A632.6.3.RB - The High Cost of Conflict

Reflect on a personal or business situation in which the cost of conflict was significantly greater than you would've preferred. Analyze the situation in relation to Stewart Levine's 10 principles of new thinking (p. 46). How would this have changed the situation? Could it have reduced the cost of conflict? What lessons did you learn from this exercise?

The cost of conflict represents a resource drain of huge proportion and a source of great unhappiness and discomfort.

In the old way of thinking, the principles were: scarcity, wasting of resources, problems issues and emotions, fostering conflict, righteous bravado and posturing, short-term adversary, logic, secrecy, winning, and deferring to professionals. The new thinking principles are: believing in abundance, creating partnership, being creative, fostering sustainable collaboration, becoming open, forming long-term collaborations, relying on feelings and intuition, disclosing information and feelings, learning throughout the resolution process, and becoming responsible. The cornerstone of the first new principal of thinking is abundance. This is because it is difficult to negotiate and create win-win situations without believing that there can be a conclusion in which both people are satisfied. 

A lot of people have difficulty with this because they believe we live in a dog-eat-dog world, where people will do anything to be successful, even if what they do harms other people. Because of this, they do not want to invest in others thoughts, feelings or future. People like this are simply too selfish to realize that even if they win, they lose in the long run as a team or organization. This creates a circle of competition, distrust and revenge that shades growth and destroys businesses.

As a worker I pride myself on being efficient with my time in order to give back to my place of business in ways that I see could use change. I enjoy joining boards and committees that align with my interests and the interests of the institution, as they tend to gather passionate and diverse entities together from across the organization. I have had supervisors that did not appreciate my ability to balance work with other activities. I have even had supervisors who attempted to control what I did with my time outside of work. Of course, most have been a victim of the micro-manager, who wants to know every move an employee makes - I have found it is usually done to figure out how they are able to accomplish more than their supervisor can.

Behind each happy worker is a competent supervisor - a boss is a person who should have never been hired and is only there because they've kissed the right butt or have successfully mastered blaming others for their shortcomings. These supervisors are bosses (which I use as a slur for those with power who overexert it to the detriment of their company) do not believe in the abundance of impact that could be done with proper planning and organization. They did not realize that many of my new ideas and ways of improving my skills came from collaborating with others and sharing best practices, from and with those with years of experience. At times, I believe that many supervisors wish to be the only mentor their workers have, the sun in their system. Because of this, they can never appreciate the skills others bring to their job; they are usually the reason why good people leave. They become possessive and jealous of those who are outgoing and who appreciate the experiences of others. 

Sadly, the conclusions this type of treatment assumes are not productive. Bosses are the reason why there is high turnover at a company. Bosses cause lack of productivity, encouraging workers to remain stagnant, un-creative and scared. Bosses will usually have years in a company and will never leave, because they are bullies who have found a comfortable, accepting home where HR is lacking and coworkers do not see it worth the risk to point out the obvious. I have learned how to spot these people - sadly they exist just about everywhere. Those under them are downtrodden and hopeless. Sometimes they have found ways to "get back" at their company, through hiding from work, talking badly about it or intentionally causing it harm - all of which show how one person can be the cause of a company's reputation going to the trash bin and an overall wasting of resources in time and people.

I intentionally try my best to be the complete opposite of such supervisors, encouraging collaboration and learning from my supervisees in all departments within our organization. I have always found it easier to know and appreciate one's resources if one is dedicated to fulfilling ones duties then supporting the initiatives of others and helping where there is a need. Building bridges is more effective than building walls. Isolation makes people paranoid that people are out to get them, and people notice this, which leads to distrust of them.

Instead of bosses thinking "Why is this employee getting to know others outside of the department - they're trying to learn skills to benefit themselves," they should be thinking, "I like the initiative this employee is taking to learn about other departments - they''' bring back information I have yet to follow-up on," or, "I can't wait to see how this employee will bring the skills they learn from the other departments to ours."

The cost of conflict includes direct costs, productivity costs, continuity costs, and emotional costs. Direct costs involved mediators for a disagreement, usually lawyers. An example of productivity cost is the amount of money a company loses because those in a situation have either slowed or halted their work because of the issue. Continuity cost is the way that situation changes the dynamics of the team, are there in the way they function together or the loss of team members. The emotional cost is the damage caused to the victims in the situation, and the wounds that may never heal. It can be difficult for those suffering in a situation to bounce back after a resolution, whether positive or negative, simply because the incident occurred.

