May 7-13 / Question 1

People have had, and always will have, a negative view of conflict. It starts at a very young age, we lack the skills to appropriately handle even the most basic of problems, leaving us with feelings of unease and apprehension. We fight and argue and have negative conflict experiences, which means, as this pattern would suggest, we learn to associate conflict with pain. 

Yes, I think the more people learn about conflict the less they fear it. An important thing to understand is that conflict can often be productive in building a relationship (as opposed to destructive) if handled appropriately. The more we engage in conflict the less we fear it, simply because we grow accustomed to it. While this may not always be a good thing, being comfortable dealing in conflict situations is a necessary ingredient to finding resolution.

May 7 - 13 / Question 2

What I liked most about this class was the pacing and choice of textbook. So often it's easy to get lost in an online course, not knowing whats due or when it's due. I felt that our professor did a great job at keeping students involved and in the loop as to what was happening for each week. I exchanged a few emails with her when I had various questions and always found her response to be both quick and helpful.

My only "dislike" may have been the amount of comments we were asked to make on other peoples postings. At times it felt excessive, like I may be repeating myself or just filling in space. The whole "commenting" idea i've seen in every single online class i've taken at SJSU. It's a useful idea in someways, although it gets rather repetitive.

May 7 -13th / Question 3

This is really the perfect question to end the semester on. For me, it all goes back to
S-TLC. This very basic principal encapsulates pretty much all of what a conflict in communication course should be teaching students. In chapter 15, we read over the different components which make up each of our worldviews, we studied the concept of “other”; all if which can be traced back to the “T” or “Think” in S-TLC. Chapter 8 dealt with managing anger, and all the problems often associated with it. If I had to sum up chapter 8 in only one word to someone, I might simply say - STOP. All other forms of conflict resolution will flow naturally after this initial pause. It’s something we often forget, we allow ourselves to get sucked into a situation without due time to sort things through in our head. Most of us, if we give ourselves the chance, can find much more satisfying conclusions to our problems if we follow S-TLC.

April 9-15 / Queston 3

Chapter 12 deals with the two theories of misplaced conflict and displaced conflict. Our textbook treats them as being two distinct and separate theories, but I see them as often being intertwined, sometimes even synonymous with each other. Misplaced conflict are defined as being conflicts, “Which occur when people argue about issues other than the ones at the heart of the conflict.” Displacement occurs, “When people take out their frustrations on those perceived as less dangerous to them.”

Take, for instance, a situation at the workplace when your called into your bosses office for failing to correctly label a repot. Say your boss has had a rough week at home, he’s stressed and ready to snap. If your boss decides to flip-out on you over this minor infraction, it’s a perfect example of both a misplaced and displaced conflict. Misplaced because the real source of his frustration is his personal life, and displaced because he is taking his anger out on a subordinate (rather than confronting the true person causing his angst). 

April 9-15 / Question 2

I think, whether consciously or not, we all form immediate first impression of others after we first meet them. These first impressions cause us to attribute certain characteristics that may or may not be accurate. If I meet a guy who dresses a certain way, acts a certain way and carries himself a certain way, (based upon my prior experiences) I will think of him as being one certain thing. From the simple, rather cursory observations I’ve made, I will come to expect from him certain behaviors. Attribution theory says, “People act as they do in conflict situations because of the inferences they make about others based on their behavior”. Much like stereotyping, It’s another way in which we tend to always want to lump people to together into groups and see them not for their unique qualities, but rather the qualities of their “group” as a whole.

April 9-15 / Question 1

I did a Google search on each of these three terms and found the top results for “forgiveness” relating to wikipedia articles, clinical studies, Biblical philosophy, psychology, brainy quotes, and nationwide forgiveness campaigns. Searching for “reconciliation”, I found mostly dictionary terminology, references to congressional practices, and a type of catholic sacrament. Searching the term “revenge” resulted in the ABC show of the same name.

