Discussion Week 2: Tangible Versus Intangible

Discussion Week 2top Of Formdiscussion Tangible Versus Intangible C

In this discussion, you are asked to identify a conflict situation about which you feel strongly. It may be a workplace conflict or a personal conflict at home or at school. The conflict may be interpersonal or between two different groups, but not more. You should analyze the conflict by documenting the details and applying the Stop – Think, Listen, and Communicate (S-TLC) approach as discussed in the course readings. Focus on understanding both the emotional content and the underlying issues, keeping in mind the basic communication rights and practicing empathy to foster a safe space for learning, exploration, and change.

To prepare, review the course resources, especially the sections on the five stages of conflict and the Dynamics of Trust model. When responding to peers, consider what has not been said, explore intangible aspects, and discuss shared goals using these frameworks. Use De Bono’s Six Thinking Hats to gain new insights into the conflict described by your peers, suggesting which hat might be most useful for gaining additional understanding. Your responses should be 3-4 paragraphs, original, and include APA citations from credible sources.

Paper For Above instruction

Conflicts, especially within organizational or personal settings, are complex phenomena that evolve based on tangible and intangible factors. Understanding and analyzing these conflicts through structured models can facilitate effective resolution and foster trust among involved parties. This paper explores two conflict scenarios, analyzing their core issues using the frameworks provided by Cahn & Abigail (2014) and Furlong (2005)—specifically focusing on tangible versus intangible conflicts and the dynamics of trust that influence them.

Analysis of Conflict Scenario 1: Workplace Raise Discussed

The first conflict scenario, provided by Natasha Mills, relates to her experience within her workplace concerning her request for a salary raise. She anticipated that her performance reviews would naturally lead to a raise, but her manager failed to propose one, which resulted in a latent conflict fueled by unspoken expectations and personal reticence. The tangible core issue was the raise itself, an observable asset directly linked to her financial compensation. The intangible elements included her shyness, which hindered her from voicing her needs, and her perception of the manager’s behavior, which she interpreted as dismissive or indifferent. These intangible aspects are critical because they influence her feelings of self-worth and her perception of fairness.

The trust dynamic plays a significant role here. Mills believed she could rely on her manager to act in good faith regarding her compensation, but this trust was undermined when the manager did not address her raise. The risk assessment revealed she feared losing her job or damaging her reputation if she pushed too hard, considering her personality trait of shyness. Conversely, the manager’s intrinsic behavior—possibly unaware of the impact of his actions—contributed to the trust breach. In resolving this conflict, Mills resorted to avoidance, avoiding confrontation due to fear and shyness, which exemplifies a dysfunctional conflict resolution cycle identified by Cahn & Abigail (2014). This approach hampers resolution, often leading to unresolved tensions that can deteriorate working relationships.

Analysis of Conflict Scenario 2: Committee and Public Relations Resistance

Donna Tizzano’s conflict involves her efforts to advance healthcare initiatives through a hospital committee, faced with resistance mainly from the Director of Public Relations (PR). Her tangible conflict involved her efforts to influence hospital website content and signage assessments, which the PR Director initially resisted. The intangible conflict was rooted in personality traits—such as assertiveness and passive-aggressive tendencies—manifested through the PR Director’s refusal to follow through and her behind-the-scenes undermining. This passive-aggressive communication style created a dysfunctional cycle, with the PR Director covertly opposing group efforts without openly addressing issues, aligning with Cahn & Abigail’s (2014) description of passive-aggressive behavior as a winner-takes-all approach that prevents resolution.

The trust model highlights perceptions of motives and intentions. Donna perceived the PR Director’s behavior as self-serving and insincere, fearing that her reluctance stemmed from a desire to dominate rather than cooperate. The risk was that the committee would fail to meet the community’s health needs, which motivated her to adopt a collaborative approach—scheduling a pre-meeting to clarify goals and seek mutual understanding. This strategy aligns with building trust through open communication and shared objectives, essential for ongoing collaboration in complex organizational environments (Furlong, 2005). It underscores the importance of addressing both tangible assets and intangible perceptions to achieve effective conflict resolution.

Implications and Conclusion

Both conflict scenarios demonstrate that tangible issues such as tangible assets and observable behaviors are only part of the story. The intangible elements—personality traits, perceptions, motives, and emotional content—are equally significant in shaping conflict dynamics. Recognizing and addressing these aspects through empathetic communication, trust-building, and collaborative approaches can lead to sustainable resolutions and stronger relationships. Structured frameworks like the trust dynamic model and conflict models provide valuable tools for analyzing and managing conflicts productively, emphasizing the need for holistic understanding beyond surface-level issues.

References

• Cahn, D. D., & Abigail, R. A. (2014). Managing conflict through communication (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
• Furlong, G. T. (2005). The conflict resolution toolbox: Models and maps for analyzing, diagnosing, and resolving conflict. John Wiley & Sons.
• Kolb, D. M., & Putnam, L. L. (1992). The multiple faces of conflict in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(3), 219-237.
• De Dreu, C. K., & Gelfand, M. J. (2008). The psychology of conflict management in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 1-48.
• Rusbult, C. E., & Van Lange, P. A. (2003). Interdependence, communication, and relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 20(3), 267-294.
• Lewicki, R. J., & Scheller, R. (2017). Negotiation. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.), The encyclopedia of positive psychology (pp. 593-598). Wiley-Blackwell.
• Ury, W. L. (1991). Getting past no: Negotiating with difficult people. Bantam Books.
• Moore, C. W. (2014). The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict. Jossey-Bass.
• McGinn, J. (2014). Building trust in conflict management. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 19(1), 177-202.
• Thompson, L. (2017). The truth about negotiation. Pearson.