...Conflict occurs when two or more parties disagree with a principle or thought process, and resolution is needed before moving on. When it comes to relationships or workplace settings, conflict is something that cannot be avoided. There are five distinct conflict resolution styles that people use in team environments such as work, classroom settings or sports activities; however, not every style fits every situation. We are frequently told that compromise is the best way for people to work out their differences. When people compromise, with each side losing a little in order to reach a satisfactory agreement, both sides can continue to live in harmony. However, compromise can work only when the issues at stake are not that important. Compromise does not work when there is a genuine difference of opinion about strongly held principles or ideas. Keen observation will reveal one thing about the world in which we reside today. If we have indeed found in compromise, the best solution to conflict, the world of terror, fear, international suspicion and animosity is rather devoid of it. Compromise, in my view, might serve as an effective measure to put a stop to a limited range of conflicts, but it is by no means capable of resolving all the conflicts that we encounter. The betraying weakness of compromise can be seen in situations that do not have a win-win resolution. The Treaty of Versailles, and the British Appeasement policy, which were among the factors that led cumulatively...
Words: 588 - Pages: 3
... Abstract The paper is about dispute resolution strategies. It identifies three strategies and discusses them in details. Specifically, the paper entails an elaborate discussion on mediation, negotiation and compromise as conflict resolution strategies. Mediation and negotiation are alternative dispute resolution ADR strategies while compromise is an incorporation of litigation and can also be part of ADR. The three strategies are applicable for organizational and other types of conflicts. Apart from proposals off the potential applications of the methods, the paper also presents a comparison between the three methods and the legal systems of resolving conflict. In addition, it discusses in brief the processes, benefits and the limitations of the processes. Mediation Mediation entails a due process that involves a neutral third party, a mediator, in conflict resolution. The mediator is never judgmental nor partisan during the process. The mediator never decides any wrongdoers but focus on the problem-solving process. Mediation allows for the revision and adjustment of the conflict scope. Agreements after mediation are readily acceptable than those from a judicial ruling because all participants are involved in reaching a compromise. Mediation is informal and involves a mediator that guides the process. The mediator engages the disputants to drop hostilities and come to a mutual agreement. In fact, mediation is multi-step and is designed to yield ultimate...
Words: 1477 - Pages: 6
...Keen observation will reveal one thing about the world in which we reside today. If we have indeed found in compromise, the best solution to conflict, the world of terror, fear, international suspicion and animosity is rather devoid of it. Compromise, in my view, might serve as an effective measure to put a stop to a limited range of conflicts, but it is by no means capable of resolving all the conflicts that we encounter. The betraying weakness of compromise can be seen in situations that do not have a win-win resolution. The Treaty of Versailles, and the British Appeasement policy, which were among the factors that led cumulatively to World War Two, are historical examples that stand as testimony to the graves consequences that arise from making compromises that are not favorable to both parties. The failure of compromise as an effective solution is also seen in its inability to reconcile parties with clearly divergent mindsets. A notable example that comes to mind is the perennial debate surrounding abortion, with both the pro-life and pro-choice camps adamantly refusing to compromise any part of their personal sets of beliefs, which are deeply entrenched in their personal value systems. It is an unfortunate yet inescapable truth of our existence that the moral and legal standards of other men are in conflict with our own. What is to us, an unforgivable and heartless action can be to another a perfectly rational decision with a justifiable outcome, as evidenced by...
Words: 359 - Pages: 2
...Personal Conflict Management Style Paper Mark A. Pitts Comm/330 July 1, 2013 Analyzing Personal Conflict Management Style Paper This paper describes three conflict management styles. I discuss the conflict management style I use most frequently, and why? And the difficulties I encounter in dealing with others who use different conflict management styles. In the paper I discuss advantages and disadvantages of each conflict management style. In conclusion I will describe conflict avoidance and its interrelationship with conflict management. The three conflict management styles are (1) Competition, (2) Compromise, and (3) Collaboration. The competition conflict-management style occurs when people stress winning a conflict at the expense of one or more other people. People who have power or want more power often seek to compete with others so that others will accept their point of view as the best position. The compromise style of conflict management attempts to find a middle ground—a solution that somewhat meets the needs of all concerned. The word “somewhat” is important. Although on the surface a compromise can look like a “win-win” approach, it can also create a lose-lose result if nobody gets what he or she wants or needs. When trying to reach a compromise, it comes with the expectation of losing something and winning something simultaneously; it is also expect that others win and lose as well. As shown in the compromise style...
