Literature Review

A key aspect in the daily running of business of any organization is the conflict and negotiations. The owners of the businesses have to face conflicts with the general public, the employees, the managers and even their partners. And at such instances, negotiations become an important aspect for creating amicable solutions for all of the parties who are involved in the conflict (Vitez, 2017). In the following parts, a brief literature review has been conducted on conflict and negotiations which is followed by three diagnostic tools so as to analyse the literature in context of the personality of the writer. And lastly, a development plan has been created so as to work on the shortfalls identified through this literature.

In words of Chou and Hsu (2009) conflict was the awareness of the parties who were involved in irreconcilable desires, discrepancies or incompatible wishes. This definition has its focus upon the parties’ perception which forms the very essence of a conflict. As per the Cambridge dictionary, conflict is an active disagreement amidst different people who have opposing principles or opinions (Cambridge Dictionary, 2017). It had been noted by Rahim (2010) that there is no single and universal definition which is accepted for a conflict. In the view of this author, one issue which has to be taken into consideration for conflict is the type of behaviour or the conflicting situation in which one is.

Nam (2016) quoted the oxford dictionary definition of conflict, which states conflict as being a major disagreement or an argument, which is usually a protracted one as there is an eternal conflict between the sexes; where there is a state of mind in which the individual goes through clashing opposing needs or feelings; are bewildered through their inner conflicts and a conflict continues between two situations. In the words of Singh (2008) conflict was such a situation, where the individuals had a difficulty in choosing, between the different courses of actions, available to them.

Rahim cited the definition given by Baron (1990) to cite the organizational conflict, where certain elements were found in definition of conflicts. These included that there has to be recognized opposing interests in between the parties, where a zero sum situation is present; there has to be a belief that each side acts against the other; this belief is likely to be justified through the actions undertaken by them; and the conflict is a process which has developed from previous interactions.

The conflict theories are found under the field of social psychology and sociology where the emphasis is laid down on the materialist interpretation of history, political program of revolution/ reform, dialectical method of analysis and a critical stance towards the present social arrangements (Einstadter & Henry, 2006). This theory draws attentions towards power differentials for instance the class conflict. The social conflict theory was originated by Karl Marx as a component of four paradigms of sociology (Burrell & Morgan, 2017).

The shortfalls and the deadlock which is caused by conflicts lead to the strategies of conflict resolution amongst which is the negotiation. Chaturvedi (2011) defined negotiation as the process where two or a higher number of people get indulged with each other in a communication chain for obtaining the objectives in a mutual manner. As this process is mutual, Fells (2009) stated that this helped in avoiding the possible disputes between two or more parties. Dwyer (2012) was of the view that negotiation was such a process which continues till the time a resolution is attained. The negotiations process is a lengthy one, particularly in the business context. It covers fours distinctive stages, and these include the pre-negotiations phase, the conceptualization phase, the settling of details, and the last stage of follow up. The success and failure of this process depends upon the successful implementation of these stages (Negotiations, 2017). Lewicki, Saunders and Barry (2011) presented negotiations as the procedure which was present in the day to day life of people, even though this procedure is differentiated with every individual. There are a number of factors which can influence the process of negotiations. Hofstede, Hofstede and Minkov (2010) have identified culture as a key factor when it comes to the negotiation process.

Diagnostic Tools

Amongst the different theories under negotiations, the linkage theory is the most prominent one. As per Crump (2007), linkage theory is the manner through which the result of the negotiations process if influenced or is determined. And through the use of this theory, the relationship between the environment and the negotiation undertaken can be evaluated in an effective manner. Maggi (2016) stated that through the use of linkage theory, the relationship between the environment and the negotiations could be explained. The reason for linking environment is that the environment has the capability of suspending, supporting, advancing and halting the negotiations process. Tollison and Willett (1979) identified that the affairs of the environment, had the capacity of hindering the negotiation process, which could be identified through the use of linkage theory.

Negotiation is deemed as the specialized and a formal version of conflict resolution, which is used more than often in the key issues being faced (Arya, 2017). The rudiments of the negation theory are based on decision analysis, the behavioural decision making, the game theory and the negotiation analysis. This process is also dependent upon the particular situation and is applied after structural analysis, strategic analysis, process analysis and integrative analysis (Thompson, 2006). There are a number of factors, as has been highlighted by different authors, which have to be taken into consideration for undertaking the negotiations. Included in this is the perception of people, their rigidness/ flexibility, culture, social influence, beliefs, anger, guilt, compassion and values, and the different external factors which are based on the particular situation in which the individual is (Robinson et al. 2016).

