Communication, Conflict and Decision-Making - Essay Example

Communication, Conflict and Decision-Making Case Study The fundamental case study entails a social conflict/discord involving me and my wife. My wife wishes to achieve her PhD in the United States. In contrast, I have a different need of relocating my family to my native home. In her opinion, my wife thinks that she can remain in the U.S. and commence her academic progress. Though, I would favor a circumstance where my wife would commence her further education at our native home. Eventually, we were incapable of arriving at a clear decision on whether relocate or stay in the United States. Poor conflict resolution abilities by the two of us were responsible for the looming stalemate at the end of the discussion. Effective strategies of communication would facilitate the development of a quick decision between us. At first, there is need to listen to carefully to the views and thoughts claimed by one another. Careful listening and appreciation each other’s opinion would encourage the progress of a caring surrounding between me and my wife. In this situation, I recognized that I am showing a high level of instrumentality in the process by struggling to communicate with intent in mind. I would like us to be very close to our family back at our native home for the purpose of child development. Nonetheless, there is the use of poor techniques of communication since I do not recognize my wife’s interests while I keep being adamant about returning home. Various theoretical conflict resolutions highlight the significance of participating in either compromise or collaborative communications. In this case, neither I nor my wife directed one’s resolution course to a reciprocal circumstance. Consequent to poor communication process, we would not make suitable decisions; thus, failed to reach an agreement. In every society, communication is the backbone of professional and social relationships. Communication facilitates the flow of ideas and/or concepts from one given source to the other. The best process of communication needs the existence of a message sender, as well as the receiver. Individuals share the views and ideas through thriving process of communication. For any communication process to be regarded as thriving, the receiver must comprehend the message content in accordance to the sender’s aim. This means that certain processes of communication lead to unsuccessful ends. Thus, it is worth noting that communication process encounters some hindrances that deter efficient information delivery to the anticipated parties. No matter the effort put in to evade a conflict, it appears to always arise at the worst moments. Thus, ineffective communication leads to conflict of views or ideas among the parties involved. During communication, conflict begins from a merely simple flicker of emotions or varies all the way to supportive proof that one presents. While conflict may lead to both positive and negative impacts, this social disagreement may boost maturity of social abilities among the individuals involved. Conflict management involves application of measures that promote advance of positive effects form a social discord. Efficient conflict management process promotes learning among parties involved and the entire society on how to address incompatible vies in the future. Conflict management entails some element of decision making in resolving a basic issue. Any conflict ends when one or both involved parties choose the appropriate strategy from the accessible alternative options. Truly, everyone has a view on conflict resolution, based on research, experience, or a recipe on both. The fact is that there a number of ways of tackling conflict, both bad and good approaches. Nonetheless, there are very little tried and accurate approaches of conflict resolution that have been experimented by various people groups and that appear to have a greater level of achievement. Such methods include the Ladder of Inference theory, the single and double loop theory, and best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA). Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA) BATNAs, as described by Fisher and Ury (1991), are decisive to negotiation since one cannot make a sensible decision on whether to acknowledge a negotiated agreement unless you recognize what your options are. My BTNA is the only set that can guard me from both agreeing conditions that are extremely adverse and from declining terms that would be in my interest to accept. If the accord is not superior than one’s BATNA, then one should revive negotiations. If it is hard to improve the agreement, then there is the need consider retreating from the negotiations and pursuing a different alternative. BATNA can be applied well in my case; through establishing my best option to the negotiated accord. First, I have to scrutinize both my position and my interests. Then, assess the sum of these sections relative to all different options accessible; select the appropriate choice, and lastly do reverse from my wife’s perspective. Nonetheless, my conflict resolution approach between me and my wife were unsatisfactory because of the failure to effectively apply BATNA. In my case study, I ended up retreating from a conflict communication since I considered my wife’s views as selfish and bizarre. This is because I failed to develop a BATNA earlier before participating in the negotiation. Failure to take suitable time to form a BATNA made me unaware of what would occur if the negotiation is unsuccessful. Consequently, I felt a powerful internal pressure to arrive at an agreement, although it is not in my best interest. Ladder of Inference Theory The Ladder of Inference model is one of the most efficient tools in comprehending and describing why we regularly get into disagreement and fail to arrive at a resolution. The model recognizes exclusivity of beliefs and principles among individuals in an incorporated social environment. Thus, different individuals choose different data and information. Values and beliefs further affect the subsequent step, which needs adding meaning to the chosen information. One adds sense to information based on his or her beliefs. The subsequent approach entails drawing assumptions and conclusions. According to this theory, one derives conclusions that are well-matched with one’s beliefs and social values. Thus, conclusions made on a deliberative decision-making procedure can be skewed as one judges his or her beliefs and social beliefs when making such decisions. I have utilized this theory in my entire life during various instances of communication and decision-making process. My