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
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
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
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
Monday, February 20, 2012
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
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
Thursday, February 16, 2012
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
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
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
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
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
Monday, February 13, 2012
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
Saturday, February 11, 2012
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.
“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.
Friday, February 10, 2012
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.
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.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
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
Thursday, February 2, 2012
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)