Skills and Strategies to Minimizing Conflicts

Conflict Management Project Analysis

Were you surprised by the results of your conflict management style assessment? Why or why not? Explain.

I was not surprised by the results of my conflict management style assessment. The results depict my nature, behavior, and approach to conflicts. I endeavor to strike a balance between aspects revolving around conflicts. At times, I do not resist getting involved in a disagreement. Avoiding to back out from a conflict occurs as one of my pro-characteristics. I believe in effective ironing out issues through discussions, arguments. At the end of these arguments, there should result in a certain level of agreement between conflicting sides. The attribute of winning surpasses the attribute of backing out from an argument.

Encouraging open sharing of concerns and issues enables me to take decisively an angle of view that addresses my perspective on a certain subject. Despite my appetite for winning an argument, I endeavor to strike a mutually understanding solution in conflicts. At the end of any argument, how conflicting sides reach a common ground occurs as a critical aspect. In achieving this, I endeavor to strike a balance between the conflicting side and my side. Failing to back out of arguments enables me to tackle issues head-on without the fear of suppression of my point-of-view. The results, a vivid description of my nature occur as the considerable approach in conflict handling and resolution.

2. Were the scores for your primary and backup conflict handling styles relatively similar, or was there a large gap? What does this imply? Discuss.

The scores were relatively similar, a clear depiction of my results of conflict management style assessment. Comprising approach tops the list. It implies moderate cooperation and assertiveness in dealing with conflicts. Unlike other schools of view with the perspective that compromising entails giving up one's ambitions, it depicts a win-win for conflicting parties. At the end of an argument, I believe reaching a central conclusion occurs as the ultimate reason for conflict management. At times, the appropriateness of compromising mode reaches in dealing with issues of moderate significance. A strong commitment to resolution occurs in the case of equal power status between conflicting sides.

Comprising comes in handy in temporary solution in cases of time constraints. Skills utilized in this style include assessing value, making concessions, negotiation, and reaching a middle ground. The avoiding style that bottoms the list shows depicts my dislike in this approach. I believe that airing out ideas and concerns serve as the best approach to reaching a common ground. Failure to do so only elicits hard feelings and emotions of one side to the other. Consequently, it may fuel unnecessary actions based on one's suppression of ideas and concerns. The accommodating, forcing, and collaborating styles scored relatively high marks. I cannot ignore the relevance of these styles in conflict resolution. The effectiveness of the three styles come in handy in the resolution of conflicts where compromising style does not yield fruits.

3. What are some skills you can work on to become more effective at handling conflict? Describe and explain.

Despite my differing perspective on the avoiding style, I have realized that the style occurs as a beneficial approach to solving some low-concerned issues. Avoiding depicts the trait of low assertiveness and cooperation. At times, conflicts of low-significance do not require engaging in arguments as a solution strategy. The strategy comes in handy in reducing tension and times when the other party is of a higher position than I am. I need to work on the ability to withdraw from a possible escalation of conflicts. Low-significance issues do not require wholesome indulgence in solving the conflicts. Timing occurs as a vital skill that I need to work on to achieve a critical edge in solving conflicts. The ability to sidestep issues enables me to shun from the conflicts I consider 'petty' that do not require indulging.

Part 2:

4. Explain the nature of the conflict in your words.

Gun Control Conflict

The hot-buttoned debate of gun control has elicited mixed feelings, emotions, and reactions to the subjects. Lots of statistics have depicted different arguing sides in the cases, whether the guns depict safety of the American Society or infer dangerous implications with their ownership. The debate occurs as an emotional subject and not as a public safety concern. In the recent wake of school shootings, the Obama administration has called for support for gun control.

Critics have argued that support for gun control draws racial and geographic concentration in ways that sap movement of political influence and power. A national consensus on gun control occurs as far-fetched ideas as differing bits of the American Society experience different levels of harm from guns. Polls have indicated that 78% of the black community supported stricter gun control measures whereas 48% of whites supported the same course (Lexington 1). "Individualists" prefer a society that maximizes on the fruits of individual choice and personal choice. Under this class of individuals, the unchanging hierarchy of the economic and social class occurs as a status quo that does not require a change. The conservative nature of critics fault changing status quo in the name of social protection and equity, in this case, gun control (Ropeik 1).

Individualists point to the emotional stakes in the gun control case. Perspectives of individualists point to a curtailment of individual freedom an aspect that directly threatens their 'security' in today's polarized society. Such a group feels threatened with the implementation of stricter gun control measures. Further, critics have called for a diverse and comprehensive approach to dealing with awful events leading to the deaths of many. Shooting cases in Connecticut, for example, depicts a broad of factors leading to their escalation, not only the freedom of gun ownership.

Supporters of gun control occur as two distinct groups namely, "communitarians" and "egalitarians." Egalitarians prefer a fair and flexible society that does not depict rigidity in hierarchical status quo. Consequently, the group supports government intervention in formulating and implementing policies geared towards social equity and protection, in this case, gun control measures. On the other hand, the communitarians group represents a group that prefers a "togetherness" society that holds to the ideology of sacrificing some aspects such as gun control for the greater good. The deep roots embedded in the conflicting sides depict the emotional stakes in gun control measures (Ropeik 1).