By far, the best results were achieved when researching forgiveness. I think because forgiveness is such an important part of our everyday interactions, that much more thought and research has been put into making the term better understood. Reconciliation is important to the communicative process as well, but it is more of an obscure term not lending itself to much detail or practical application. Once you scroll past all the websites relating to the TV program “Revenge”, you can actually find some decent scholarly information pertaining to the subject. Because forgiveness is seen as a positive process and revenge a negative one, there is a greater emphasis placed on the first over the second.

Week of April 2 - 8 / Question 2

There have been a handful of situations where forgiveness was last on my list of priorities. Almost all involve close inter-personal relationships having gone array, usually resulting in a period of mutual ex-communication, then followed by something like an apology. At some point enough is enough, we move on past our differences and continue with our friendship. There have been many times where I’ve found it difficult to forgive, but I can honestly say I’ve never found it impossible. On a side note, I’d much rather it be a guy whom I’m arguing with. We tend to argue it out, say what we need to say, then move on. There isn’t always an official apology, but we know whats up. Women, on the other hand, are a completely different story. In my own experiences, I see that women carry around much more “emotional residue”. This can be difficult for men to grasp in relationships, usually getting us into trouble. 

Week of April 2 - 8 / Question 1

Facebook is all about face management. Whether your familiar with the official terminology or not, we all carefully manage our facebook and other social network image. In terms of privacy, I keep my facebook pretty much locked down. Unless your “friends” with me, the only info you’ll be able to glean from my account is my profile photo - thats basically it.

I think it’s largely a question of personal preference. I know some friends who keep open accounts, post personal updates, and share, in my opinion, way to much of their information. When you post drunken photo’s from last night, or pics of you doing illegal or irresponsible things, you are advertising yourself to all of your friends as being reckless and careless. Keep in mind, in the near future potential employers will check your facebook and blog sites to see what you’ve been doing and what kinds of activities you engage in. I know of people who have lost jobs for this very reason.

-Ben

March 19-25 / Question 2

Personally, It takes quite a lot to get me worked up. As discussed in chapter 8, I don’t so much experience anger as frustration. To whatever extent I do get angry, I will either “anger it in” if I feel it’s insignificant, or “anger control” it if I think it’s a problem worth addressing. I figure this is just a personality thing. I’ve always kept a cool head, this has been true for as long as I can remember. Anger was never something I struggled with, however, it has been a problem for other people I’ve known. Whenever I’d see them “lose it” over something, I could sympathize with their emotions, but couldn’t relate to how they were expressing it. It made no sense to me.

    In my opinion, a common theme of these “anger-outers” is their tendency to react immediately and aggressively, often over mundane issues. Common is their willingness to say whatever sort of damaging thing that first comes to their mind, blind to the consequences of their actions. Eventually things will cool down, and sometimes “anger-outers” will, in retrospect, apologize for their misbehavior. This is all very well and good, however, too often the damage has already been done.

-Ben

Question 3

Chapter seven references both “distress” and “hyperstress”; distress being when we feel as if were not in control, and hyperstress is when we take on too many tasks at once. While they each have their own definitions and triggers, often you will see them on display at once. Hyperstress can lead to distress if the individual feels overwhelmed and overworked. Sometimes I picture managing multiple stressors like spinning plates. You can only spin so many at once before the whole system comes crashing down. Hyperstress is caused by being pulled in all different directions at once, your attention is directed in too many different places and you loose focus. This loss of control can leave you feeling as if things are “happening to you”, like you lack the power to handle the situation on your own, therefore causing distress.

-Ben

Week 7 / Post 1

1). I Insist on applying the First Solution whenever I’m out with co-workers or school friends on the weekends. We may have a project we’re working on together, but fun time is our time. Leave work talk at work, and likewise, leave school talk at school.

The Second Solution is an argument for having a “playful” mindset. “How we think about matter affects the way we perceive the events we experience.” I see this as being all about your attitude and how it can effect the outcome of a situation.