case study serves as an ideal representation of this theory. The case needs me to communicate views on my position regarding the issues of leaving my wife in the U.S. Therefore, I pursued an organized procedure in conducting the deliberative process. I began by recognizing facts on my duties as a family man. Having agreed that I am supposed to be a sole provider, I attempted to apply this model in devising an option to the problem of leaving my wife in the U.S. After forming an all-inclusive meaning, I concluded that we should relocate back to our native country. My cultural understanding influenced my decision to be the best option course of action to take. Single and double loop theory According to Fisher and Ury (1991), learning entails the discovery and correction of mistake. Where something goes awry, it is proposed, a preliminary port of call for various individuals is to look for a different plan that will tackle and work within the major variables. That is, chosen or given goals, plans, values, and regulations are operationalized and not questioned. The single loop model focuses on linear approach of thinking, sticks to what presently exists, values permanence, and looks at the type of actions and outcomes. This procedure does not permit for important questions to basic ideas or means. Double loop process looks at deeds and consequences relative to foundation theories and suppositions; and calls for questions, reflection, and the likelihood of change. Single and double loop model was very much applicable in my case study that involves a strong conflict between my interests and those of my wife. Using this model, I acknowledged that when an error is perceived and corrected allows us to continue on our present policies or attain our present objectives, then that process of error-and-correction is single looping. It entails making inferences on one another’s behavior without examining whether they are applicable and advocating one’s own opinion conceptually without illustrating or explaining one’s reasoning. In my case study, we have failed to reach an accord because of the diverse conflict management approaches used by each one of us. Personally, I am unrelenting on moving my family back home. Thus, I appear to use much of a competing approach. Moreover, there is no cooperation when it comes leaving my wife back in the US. Indeed; I seem more forceful in my position and on the significance of relocating back home. On the contrary, my wife assumes more of a collaborative approach. Based on her position on the issue, she is attempting to build a cooperative environment in assessing the significance of attaining a PhD. Using the single and double loop model, I learnt acting defensively can be perceived as evading something, normally some facts about us. Thus, the only appropriate approach is to facilitate open communication, and to candidly test suppositions and beliefs. Ladder of Inference Model: From this model, I discovered that decision making procedure during communication begins with gathering of information from my case study. This model narrows down to the conclusion stage through information collection and the addition of sense to the supposition stage. I further learned that assumption and conclusion formation are a natural part of life. Hence, it is wise to draw conclusions founded on our convictions and beliefs, although it is essential to evaluate them since they may deter us from making the appropriate solutions. Furthermore, applying the BATNA model made me learn to list what I will do when the agreement is not achieved; change majority of promising alternatives into practical options; compare my BATNA to that proposed by my wife, and then consider advancing or accepting it. That is, considering the alternative of moving to home and ensuring that my wife gets to finish her PhD without any delay. We attempted to separate the development process from the assessment stage. We came together and devised all the appropriate solutions to the issue. Collaborating approach promotes the advance of an extended range of options while striving to attain a win/win state. Thus, my wife and I should be assertive and cooperative in managing our conflict. Conclusion Fisher and Ury techniques to solve a problem The getting to the YES ideas that are applicable to my case study and addresses the levels of compromise and conflict resolution begins from the first theory of separating the individual(s) from the problem, which is conducted by distinguishing the individual needs, attitudes and perception. The major question asked based on Fisher and Ury model is: how do I as a mature adult think the outcome of this conflict resulting in benefiting us? Using Fisher and Ury principle, I learned that negotiation is a fundamental means of achieving what you need from others. This is a sideway communication intended to arrive at an agreement in a case with both shared and opposing interests. Based on my case study, the basis of the conflict between me and my wife is diversity in our needs and desires. Her interest is to get a PhD from the US and my interest is to relocate my family back home. My wife believes that getting a PhD in the US is more important due to the value given to a PhD holder in our country. She also asserts that since we have spent much time in the US and that she had much understanding of the US education system compared to that back at home. On the contrary, I believed that pursuing her PhD at home is much cheaper compared to the US, and starting her PhD at home would give an opportunity to settle well in the country. The most important part of my concern is to keep our marriage together. It is from this conflict that I discovered the significance of addressing and managing a conflict. The impasse that I encountered was stern, and if each of us was reluctant to solve the issue, we might have eventually done more harm than good to our marriage. I did not just learn that in situations when interests are unswervingly different, parties must use objective measures to resolve their divergences. The main thing that we need to avoid is falling into a win-lose situation so as to get a compromise. I believe that in the future, I would be able to rationalize the procedure that we commenced through the process of this quandary and focus on finding a sensible rather than dragging the disagreement over an extended period resulting into emotional and mental fatigue and a lot of frustration to parties involved. A decision founded on sensible standards makes it simpler for the parties to concur and protect their good relationship. Reference Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin Publishers. Read More