References

Levine, S. (2009 ). Getting to resolution: Turning conflict into resolution. (2nd edition). Williston, VT: Berrett-Koehler Publishers 

Levine, S. The Many Costs of Conflict. Mediate.com. Accessed at http://www.mediate.com/articles/levine1.cfm

A632.5.5.RB - Protected Values in Decision-making

Reflect on the concept map that you created in the previous exercise and consider the Dan Gilbert video from module one. Discuss your protected values and how far you are willing to go to support those values. Explore the level of protection associated with each of your major values identified in the concept map and detail your thoughts on each. Finally, discuss how those protected values would influence your decision-making.

After reading about protected values and working on the concept map it has opened my eyes on what I feel are my protected values. I had to think about what my protected values were and how I was and am willing to go to protect them. I would say that 100% of what I do is reflective of how it will affect society as a whole, either directly or indirectly.
I chose peaceful protest/assembly, marriage equality and religious freedom as my protected values, and I reviewed how I exercise these values every day.

Though I have not protested recently, I am very active in letter-writing campaigns, calling the offices of representatives to speak on or out against proposed legislation, and enjoy speaking my mind online. At times, I feel that I need to do more - it has become quite easy through the internet to feel like one is making an impact without really doing anything. I donate to causes that I am very passionate about, particularly women's rights issues. I need to trust that my money is going to a cause, and not into someone's pockets. As Julie Irwin and Jonathan Baron discussed in "Values and Decisions" in Chapter 14, people may say they are very passionate about issues, but when it comes to actually supporting those passions, their money, time and energy tends to fall short. I believe that highlighting events in which citizens are prohibited or punished for gathering peacefully through as many means as I can - by face-to-face conversations, Facebook posts, tweets, blogs and letters - I am living out my passion.

Marriage equality has been a topic I have been very outspoken for, for as long as I've known it was an issue. My first discovery of this issue was when I was in grade school, and I saw a CNN story on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," a policy barring gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the military. When I asked my mother about the details of such a rule, she explained that stating one's preference in dating and intimacy would get them harassed, ostracized and physically assaulted in the military. It changed the way I felt about the Armed Forces. Both of my parents are veterans; I only saw military personnel as heroes. I could not believe that people with such high stature would stoop so low as to bully others who have sacrificed just as much for this country as they have. It was offensive to me that a professional would find it moral or entertaining to hurt another professional. At that time, I had no understanding of the progress the military had made from its inception - I assumed that the military had always been open to all citizens, regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation. 

In high school, I joined a multicultural Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Ally (LGBTA) group. During my membership, I joined GLSEN, Inc., the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, a national LGBTA organization that fights the discrimination of LGBT people. This organization solidified my association with the plight of gay people. I started the Day of Silence at my high school, a passive protest against anti-LGBT name-calling, bullying and harassment in schools. We petitioned the school to allow the group to decorate a hall for the annual International Week, and with four other high schools, petitioned the School District of Philadelphia to recognize October as Gay and Lesbian History Month.

In much the same way as LGBT issues are a passion, religious freedom is as well. I was raised in a household where all religious text was available. Growing up in a multicultural community, I had friends who were from a plethora of backgrounds, with various religious beliefs. My mother was involved in the Jewish community and most of my friends were Christian or Catholic. The experience of attending multiple religious services allowed for me to gain an appreciation of all backgrounds, and I enjoyed figuring out my own beliefs through learning about others and questioning my own. I went through phases of being religious, non-religious spiritual, and non-spiritual. In my teenage years, I aligned myself with atheist and agnostic beliefs, and even came up with my own religion that I named wrote documents about. When I started college, I began to research the Unitarian Universalist church, and I presently feel that it best describes my beliefs about the universe and provides a way to converse with others about their beliefs. At times, I identify as a follower of Judah and I am questioned for a multitude of reasons. I do not "look Jewish.: I do not wear a Star of David. Some have an "ah-ha" moment as they reference stereotypes I fit which they note as proof that I am Jewish, like being thrifty and enjoying financial wellness books. I am assumed to hate those who are Muslim, which is a huge offense. It saddens me that some try to align with me over a presumed hatred of others. At these instances, I must not only fervently disagree with their sentiments, but pull out the soapbox to discuss the reasons why xenophobia and religious hatred are going to be the downfall of our country and of civilization. Going to bat against hatred is a sport we should all participate in! Like our lives, our minds are always (or at least, should be) changing and expanding with each piece of new information. I am happy to be open-minded to the love the world provides us.