Here’s an example:

    Last summer I spent a week in New Zealand. My arrival happened to coincide with a severe and unexpected snow storm, causing much frustration and overnight power outages. When I arrived at my hotel, the concierge informed me that a paperwork error had cost me my reservation. Due to the power outage, he couldn’t even access his computer system to find me another room.

    In keeping this “playful mindset”, I chose to see my predicament as being funny. I knew this would make for a great story once I got home. I trusted they weren't going to have me sleep in the snow, knowing that the situation would work itself out somehow. It did, and I wound up in a better room than I had originally booked (free of charge).

-Ben

Chapter 6 / Question 3

    On the topic of harmful conflict climates and defensive behavior; at the very bottom of page 113 lists a series of behaviors juxtaposed against one another. Midway down the list it labels “Neutrality” as a cause for defensiveness, and it’s opposite being “Empathy”. In other words, neutrality breeds defensiveness, while empathy breeds supportiveness.
    At first, this stuck me as odd... Why would neutrality lead to defensiveness? After all, wouldn’t neutrality be, well, neutral? Then I began to think back to the various conflict situations I have been involved in over the years. I remembered specific examples of me growing frustrated when I felt as if my concerns weren’t being understood or fully appreciated. I remember one such occasion when a “neutral” third party intervened to settle a dispute between me and a co-worker. His best efforts to be neutral made me even more frustrated because he lacked any empathy for our situation. I grew defensive because I felt as if he didn’t properly understand my concerns. He was so focused on being impartial that his demeanor came off as robotic and uncaring.
    This would have been much better handled if, instead of a defensive conflict climate, he was able to manage our dispute with equal amounts of empathy for both our situations.

-Ben

Chapter 6 / Question 2

Eventually all of us will wind up as either the powerful or the powerless in an “unbalanced power relationship”. It may not necessarily be within the context of an interpersonal relationship, or even a romantic one. Chances are (and I know this to be true for me), the most common type of unbalanced power relationships we engage in is that of the subordinate/boss dynamic. Given our relative age as college students, most of us occupy positions, to a greater or lesser extent, that require us to take orders from, or answer to, a supervisor or superior.
    This type of command structure is near universal in both the private and public sectors. It’s this way for a reason - because it’s effective. For most any organization to run smoothly we need leaders and followers both acting cooperatively, not competitively, to get the job done.
    Personally speaking, I’m OK with having “less power” in the unbalanced power structure, so long as the people above me exercise compassion and fairness in their approach. Some people will have more power, other less.
    However, the inescapable truth is that everybody reports to somebody. The “unbalanced power structure” is largely a product of our own limited perspective. The private may disagree with having to answer to his sergeant, but often forgets that his sergeant reports to a lieutenant, and a lieutenant to a captain, so on and so forth.

-Ben

Chapter 6 / Question 1

    Trust is defined in our textbook as, “The belief that another is benevolent or honest toward the trusting individual, and that the other persons caring transcends any direct benefits the other receives as a result of caring” (111).
    I would consider myself a trusting individual, not to an unhealthy extent of course, but someone who has a good head on his shoulders and who is aware when I’m being mislead. I choose to surround myself with people whom I have confidence in, people who I feel I can trust. Another way of putting it would be to say, I see trust as the degree to which I can feel vulnerable around them.
    The only times I’ve truly lost trust in someone weren’t because of how they acted towards me, rather it was me witnessing how they behaved around other people. I once was buddies with a guy who I felt was a trustworthy source to turn to for personal advice. Although he never disclosed any of this information, nor to my knowledge acted inappropriately upon it, I heard casual the way in which he spoke of close friends and family members, often times using personal information behind their backs which could’ve damaged their reputation. My trust in him was lost after I realized that this gossip served no real purpose outside entertaining his friends. I thought, “If this is how he talks about others, what is he saying about me?”. The lack of judgement and poor discretion caused me to longer consider him worthy of my trust.