This is a prominent diagnostic tool which helps in analysing the assertiveness and cooperativeness of an individual in a particular conflict situation (Stanley, 2016). The assertiveness shows the attempts of the individual to satisfy their own needs and concerns; whereas the cooperativeness denotes the extent to which the individual makes an attempt to satisfy the concerns of the other person (Northouse, 2011).

This is a leading personality test which helps an individual in understanding the manner in which they act and how the personality of an individual is structured. E denotes the extroversion, A denotes the agreeableness, C denotes the conscientiousness, N denotes the neuroticism and O denotes the openness to experience (Hahs-Vaughn, 2016).

This model was is a feedback or disclosure model of awareness which was named after Harry Ingham and Hospeh Luft. This feedback helps in ascertain the four qualities of an individual, i.e., open, blind, hidden and unknown (Human Resourcefulness Consulting, 2017).

As per the this analysis, which was self conducted on the writer, the scores attained for competing were 5, for collaborating were 5, for compromising were 7, for avoiding were 6 and for accommodating were 7. On the basis of this, the writer falls in the category of average for competing, average for collaborating, average for compromising, average for avoiding and high for accommodating. So, the application of the diagnostic tool shows that the individual takes the average steps as per the theories mentioned in the literature review and as per the concept found under the definition of conflict and negotiation.

Analysis of Results/ Reflection

However, unlike the literature, the writer is accommodating, which shows that the individual is unassertive and cooperative, where the concerns of the other individuals are kept on higher priority than the concerns of the writer himself. This is both a strength and weakness of the writer, particularly because the writer empathizes towards the others, but at times, it can cause them harm as they sacrifice their interests for the others.

The test conducted on the writer revealed the following result: 

                                     

This depicts that in comparison to the average score of 3, the writer is low in extroversion due to the score of 2.8, which shows that the writer prefers to work on the projects alone. The writer scored 3.3 in agreeableness shows that the writer is usually polite and likes people. The score of 3.1 in conscientiousness highlights that the individual who took the test, likes to follow the rules and prefers clean homes. The score of 3.3 in neuroticism shows that the writer is quite emotional. And lastly, the score of 3 in openness to experience depicts that the writer is an average person who can dream a lot and at the same time, be down to earth.

In a conflicting situation thus, the writer is most likely to resolve the dispute in a polite manner, by following rules, instead of being rigid, as the literature suggested. This is a key strength of the writer as they stop the conflict from escalating by being polite. And half the battle is won at such instances as the situation is not worsened, if not improved upon.

                                                         

The values attained for the “solicits feedback” were 37 and the value for “willingness to self-disclose/ gives feedback” showed 26. This showed that the writer needs to ask people for their feedbacks and that people need to tell the writer more about themselves. This means that in conflicting situations, the writer requires relying upon negotiator to solve the dispute and needs to be told what has to be done to avoid the conflicting situation. Thus, it makes negotiations all the more important for the writer.

In the preceding parts, a number of flaws in the personality of the writer were highlighted through the use of three diagnostic tools, i.e., Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Style Questionnaire, the Big Five Personality Test and the Johari Window Questionnaire. There is a need to rectify these flaws as not only these lead to conflicts in real life but also as they are required for the overall development of an individual. The two key flaws highlighted through this analysis is that the writer is emotional and that the writer puts others before himself.

In order to get over the writer being emotional, the writer needs talk to others, as was rightly highlighted through the use of Johari Window Questionnaire diagnostic tool. The writer needs to interact with his friends, families and other significant people in his life like teachers and counsellors. This would allow the writer to identify their shortfalls and also in this feedback, the writer could ask the near ones about the instances where they thought the writer had been highly emotional. A self analysis is also needed where the writer could self analyse the situations and identify the causes which lead to the individual being emotional.

The next shortfall which the writer needs to work upon is putting the needs to other before him, i.e., being overly empathetic. This can again be done effectively by self analysis where the writer analysis the situation which they had to bear a loss due to keeping the view of others before themselves. It is important for the writer to do this and also ask his friends where they felt the same and ask them their views to best resolve the situation.

