teAvo­id­ance can be expe­ri­en­ced by others as graceful tact and diplo­ma­cy. It can also per­mit groups to func­tion bet­ter in the face of hard to resol­ve inter­per­so­nal dif­fe­ren­ces. High avo­iders are skil­led at using such con­flict redu­cing methods as clear rules and hier­ar­chies to sub­sti­tu­te for nego­tia­ti­ons. They pre­fer com­mu­ni­ca­ti­on tools like email or even inter­me­dia­ries to mini­mi­ze face-to-face con­fron­ta­ti­on.

Howe­ver, a weak­ne­ss is that when inter­per­so­nal con­fron­ta­ti­on is a func­tion­al aspect of orga­niza­tio­nal or group life, high avo­iders can harm the flow of important infor­ma­ti­on, espe­ci­al­ly regar­ding people’s needs and pre­fe­ren­ces. Once inter­per­so­nal con­flicts start, they often get worse, lea­ding to all man­ner of pro­blems. Final­ly, high avo­iders pass up many oppor­tu­ni­ties to ask for things that would make them bet­ter off when others would be per­fect­ly hap­py to accom­mo­da­te their need. This may result in their beco­ming dis­sa­tis­fied with a situa­ti­on when a solu­ti­on to meet their needs is only a ques­ti­on away.

Low avo­iders have litt­le fear of inter­per­so­nal con­flict. Inde­ed, they may in some cases enjoy it. As nego­tia­tors, they have a high tole­rance for forceful bar­gai­ning. They can fight hard against their coun­ter­part all day and share drinks and sto­ries with the same per­son in the evening. Low avo­id­ance scores are hel­pful in such pro­fes­si­ons as labor manage­ment rela­ti­ons, liti­ga­ti­on, and mer­gers and acqui­si­ti­on work.

But bewa­rePeo­p­le with low scores in avo­i­ding some­ti­mes lack tact, and are often view­ed as over­ly con­fron­ta­tio­nal. In bureau­cra­tic set­tings, low avo­iders may be seen as trou­ble­ma­kers. The low avo­ider is cha­rac­te­risti­cal­ly frus­tra­ted by bureau­cra­cy and office poli­tics, which are ali­en set­ting to him or her.