-Ben

Chapter 4 / Question 3

In my mind, I associate I-Statements with assertiveness in that they are both telltale signs of a communicator who is thinking before they act. It is not always easy to take personal responsibility for the feelings we express and the words we speak. More often, people tend to distance themselves from their criticism by way of terms like, “We all think that..”, and, “Wouldn’t it be better if..”

It may seem as though we are avoiding hurting the others feelings, but what instead happens is our partner is left confused. The full force of our feelings was not appropriately reflected in our choice of phrasing, therefore spoiling an opportunity to give constructive and meaningful criticism. By using “I” statements we maximize our opportunity to be assertive by adding a personal point to our message, the result of which is a far more effective long-term strategy for dealing with conflict.

-Ben

Chapter 4 / Question 2

Although I’m a Communications major, I’ll be the first to admit that often times I “tune-out” when someone else is speaking to me. Not always, but often enough that I know I need to improve upon it.

Many times it is not because I don’t like the other person, or think what they have to say is unimportant, rather if I'm tired or preoccupied with other things, my mind wanders. I’d hazard a guess and say that this is true for almost everybody.

Even worse, sometimes I will zone-out the conversation completely and catch myself nodding in agreement to whatever the person is saying. What I’ve noticed is not just that my mind wanders to other topics, (depending on how interesting the other person is) I often stop paying attention entirely.

Within the context of conflict management, however, I do stay focused on the person with whom I’m having a disagreement. The difference being that conflict is engaging, while be “talked at” makes you feel uninvolved.


-Ben

Chapter 4 / Question 1

Chapter 4 / Question 1

Generally speaking, it’s not hard for me to stop a conflict in its early stages. Part of this is just my personality type, I don’t get worked up easily - never really been my thing. If I were to give one of my “hothead” friends advice on how not to behave, it would be first to work on impulse control.

Take a deep breath and think to yourself, “Is this really worth getting upset about?”. Sometimes the answer is yes, it may be something serious enough to warrant attention. If so, I would then caution them to choose their words carefully (don’t say something you will later on regret) and watch their posturing. I’m thinking specifically of young, college age guys I’ve known and seen let their emotions get the best of them.


S-TLC is important because what begins as a simple misunderstanding often results in a show of idiotic machismo wherein neither party is willing to back down, thus further escalating the situation.

-Ben

Chapter 11 / Question 3

A mediator is defined as, “A neutral third party who has no decision-making power regarding the outcome of the mediation”.

While formal mediation can be useful in some situations, it is far more likely that we will deal with conflict in which we are not a neutral observer, but rather an active participant. However, I don’t think this means we can’t glean some helpful information from the skills taught to third party professional mediators.

On page 198, the book lists “specificity” and “focusing on behavior which one can change” as being useful mediation tools. There is overlap here between the skills of a meditator and the ways in which we choose to engage in interpersonal conflict. Key to the very idea of conflict resolution is focusing on specific, controlled behavior and not accusing your partner with broad generalizations.

I also find “speaking for myself” particularly important. One mistake that is commonly made is when one person attempts to put words in the others mouth, trying to portray a false version of their point of view.

-Ben

Mediation in a business context

Fractionation, framing, refraining, and finding common ground are skills that have uses outside of interpersonal communication, for example, these principals may help a manager re-tool the mechanics of a lackluster sales division.

First, identifying and isolating the individual components of a failing organization by way of fractionation. Framing the real issue (say a faltering economy) as the prime cause behind the need for restructuring, without pointing the finger at any one particular person or groups of people. Framing is closely related to refraining, in other words, it is avoiding placing undo blame or unfair accusations on those who you need to maintain a working relationship with. If the reason your sales are down is because the accounting team mismanaged the books, the issue must be addressed in a way that is non-accusatory and open-minded. Unless you plan to get rid of the accounting division entirely, the focus of your mediation should be upon how to better ourselves so mistakes like these wont happen again in the future.