A632.4.5.RB - Deception in Negotiations

During the course of negotiations, people often misrepresent information to gain at least a temporary advantage. For example, a seller may fabricate existence of another interested buyer or a buyer may misrepresent the price and availability of an item from a different vendor. Reflect on deceptions in negotiations and describe four ways to evaluate information during negotiations. Relate an example of a recent negotiation in which you have been misled and one in which you may have overstated a claim.; define how far you would be willing to go to leverage your position.


One of the most prevalent experiences I have read about and witnessed that aligns with deception in negotiating is the used car selling process, particularly from person-to-person (as opposed to buying from a dealer). 

There are several reasons for buying and selling through the private party process. If the car is already paid for, it can usually be sold for more than a dealer would give the seller. A dealer may be more willing to take a less-than-perfect car off a seller's hands, but the dealer not going to do it at a premium. A seller can always expect to get more than the wholesale price. Even if someone owes money on their car, they still may be able to make a profit after a private sale, or at least make enough to pay off the car.

When I was looking for a car, I really wanted a vehicle that looked clean and newer than it was. I paid close attention to rust, dents, paint jobs, new tires and delicately used interiors. I wanted a CD player, leather seats, clean floors and automatic windows. I found that a lot of the cars I viewed only had one or two photos - some of them were of the same side of the car. When I requested additional photos, I received close shots of specific parts of the car. On two occasions where I went to view the car in person, the opposing side of the vehicle which was unseen in photos had obvious accident damage or had been vandalized. The seller had no way of explaining such an omission from the ad and the phone discussion before I traveled. As Wharton notes, "a negotiator must estimate the cost of detected deception. This can include... reputation costs" (Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H., & Gunther, R. E., 2001, p. 192). As soon as I arrived home, I made a request to the webmaster to remove the ad. It was a waste of money and time to travel to see details which should have been exposed online.

I am currently helping a friend sell her car, and the process involves some deception I have taught her. This teaching came from my experience selling personal items (furniture, electronics, etc.) on CraigsList during my many relocations over the years. I let her know to push the virtues of the car, such as the optional equipment and accessories, its desirability in the marketplace, and any recommendations and awards by used-car guides or magazines. If there was a big issue, address it, but downplay it. I also told her to publish a price that was 50% higher than she wanted for the car, and its defects would drop the price (The Federal Trade Commission, 2014). Though many articles state that 25% above the expected sell price is fine, I believe it is harder for women to sell their cars alone, as buyers think women know less about cars and can be pushed around a bit more. This is as far as I would go to deceive someone, as it is part of the car selling process. Let the potential buyer point the problems out. I would never encourage someone deny or lie about them. I would not sell someone an unsafe car.

As a car buyer, I have looked at several venues to buy cars and read thoroughly on how to compare products. The evaluation process should consist of feature-by-feature comparisons of the cars; the evaluation of trade-offs among competing models; and cost comparisons (Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H., & Gunther, R. E., 2001, p. 196). I conjure up a group of knowledgeable friends and task them with reviewing and evaluating specific ads, as they affect each persons’ areas of interest and expertise. One of my friends is a tinkerer; he enjoys fixing his cars and prefers cars that make it easy for him to engineer with simple tools. One of my friends is all about the year, make, model and mileage comparisons - he believed he can edge up the last-ability of a car without knowing anything else but these details. I sit this group of friends in front of a stack of printouts of cars I'd like to make an offer on and they will call other friends who may own or work on the different cars, and they check references with sellers about past owners and service records. They also check outside references, like Carfax, Kelley Blue Book and TrueCar to review salvage alert and accident records.

References

Cars.com. Price Your Car Right. Accessed at https://www.cars.com/sell/how-to/price-your-car-right

The Federal Trade Commission. (2014). Buying a Used Car. Accessed at http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0055-buying-used-car

Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making decisions. New York:

Wiley.

Kelley Blue Book. Step 1: Find Out How Much You Can Afford. KBB.com. Accessed at http://www.kbb.com/car-advice/car-buying/step-1-find-out-how-much-you-can-afford/