Personal Case Study
Communication
Personal Case Study
Interpersonal Conflict
One in a while we find ourselves in a situation where we need to make a stand to what we believe is right and fair. In the past, I have been in a conflict with a store manager and the attending staff during one of my visits at an electronic gadget store. The cause of the conflict is the miscommunication regarding the validity period in the product return and replacement policy of store, which was not clearly explained and communicated to me as a customer. The product I bought is entitled for a replacement in case of faulty features and defects within seven days from the time of purchase. After finding out that the product has a manufacturing defect within 4 days of using it, I returned to the store to have a replacement. Apparently, the store attendant refuses for the reason that there is no other product left on stock to replace the defective unit and advises me to leave it for repair, which I have to pay for because I haven’t registered the product yet to activate its warranty policy. I upheld my right as a customer and the circumstances that I believe that strengthens my position on the issue as a result of the conflict between consumer laws and the store policy insisted by the store manager and the staff. In the end, my argument was deemed to be more valid and the issue was resolved in my favor. The factor affecting the conflict is miscommunication in interpreting and implementing policies both the statutory and that of the company.
The root cause of the experienced conflict with the store manager and attending staff is miscommunication in conveying the understanding of consumer policies. This issue encompasses the problem of how one person perceives and understands information and the manner of communicating it to another party. In relation to the work of Cahn and Abigail (2014), the key factor that creates conflict is the way people act in conflict situations is because of individual dispositions or the way they think. In the described conflict experience, I insist on the staff and the store manager to acknowledge my concern and my disposition is based on what I know about my rights as a consumer. On the other hand, the staff and the manager are insisting their position on the issue based on how they understand consumer policies implemented by the company. In this regard, my position and those of my opponent came from conflicting perspectives about consumer policies. In addition, the conflict between my opponents and me can be attributed to the concept of social exchange theory, which suggests that people tend to evaluate themselves in their interpersonal relationships based perceptions of self-value created by rewards and cost associated with the relationship (Cahn and Abigail, 2014, p. 66).
It is apparent that I and the store manager and attending staff have an interpersonal relationship as customer to seller. This interpersonal relationship has two-way perception of value. For one, I value myself as customer that expects reward in a form of good product in exchange for the cost of money to buy the product. On the other hand, the staff and the store manager also perceives their own value as provider of consumer needs in a form of products and services as an exchange for the reward they receive from customers in a form of payment. The differences in the perception of self-value is a cause of conflict most especially when the rewards that each party receives is insufficient as compared to the cost they must pay within the relationship (Cahn and Abigail, 2014). In many ways, Cahn and Abigail (2014) were able to provide a clear understanding of conflict from several theoretical perspectives. However, Several studies also tried to explore the context of conflict from another spectrum. For instance, Macintosh and Stevens (2008) suggests that conflict can be a result of the variation in communication strategies on a mix of social and economic motives.
Relationship of the Conflict Experience and Evidence in Research
The described issue regarding the conflict I experienced with the staff and the store manager relates to the study by Ogilvie and Kidder (2008) where the negotiation styles were reviewed to determine the variation in conflict styles in relation to individual differences. According to the study, negotiation styles vary according to the nature of conflict influenced by individual differences between the negotiating parties. In my experience, the conflict between the store personnel and me occurred because we both have different perspectives on the issue about the product in question, and it affected the flow of the negotiation where the other party refuses the propositions of the negotiated resolution. The occurrence of conflict in the negotiation process have escalated into a heated discussion because in my part as a consumer, my strategy was based on social and economic motives while my opponents’ motivation is driven business motives (Macintosh and Stevens, 2008). Apparently, the escalating conflict was exacerbated by the store manager’s lack of sensitivity to my economic and social motives, which according to Macintosh and Stevens (2008) are essential in conflict resolution, and relatively important in establishing consumer fairness.
Comparing and Contrasting Research Evidence with the Course Text
Understanding the context of conflict encompasses a need to look at its concept from various perspectives. Deciphering the work of Cahn and Abigail (2014) and the evidence from various researches in communication encompasses both distinct differences and similarities. In Cahn and Abigail (2014), it was asserted that conflict is an exchange of verbal and non-verbal messages that goes trough five stages beginning with a prelude and ends in resolution phase. In addition, the text also suggests that not all conflict can result in a mutually satisfactory outcome. On the other hand, Lu et al. (2011) asserted that conflict is related to knowledge sharing behavior innovative behaviors. This assertion by Lu et al. (2011) demonstrates a contradiction to Cahn and Abigail (2014) in terms of defining the cause of conflict where the latter’s view is based on general terms while the former’s perspective lean towards the organizational perspectives, which is more closely related to the described conflict experience.
In comparison to the study by Ogilvie and Kidder (2008), the work of Cahn and Abigail (2014) encompasses similar assumptions about conflict handling styles, which is both emphasizing the importance of competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, and accommodating in mitigating conflict. On the contrary, Ogilvie and Kidder (2008) emphasized the role of individual differences and personality as factors in articulating the context of conflict in relation to negotiation styles as an approach in conflict resolution. In many ways, the information obtained from the readings was able to provide a clear perspective on understanding conflict. In addition, the information made it clear that conflict arises as a result of differences in individual perspectives, motivation, personality, and behavior information sharing. Furthermore, the newfound understanding from the discussed readings shed light to perceived issue of misunderstanding between the store personnel and me. For example, my disposition in the conflict experience involved economic and social motives while the store personnel are arguing from business and organizational perspective.
Conclusion
Based on the experience and new understanding of conflict and communication, I can safely assume that I can manage situations more effectively because the five stages of conflict eventually ends in resolution. In addition, the compromise approach learned from research findings provides a middle ground for conflicting parties to resolve conflict. Therefore, communicating clearly and learning to compromise can effectively manage conflict.
References
Cahn, D. & Abigail, R. (2014). Managing conflict through communication. Boston: Pearson.
Lu, L., Zhou, F., & Leung, K. (2011). Effects of task and relationship conflicts on individual work behaviors. Int Jnl Of Conflict Management, 22(2), 131-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10444061111126675
Macintosh, G. & Stevens, C. (2008). Personality, motives, and conflict strategies in everyday service encounters. Int Jnl Of Conflict Management, 19(2), 112-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10444060810856067
Ogilvie, J. & Kidder, D. (2008). What about negotiator styles?. Int Jnl Of Conflict Management, 19(2), 132-147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10444060810856076