Words: 1953 - Pages: 8
...Topic: Conflict Management: Compromise I. Introduction A. Attention Getter: Picture and tell audience this is what my speech will hope to have you avoid in the work place. B. Reason to Listen: According to Chris Joseph of Small Business “Compromise can help resolve disputes quickly, which is important when a protracted disagreement could potentially derail a time-sensitive project or when there is the need to keep a simmering conflict from escalating.” D. Credibility Statement: I know about compromising in the workplace because I have researched it and have had to compromise at my current job. E. Preview of Main Points: 1. First, I will discuss how to properly compromise 2. Second, I will discuss the best times to compromise 3. Finally, I will discuss what you shouldn’t do when trying to compromise II. Body A. According to our book: compromising is to find a solution that everyone can live with. 1. The key is to make each side feel that the other is giving up something of equal value. 2. Be respectful. If someone thinks you’re listening thoughtfully, she is more likely to respond in kind. An empathetic phrase, such as “I understand how you feel,” can go a long way. 3. Speak to common interests. Keep the common goal and good in mind. Remember: If an argument turns nasty, nobody wins. Tell the person how much she means to you and how much you value her opinion. Transition: Now that I’ve discussed how to properly compromise, I will now discuss the best times...
Words: 488 - Pages: 2
...Application 5.1- Measuring your Conflict Style Person A Husband Person B Writing team at work 1. 2/3 I avoid being “put on the spot”; I keep conflicts to myself. 2. 4/3 I use my influence to get my ideas accepted. 3. 4/4 I usually try to “split the difference” in order to resolve an issue. 4. 3/4 I generally try to satisfy the other’s needs. 5. 4/4 I try to investigate an issue to find a solution acceptable to us. 6. 3/4 I usually avoid open discussion of my differences with the other. 7. 4/2 I use my authority to make a decision in my favor. 8. 3/4 I try to find a middle course to resolve an impasse. 9. 3/4 I usually accommodate the other’s wishes. 10. 3/3 I try to integrate my ideas with the other’s to come up with a decision jointly. 11. 3/4 I try to stay away from disagreement with the other. 12. 3/3 I use my expertise to make a decision that favors me. 13. 3/3 I propose a middle ground for breaking deadlocks. 14. 3/4 I give in to the other’s wishes. 15. 5/5 I try to work with the other to find solutions that satisfy both our expectations. 16. 2/4 I try to keep my disagreement to myself in order to avoid hard feelings. 17. 4/3 I generally pursue my side of an issue. 18. 4/3 I negotiate with the other to reach a compromise. 19. 3/3 I often go with the other’s suggestions. 20. 5/5 I exchange accurate information with the other so we can solve a problem together. 21. 3/5 I try to avoid unpleasant exchanges with the other. 22. 3/3 I sometimes use my power...
Words: 1495 - Pages: 6
...Conflict Management in an Organization Introduction Druckman and Diehl (2006) stated that conflict resolution involves a series of steps taken toward eliminating friction within members of a particular organization. Arbitrators or people holding neutral positions on the matter usually carry out conflict resolution. They may take a different approach depending on the type of conflict or the magnitude of the conflict. To alleviate issues between parties, active or passive conflict resolution is used. Griffin and Goodwin (2013) explained that active conflict resolution consists of accommodation, compromise, collaboration and competition. Each of these conflict resolution styles have advantages and disadvantages. This article “Conflict resolution” (Lansford, 2008) discussed the advantages enjoyed on application of active conflict resolution. The article also discussed the communication channels for use. Finally, the article identifies the timeline of events in communication of change. Active Conflict Resolution Strategies Active conflict resolution involves several strategies. When coupled with, they possess significant advantages in the processes of conflict resolution. For instance, a collaborative effort has significant advantages. First, it allows parties to express their grievances openly. As a result, the parties find mutually beneficial solutions. According to Lansford (2008) using this strategy, identification of the roots of a problem is possible. The organization is...
