Reasoning Paper - Personal Statement Example

In general, conflict is an affliction common to all of people, but the ways that people "struggle" with one another are quite diverse. One employee might not ever discuss important issues, yet the next will argue incessantly over minutia. There is a touch of idealism revealed in our belief that appropriate control over the process of communication may lead to more equitable, humane, and satisfying forms of conflict than are often experienced. Still, the relationship between communication and conflict is not straightforward.

Sometimes the ostensibly "best" forms of communication lead to the worst consequences and vice versa (Dixit and Nalebuff 2003). My description of communication in conflict entails a logical sequence of steps. The conflict situation shows that one must be able to describe what people do when they have conflict; for example, they may lash out, apologize, sulk, laugh, or disclose. The second step in analysis is to describe the characteristics of communication systems. This involves a shift in the level of analysis from individual messages to recurring patterns of communication.

System characteristics are potentially more revealing than individual styles. A particular form of communication, say a single angry outburst or even a series of outbursts, may reveal little about the interpersonal relationship that is observed until the recurring events that elicit the outbursts are understood (Hardt and Harris 2007). This is hardly a new idea but it is difficult to put into practice. It is simply easier to describe individual conflict styles than it is to describe patterns of interaction.

Our discussion focuses on five properties of conflict patterns: variety, symmetry, continuity, stationarity, and spontaneity. Although individuals behave strategically at times, at other times conflicts proceed without clear goals and plans. Much conflict behavior is experienced as "just happening." The spouse who is criticized by the other may automatically respond with a counter complaint and not make a reflective choice about those behaviors (Hardt and Harris 2007).In this conflict situation, affect is a second important dimension.

Some styles are hostile (e.g., confrontation), others are neutral or friendly (e.g., conciliatory behavior and humor), and still other styles, such as conflict avoidance, are inconsistent or unclear in the sort of emotion expressed. The implications of affect are reasonably straightforward. Generally, people who are more compatible (i.e., satisfied, well-adjusted, and the like) are more friendly to one another. For example, they make fewer confrontational statements, speak in a more positive vocal tone, sit closer together, touch one another more, and so forth (Dixit and Nalebuff 2003).

During the conflict, evasive comments can occur when one employee asks a question or makes a statement about conflict and the other employee responds ambiguously. Evasive comments are related to the understanding of "disqualification." Disqualifying comments can occur when employees see themselves in a "bind" (i.e., a way to avoid a conflict situation). When given a choice between the acceptation of decision, and a disqualifying response, employees usually say that they would choose the latter (Hardt and Harris 2007).

The heavy use of denial by roommates is to be expected, given the awkward and unprecedented social arrangement that roommates have