-Ben

Mediators Vs. Lawyers

Being a good mediator requires a set of skills specifically geared towards Communication majors. Conflict mediation incorporates a number of themes from course work in Group Discussion, Interpersonal Relations, and Conflict in Communication classes. Having a background in these areas provides material for us to draw from if ever called upon to informally mediate a conflict.

As an example, from the Group Discussion course I took last year at West Valley, a key component of reaching a consensus is to first brainstorm for solutions. The phrasing for how mediators are to go about brainstorming sessions were identical to those which I was taught last year. Specifically, not giving feedback ( be it positive or negative) on the proposed solutions. Negative feedback will obviously shut a person down. Positive feedback, no matter how well intentioned, will influence the thought process of the group and interfere with the creative ideas brainstorming is meant to produce.


Lawyers are taught to think in terms of right and wrong, black and white. They ask, “Who is guilty?” and “How should they be punished?”, ignoring the more complex task of establishing mutual understanding and working towards a consensus. Put simply, it is always a “win-lose” issue, whereas mediation searches for “win-win” solutions.


- Ben

Collaboration, Competence and Assertion

On page 55. In our textbook, the author details some communication behaviors an assertive person is likely to demonstrate.

“Assertive communication includes good eye contact, straight posture, and an air of competence”.

In other words, you have to know what your talking about. Competence is key because if you take the assertive position in a meeting or in a group context, this will often thrust you into a leadership role. The consequence of being assertive is that people will now look to you for guidance, or elect you as their unofficial spokesperson.

If there is a disagreement between group members, your assertiveness - acting in conjunction with a competent understanding of the issues - will likely cast you as “lead collaborator”.

Collaboration is closely linked with teamwork, and, very similarly, requires an assertive personality to help get the conversation started. Ideally, in collaboration all members of the group have equal influence. However, given the nature of group communication, not everyone feels comfortable with sharing their opinions. Some people may prefer avoidance or accommodation, while others (admittedly a minority) may seem verbally aggressive or competitive with their teammates.

Being both competent and assertive helps to bridge the gap between these different personality types.

Chapter 3. Question 2.

2).

Strict discipline does not necessarily equate to abuse, I think we all can agree on this. While discipline plays an important role in the parent/child relationship, it can happen that parents will cross the line into physical or verbal abuse.

Perhaps that best case study for this might be wether or not spanking a child is appropriate. By definition, spanking is supposed to reinforce strict discipline by way of pain. A parent who lightly slaps their kid on the rear-end for a mild offense, I don’t think qualifies as abusive parenting. You can disagree with the methods used - I would suggest to the parent alternative ways of dealing with the issue - the real question, however, is to what degree this is inflicted.

I would also lump verbal abuse along with physical abuse, as equally damaging to a young child. I’ve seen exhaustion plus frustration push parents into a corner. They stop thinking rationally and often react to situations inappropriately.

Options In Conflict

1).

I choose my conflict orientation largely based upon the relationship I have with the other person involved. On average, I try to use a win-win type solution when conflicts arise, however, it depends on the context.

For example, if I were hanging out with someone to whom i’m only causally acquainted (someone who I wouldn’t quite count as a friend) and they asked if I wanted to grab sushi for lunch, I may be inclined to smile and say, “Sure, lets do sushi” even though I would much rather prefer In-In Out Burger. At this point in our relationship, I may choose an “Other-Centered” approach while still getting to know the person.

Yes, I do generally favor the outcomes of my conflicts because I choose my conflict orientation method strategically. In the professional world, during a business meeting or a strategy session I will take a more assertive posture while also emphasizing collaboration. I always will keep in mind the paramount need to preserve the working relationship I have with those around me.


-Ben

Responses In Conflict

In the latter part of chapter 2, we are asked to consider our partner’s point of view. This is a very small part of the chapter, but an important one nonetheless. I have personally used the strategies mentioned for empathy and responsiveness and can say, without a doubt, they work.

