PSDM Model of Interpersonal Conflict Resolution - Essay Example

? MIA3- Conflict MIA3- Conflict Introduction Interpersonal conflict resolution entails incompatibilities, behaviors and sentiments. Some incompatibilities that lead to destructive intergroup conflict include the power differences and competition for scarce resources. Accordingly, interpersonal conflicts result from differences in values and ideologies (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). Accordingly, the society has different religious groups and cultural groups that influence the values of an individual. Power conflicts within a social groups emanates from desire to influence and control the relationships within the group. Struggle for control and dominance within a social setting such as corporate environment will lead to a stalemate in the interpersonal relationships among the individuals. Some behaviors that are associated with power struggles include feelings of deception, manipulation and defeat (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). However, positive power behaviors such as persuasion will minimize the interpersonal conflicts within a group. Another element of interpersonal conflicts is the differences in perceptual and cognitive factors. Human beings tend to attain distinctiveness and social identity within the social group thus individual who fail to conform to group values are discriminated against in social interactions (Rahim, 2011). High social dominance orientation will promote the group-based hierarchies in favor of the high powerful individuals in the group (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). Social group factors such as the level of cohesiveness, group identity, conformity pressure and decision-making methods will influence the effectiveness of conflict resolution among the group members. All individuals within the group strive to attain a higher social esteem and group identity. However, group dynamics such as intensity hostility between the members, fear, deception and mistrust will escalate the level of conflict within the group (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). PSDM model of interpersonal conflict resolution The PSDM model of decision-making and problem solving is integral to conflict resolution within a group. According to the model, conflict resolution entails four phases that include diagnosis phase, identification of alternative solutions, evaluation and selection of acceptable alternative and finally decision making and implementation phase. The diagnosis phase involves identification of the source of the conflict. The parties must cooperate in identifying the conflict sources (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). In addition, the parties must avoid any destructive behaviors such as blaming others during this phase. The second stage is identification of alternative solutions through brainstorming. A checklist is used in brainstorming sessions in order to stimulate creativity. The third phase is evaluation and selection of an acceptable solution (Rahim, 2011). This phase entails consideration the various alternatives and determining the most effective in resolving the conflict (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). The parties can utilize a reference frame such as ability to attain social cohesion, ability to attain group objectives and fairness to all parties. The last phase is decision-making and implementation of the solution through changing the values, attitudes and communication channels within the group. Theory of cooperation and competition The theory was advanced by Morton Deutsch and later elaborated by David W. Johnson. The theory emphasizes on the interdependence of the goals of the parties to the conflict. The goals of the parties must be positively correlated in order to foster cooperative conflict resolution (Rahim, 2011). Goal interdependence is then combined with psychological processes such as attitudes, substitutability and inducibility (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). The theory aims at controlling destructive competition within the group and fostering cooperation through enhancing group cohesion and problem cognition. The interpersonal conflict must be reframed in to mutual problem through identifying common disagreements and accepting responsibility for the harmful consequences of the conflict (Rahim, 2011). The parties must eliminate tensions, fears and suspicion in order to facilitate cooperation problem solving that leads to conflict resolution (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). An effective interpersonal conflict resolution model must take in to account the processes that lead to conflict, perceptions of group members, communication styles and decision-making methods available within the group. Biases, mistrust, hostility, self-fulfilling prophecies and other destructive behaviors will hinder effective interpersonal conflict resolution (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). My individual interpersonal conflict resolution model My interpersonal conflict resolution model entails several steps that ensure parties to the conflict can openly express both positive and negative emotions. In addition, the model aims at creating cordial environment that eliminates barriers to conflict resolution and implementing an acceptable solution to the conflict resolution. Step 1: Identification of the conflict source The initial step entails identifying the conflict problem. The parties must identify the signs of the interpersonal conflict. Some potential conflict problems within a group include poor communication channels, cross-cultural differences and differing personalities (Rahim, 2011). Other possible problems that lead to interpersonal conflicts include poor leadership, poor definition of individual roles within the organization, power struggles and poor decision-making processes. Step 2: establishing a sense of urgency The second step in interpersonal conflict resolution is creating urgency for the end of the conflict. This step entails helping the parties understand and acknowledge how the conflict is detrimental to the group (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). For instance, the parties must understand how poor communication has led to inefficiencies in work and how poor relationships hinder group work within an organization. Accordingly, the conflict mediator must identify how conflict has hindered the attainment of certain group goals (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). In this stage, it is essential to acknowledge that conflict has negatively affected the group norms, values and objectives (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). Step 3: Creating a favorable conflict resolution environment The third step in the model is preparing the parties to conflict resolution through creating an enabling environment that fosters cooperation and trust. In this step, the parties to the conflict must acknowledge their mistakes and openly accept blame for the conflict (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). The stage aims at increasing the social cohesion between the parties and improving collaboration (Rahim, 2011). The parties are encouraged to express both positive and negative emotions regarding the conflict problem (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). This step is critical in ensuring trust and strengthening open communication between the conflicting parties. In addition, all parties must be prepared to engage in constructive feedback regarding the progress of the conflict resolution. Step 4: Brainstorming for conflict resolution alternatives The fourth step entails brainstorming for various solutions that can solve the interpersonal conflict. Some of the possible alternatives to conflict resolution include avoidance, compromise and accommodating the interpersonal differences (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). Step 5: Evaluating the interpersonal conflict resolution alternatives The fifth step entails evaluating the interpersonal conflict resolution alternatives in order to select the most suitable solution. The parties must have a criteria or a reference frame that will check list the ability of an alternative to adequately resolve the conflict (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). The parties will also conflict the ability to attain group objectives, ability to maintain working relationships and feasibility of each interpersonal conflict resolution alternative (Rahim, 2011). Avoidance solutions lead to low cooperation while competition will hinder the group cohesion. The parties must collaborate and compromise their individual interests in order to attain a mutually acceptable solution to the conflict (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). Step 6: Implementing an acceptable conflict resolution alternative The selected alternative will be implemented immediately in order to avoid the negative impacts of the interpersonal conflict (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). Implementation may require some supportive changes such as redesigning of roles, changing communication channels and implementing new rules. However, cooperation and collaboration is critical during the implementation stage (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). Step 7: Enhancing group cohesion and norms This step entails aligning the goal interdependence of the conflicting parties. Accordingly, the step will promote social cohesion through implementing shared values, beliefs and attitudes (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). The parties must be willing to accommodate the cultural differences and differing personalities (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). Step 8: Evaluating of the solution The parties to the interpersonal conflicts must have short-term wins that are essential in reviewing the progress in ending the conflict. Some short-term wins include the quality of interpersonal relationships, the efficiency of the communication channels and ability to deliver feedback (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). A corrective action should be undertaken whereby the solution fails in addressing the interpersonal conflict (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). Conclusion Interpersonal conflict resolution entails dealing with behaviors, sentiments and incompatibilities that lead to conflicts. Some causes of interpersonal conflicts include power struggles within a group, competition for scarce resources and differences in perceptions and personalities. Positive behaviors such as collaboration and persuasion will promote social cohesion, group identity and norm congruence within a social group. The PSDM model of problem solving is useful in interpersonal conflict resolution due to its ability to eliminate disruptive behaviors and stimulating creativity in arriving at a mutually acceptable solution to a conflict. The theory of cooperation and competition solves interpersonal conflicts through facilitating goal interdependence and enhancing cooperation that eliminates negative competition among group members. The theory because it theory eliminates fear, tensions and fosters harmony in conflict resolution. My personal interpersonal conflict resolution model entails eight steps that aim at solving the conflict and creating group cohesion. The initial step is the identification of the conflict problem and its causes. I have selected this model since it clearly defines certain sources of interpersonal conflict such as power struggles and personality clashes. Accordingly, the model is useful since the second step aims at establishing the need to solve the conflict through enabling the parties understand the adverse effects of the conflict towards attainment of group objectives. This step helps parties understand why the conflict is harmful. Another advantage of my model is the third step that creates a cordial environment for conflict resolution. All parties must acknowledge and accept blame for the conflict and ensure open communication. This step is critical since it eliminates any fears, biases and deceptions that parties harbor. The fourth and fifth steps provide some guidelines on the behaviors that parties should avoid during brainstorming and evaluation of a viable solution. Some disruptive behaviors include competition and avoidance. The parties must encourage persuasion and collaboration in these critical steps. Accordingly, my model includes the need to enhance cohesion and norms after implementation of a viable solution to the conflict. I have included this step because differences in individual goals and belief systems create power and economic struggles that are responsible for interpersonal conflicts. The step is critical since it leads to harmonization of values and attitudes and acceptance of unique individual personalities within the group. Finally, my model provides the opportunity for feedback and implementation of corrective action. References: Deutsch, M., Coleman, P.T., & Marcus, E.C. (Eds.). (2006). The handbook of conflict resolution: theory and practice. (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Donohue, W.A & Kolt, R. (1994). Managing interpersonal conflict. New York: Sage. Rahim, M.A. (2011). Managing conflict in organizations. New Jersey: Transaction. Read More