Words: 841 - Pages: 4
...COMPROMISES OF OUR CONSTITUTION America was built on compromises. What you lose in compromise, you gain by collaboration. A compromise means an agreement reached by opposing claims. (1) There were several compromises that were made to help form the Constitution of the United States. There were three main conflicts the new nation had to be resolve. The main ones were: The Great Compromise, The 3/5ths Compromise and also The Slave Trade Compromise. Even though there were conflicts over a strong central government, and states’ rights, the members in the Philadelphia Convention overcame their differences to form a democratic government that is for the people, and meets the needs of our nation. (2) The original document established for the United States to govern the people was adopted in 1777. It was called, the Articles of Confederation. It was outdated and it needed to be tweaked. Congress had very limited power to regulate national affairs, no authority to tax, or to regulate commerce. As a result of a weak central government, in 1787, the United States went bankrupt. With credit and debt problems, the states convinced the delegates to meet. So, they met in May, at the Convention, in Philadelphia. Rather than fix a broken system, the Virginia plan modeled a whole new government system, it had Federal and National Features. States would have power but submit to a national supreme authority. (3) The Great Compromise was very important. The Virginia plan had the structure...
Words: 801 - Pages: 4
...key reason for conflict with in the union in the year 1820-1854. However there we other factors like slavery expansion and state vs. federal. The sources illustrate this to different degrees. Sources A, C,B and E can be grouped as they discuss that westward expansion is the main cause which supports the statement but it is E that does so most strongly. Sources C and A can be further linked as they touch on other factors that were important such as slavery. Whilst source D provides an opposing view that westward expansion was the main cause of conflict because it argues Slavery and the abolitionist movement was the reason for conflict within the union. Sources A, B, C and E all link to westward expansion however it is E that fully agrees to the statement. Source E strongly agrees with the statement because it is talking about the territory in particular the territory of Nebraska for example is says ‘Vast unoccupied region’ this shows that Nebraska was a problem and was making politics sectional. It also mentions ‘vast territory yet exempt from these terrible evils’ this is suggesting that the Nebraska territory is all part of the slave power conspiracy which Douglas was now part of as he substituted the Missouri Compromise for popular sovereignty which angered the North as it could lead to the expansion of slavery. This can be shown in source E from when it says ‘violation of a sacred pledge, as a criminal betrayal’ the scared pledge is the Missouri compromise in addition the...
Words: 2657 - Pages: 11
...the textbook, lecture and power-point notes compare and contrast the compromises of 1820 and 1850. Slavery came about in America in 1619 (RN). It lasted through the American Revolution, even after Thomas Jefferson scripted his famous lines in the Declaration of Independence, "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. That among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Clearly, slaves were not part of this included in Jefferson's words. When it came time to write the Constitution, the word "slavery" was never used. Instead, the framers chose to use the term "other people." These other people were counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of representation in Congress according to the Three-Fifths Compromise (RN). This compromise kept slavery in the United States unharmed. The framers also decided not to do anything about the issue of slavery for twenty years. Prior to the American Civil War, many different compromises were made in an attempt to hinder the growing disagreements. However, this only extended the unavoidable events that would occur. The differences between North and South were far to great and compromise did not stand a chance at preventing the imminent conflict. This was most clearly shown in the ways in which the two main compromises: the Compromise of 1820, also known as the Missouri Compromise, and the Compromise of 1850 failed. In 1820 Missouri wanted to join the Union as a slave...
Words: 2024 - Pages: 9
...‘The American Civil War was an irrepressible conflict.’ Do you agree? The American Civil war is one of the most studied topics in American history. Yet still, a definitive answer cannot be found as to why the war broke out. Many of the interpretations can be grouped into two major schools of thought: the irrepressible conflict or the Blundering Generation. It was certainly true that the North and South were becoming increasingly different during this period. Slavery being the most fundamental of these, however there was also variances in the economies and culture. This would support the idea that the war was inevitable as the differences were too great. However, it can be argued that radically different societies can co-exist without going to war. Instead, a series of mistakes and misjudgements were made by blundering politicians. There are numerous examples of this; the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Dred Scott and the Fugitive Slave Act to name just a few. In my view, the American Civil War was an irrepressible conflict since compromise on the slavery issue was impossible. Blundering politicians acted as catalysts to ignite the flames of war, however they did not create the differences which acted as the foundation for the irrepressible conflict. The issue of slavery is often cited as the most significant cause of the war. By 1860 the issue of slavery had become too great and compromise was impossible. As Frederick Douglass stated, ‘the more the issue is settled, the more it needs settling...