Conclusion:

The discussion conducted in the preceding parts highlighted that conflict is a situation which can cause a lot of disruptions in the life of an individual. There are a number of definitions of conflict but each one points towards certain common points, as had been rightly identified through the literature covered. The literature review also highlighted that conflict resolution has a major form, which is negotiation. Negotiation is thus an effective concept through which the conflict is resolved in an amicable and in a mutual manner. The process is not ended till a conclusive resolution is attained through negotiations.

The second half of this discussion covered the self analysis of the writer, where three distinctive diagnostic tools were applied to analyse the personality traits of the writer. These highlighted two key shortfalls of the writer whereby it was shown that the writer is emotional and a highly empathetic person, which can often cause a loss to the writer. Thus, a development plan was drawn, whereby the writer was suggested to opt for self analysis and to take feedback of others for improving upon these shortfalls.

References:

Arya, A.N. (2017). Preparing for International Health Experiences: A Practical Guide. Oxon: Routledge.

Baron, R.A. (1990). “Conflict in Organizations”. In Murphy, K.R., & Saal, F.E. Psychology in Organizations: integrating Science and Practice. London: Psychology Press. 197–216.

Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (2017). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life. Oxon: Routledge.

Cambridge Dictionary. (2017). Conflict. Retrieved from: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/conflict

Chaturvedi, P.D. (2011). Business Communication: Concepts, Cases, and Applications (2^nd ed.). New Delhi: Pearson.

Chou, H.W., & Hsu, J.L. (2009). The effects of communicative genres on intra-group conflict in virtual student teams. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 7, 1- 22.

Crump, L. (2007). A temporal model of negotiation linkage dynamics. Negotiation Journal, 23 (2), pp. 117-153.

Dwyer, J. (2012). Communication for Business and the Professions: Strategies and Skills (5^th ed.). NSW: Pearson Australia.

Einstadter, W.J., & Henry, S. (2006). Criminological Theory: An Analysis of Its Underlying Assumptions (2^nd ed.). London: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.  

Fells, R. (2009). Effective Negotiation: From Research to Results. Victoria: Cambridge University Press.

Hahs-Vaughn, D.L. (2016). Applied Multivariate Statistical Concepts. Oxon: Routledge.

Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J., and Minkov, M. (2010) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. 3^rd ed. USA: McGraw-Hill.

Human Resourcefulness Consulting. (2017). The Johari Window Model. Retrieved from: https://www.humanresourcefulness.net/CypressCollege/docs/HUSR224/Johari_Window_Questionnaire-package.pdf

Lewicki, R., Saunders, D. and Barry, B. (2011) Essentials of Negotiation. 5^th ed. London: McGraw Hill.

Maggi, G. (2016) Issue Linkage. Yale University. Retrieved from: https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Faculty/Maggi/IssueLinkageDraft_041216.pdf

Nam, T.D. (2016). Possible Methods for Resolution of Social Conflicts: An Analysis from Buddhist Perspective. Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 2(8), 1489-1492.

Negotiations. (2017) The Four Phases of The Negotiation Process. Negotiations. Retrieved from: https://www.negotiations.com/articles/negotiating-phases/

Northouse, P.G. (2011). Introduction to Leadership: Concepts and Practice (2^nd ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Rahim, M.A. (2010). Managing Conflict in Organizations (4^th ed.). London: Transaction Publishers.

Robinson, A. C., Knowlton, A. R., Gielen, A. C., & Gallo, J. J. (2016). Substance use, mental illness, and familial conflict non-negotiation among HIV-positive African-Americans: latent class regression and a new syndemic framework. Journal of behavioral medicine, 39(1), 1-12.

Singh, B.D. (2008). Managing Conflict and Negotiation. New Delhi: Excel Books.

Stanley, D. (2016). Clinical Leadership in Nursing and Healthcare: Values into Action (2^nd ed.). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.

Thompson, L. (2006). Negotiation Theory and Research: Negotiation. London: Psychology Press.

Tollison, R.D., and Willett, T.D. (1979) An economic theory of mutually advantageous issue linkages in international negotiations. International Organization, 33(4), pp. 425-449.

Vitez, O. (2017). Conflict & Negotiation. Retrieved from: https://smallbusiness.chron.com/conflict-negotiation-2657.html