In my current job, I am routinely called upon to intervene in stressful situations, often between two or more people, each with their own story about what happened and why they are upset. I find myself using key skills like “Rephrasing” and “Asking what the other person means” to help me in understanding why people are upset.

What I have found to be true is that, more often than not, people just want to be listened to. They want to express their feelings and have those feelings acknowledged and understood. Occasionally, certain individuals are capable of talking themselves through a problem when I prompt them with “Unfinished questions and letting the other person fill in the rest”.

 To understand motive is to understand what compels people to act a certain way. When I’m involved in situations like these, I don’t think, “Would I resent this?”, but rather, “Why do they resent this?”, or “Why would they think this?”.

I’ve been fortunate enough to have worked helping run after school programs for Junior High students recently. I have seen that conflict resolution is not me telling them what to do, or who is most at fault. It involves me leading them to the conclusion I want them to reach, but having them reach it by themselves. Responding to them with these types of phrases is incredibly useful and effective in helping me achieve this goal.

-Ben

Process View Of Conflict

The authors define the “process view of conflict” as a series of stages. Ideally, a properly resolved conflict situation will have five distinct steps - Prelude, Triggering, Initiation, Differentiation, and Resolution.

When asked what it means to have a non-process view of communication, I don’t interpret this as meaning that none of the five phases occurred, rather that the process has been interrupted or derailed some point before the Resolution stage. When we take a non-process view of conflict in communication, the Prelude and Triggering phases may be met, but never fully evolve into Resolution.

Having never allowed the conflict situation to reach the Initiation phase can be seen as a result of “Confrontational Avoidance” or due to whats known as the “Chilling Effect”. Although it is often times better to “let sleeping dogs lie”, avoidance is often the result of a lack of confidence in the recipient.

We can change our thinking first by education ourselves as to the five phases of conflict resolution. When we are put into situations like these, now we are capable of stopping to consider what kind of outcome is most desirable in a conflict situation. Instead of storming out of the room at the Differentiation Phase, instead, we now can recognize this as just being a prelude to Resolution, rather than treating it as the final act.

-Ben

Week 2 / Blog 1

Week 2 / Blog 1

- Yes, I would argue that the tendency towards conflict is an inborn human trait. While people can argue wether or not this “conflict”, in its various manifestations is a good thing, history has made it clearly obvious that the human species has an inclination towards dispute and disagreement.

- The question over wether this makes us more human is a difficult one to fully answer. If we were to go about life devoid of all emotions and opinions, our “human” condition would be  more robotic than biological. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that those who commonly cause conflict are more human, and I wouldn’t say that people who generally tend to avoid conflict are somehow lacking either. Conflict is just a part of nature - this can be witnessed in the animal kingdom, for example. Conflict doesn’t make us “human” so much as humans make conflict.

- As chapter 1 makes clear, yes, conflict can be constructive. It is valuable because it can act as the impetus for address a troublesome situation, therefore leading to a potential resolution beneficial to both parties.


 -Ben

Introductions...

Hi everyone,

Looking forward to Comm 115p! This is my second semester at SJSU, and my first semester taking any online courses. Ideally, I would have preferred an "in-person" class, but personal/professional commitments got in the way

Outside of school I really enjoy travel, in-fact, if I had the opportunity I think that's what I'd spend the first few years after college doing. Ventured off to New Zealand and Europe last year... hopefully I can keep that trend going in 2012 :)

As far as sports go, I've tried my hand at them all - Baseball, soccer, martial arts, lacrosse, even SCUBA. Out of all the different sports i've attempted, lacrosse has definitely been a favorite. For those of you who've never seen a game, think of it like a cross between hockey and soccer, but with more scoring.

I hope to take from this class new, substantive ideas on how to deal with conflict in communication. Semesters always seem to drag on for me.... but the good news is summers only 3 1/2 months away! Lets get started.

-Ben