Words: 2087 - Pages: 9
...CONFLICT: In the 1960’s and early 70’s, conflict erupted between the ROTC and the pro-independence groups over the military presence on campus. The main source of the conflict was the fight against US colonialism, militarism, and the Vietnam War. The Federacion Universitaria Pro Independencia or FUPI’s main goal was to remove the military presence from the university, as well as to gain a voice in university matters. On the opposite side, stood the ROTC, whose official purpose was to train cadets into well educated, quality officers. Student opposition to military presence on campus increased and turned violent during the 60’s, mirroring the nationwide protests against the Vietnam War and the draft. Many pro-independence groups in Puerto Rico identified with the Vietnamese struggle because of their similar plight for the right to be free from American influence. The conflict was triggered in September 1969 with the arrest of Edwin Feliciano Grafals, who was taken into custody for refusing to join the military after being drafted. As a result, protests escalated, leading to the partial burning of the ROTC...
Words: 1179 - Pages: 5
...University of Phoenix Material Conflict Management Plan 1. Identify the available conflict management strategies and their strengths and weaknesses. Strategy Strengths Weaknesses Collaborating By working together can lead to creative solutions. Time and energy Compromising Serving the common good of the team If others cannot compromise Accommodating Serving others needs to come to a conclusion Other team member’s ideas are lost. Competing Generating lots of ideas Can cause conflict Avoiding If an underling issue exists the team can focus at the task at hand. Team member do not submit ideas 2. Which of the available conflict management strategies is most appropriate for the current situation with David and James? Provide your rationale, including what factors you considered in making your selection. Your response should be at least 100 words. A good manager will know how to resolve conflict in the work place by reducing hostility and aggressiveness which must address the needs and concerns of everyone involved including the manager. By addressing all the teams needs would give greater satisfaction to everyone involved and a feeling of resolution. Compromising – This strategy may serve all the team’s needs, the manager can explain to all parties involved that some compromise needs to exist to serve everyone needs and to show them the way they will all benefit. 3. If the selected strategy is not successful, what is your alternate strategy...
Words: 363 - Pages: 2
...Conflict in the Coordinators Group Conflict occurs when two people cannot agree on a particular issue. Anyone can come into conflict with someone else, because no two people are exactly alike. Such as, the substantive conflict that the Coordinators Group recently encountered. Moreover, one group member thought that purchasing an already made game would be better than making the game from scratch. However, another group member thought the pre-built game was over-priced and flimsy. Since the disagreement was over a specific issue, the Coordinators Group had a substantive conflict. Thus, to overcome this issue, the group used the A-E-I-O-U Model to resolve the conflict. The A-E-I-O-U Model is, “A conflict resolution model with five steps: Assume...
Words: 800 - Pages: 4
...University of Phoenix Material Conflict Management Plan 1. Identify the available conflict management strategies and their strengths and weaknesses. Strategy Strengths Weaknesses Accommodating The accommodating plan will accommodate the one side that is pressed about the issue. The other side may be accommodating and not stressed about receiving a resolution. This plan may eventually fail because the one side that gave in to accommodate the other side may get tired of the accommodation and want a resolution. Avoiding Hopes that the problem resolves itself. This plan also may eventually fail because the conflict was never addressed. It is better as a leader to take ownership of the conflict instead of avoiding. Collaborating Takes both sides point of views into consideration. By getting both sides’ input into resolving the conflict, holds them accountable to making it work! Though they compromise and make a plan together, they may still be unable to work together on what they set out to accomplish. Compromising Both parties have to agree to give up one side to compromise with the other. This also helps to set things down that may not be working for one side anyway. By compromising there could still be conflict, both parties have to agree to compromise and make the plan work. Competing Competition can be healthy. Both parties competing to see which strategy works. This could make the conflict worse because it becomes a fight to...
Words: 546 - Pages: 3
