Many conflicts in the workplace are the result of clashes of personality styles rather than substantive disagreements.
Perhaps you're a bottom line kind of guy who likes to cut to the chase, and get annoyed when people give blow by blow accounts with an excess of extraneous detail.
Or you might like to build a steady relationship based on trust, and are uncomfortable with people who are more focused on getting things done quickly.
In dealing with these clashes you have two choices: you can change your behavior, or change your thinking.
There are numerous personality profiles that group people into categories.
Typically, four quadrants are drawn up based on two dimensions.
One dimension is based on strength of personality, for example, assertiveness.
The second dimension is based on sensitivity, and can be denoted as an indication of people orientation or emotional responsiveness.
The four categories can be summarized like this: Analyticals (low assertive, low people orientation) are detailed, methodical problem solvers.
They tend to be risk averse, emotionally guarded, and choose their words carefully.
Example: Warren Buffet.
Dominants (high assertive, low people orientation) are decisive, opinionated, tenacious, and competitive.
They are result oriented and may be insensitive towards others.
Example: Donald Trump.
Expressives (high assertive, high people orientation) are energetic, enthusiastic, talkative, animated, and friendly.
They may also be hot tempered, obstinate, and lack follow through as they move on to the next thing to capture their interest.
Example: Richard Branson.
Amiables (low assertive, high people orientation) are friendly, supportive, diplomatic, consensus driven team players.
However, they are often too eager to please and indecisive.
Example: Barack Obama.
Dividing people into one of only four social styles is surprisingly useful.
Most people can differentiate the four types rather easily, and with practice, can adapt their own behavior to enjoy a smoother interaction with a particular individual.
This is very practical, because you cannot ask a business contact to take a personality assessment before you begin a discussion! Once you have identified a person's type, modify your behavior accordingly.
For example, if your dominant boss likes clear cut choices, present him with two or three options.
Be prepared to give your reasons, if he asks.
Do not launch into a systematic analysis right off the bat.
When writing a report for multiple readers, include something for everyone.
Prepare a good executive summary for the dominants, include detailed appendices for the analyticals, use personal language for the amiables, etc.
Use a similar approach when giving a presentation to a group.
However, this approach is not a panacea.
Some of the people who are difficult to get along with have characteristics that cut across all four categories.
In such cases, it might serve you better to change your thinking.
Here are some examples: Negative people - they whine, complain, and look for reasons things won't work.
They drain your energy and bring you down.
Change your thinking:

• Ask yourself if there is some truth to what they are saying.
  
• Phrase things positively.
  For example:
• "Assuming we can do it, how can we make this work?"
• When a Negative makes broad generalizations, poke holes in his argument with counterexamples:

"He always screws everything up.
" "Not always.
Remember the Kingsley project? He has his moments.
" Know-it-alls - they have strong personalities and stronger opinions.
It's difficult to prove them wrong, and they won't admit it, so don't try.
Instead:

• Give them the respect they crave.
  
• Look for common ground.
  
• Let her think it was her idea and let her have the credit.
  

When you prove to her that you're a strong player and support her, she may accept you and your input more readily.
Apple polishers - these suck-ups bend over backwards to score points with the boss and look good.
They want approval.

• Give them approval, so long as it's warranted.
  They may return the favor some day.
  
• Don't trust them.
  They will put themselves first, and may put you down to do it.
  

You probably have your own list of annoying types.
In the end, you won't change them.
You can only change the way you think and feel about them.
Don't let them get you down.
For example: "There sure are some characters in this office, but at least I have a good job.
" "He's such a suck-up.
Poor guy must be insecure - if that's what he needs to feel good about himself, more power to him.
" Pay more attention to the traits that make certain people a challenge to work with.
Decide when to adapt your behavior and when to change your thinking.