Communication Strategies

With the fast progress in technology, increasing social mobility, globalization of cutback, and the emergency of cultural miscellany, intellectual human contact at both individual and organizational level is on the rise (Joseph et al 1983 126). It is because of the increased number of contacts between people whence an increased number of beliefs and cultural backgrounds that cultural diversity has been generating more heat in organizations. Even though the conflicts act as hutching grounds for problems, sometimes they are likely to foster organizational development if managed well and foster positive relationships between workers than even before.

When cultural diversity is on an increase this calls for a knack to live together in a weird environment and work and live positively with people with varied backgrounds. Intercultural sensitivity has been connected with intercultural communication competence which entails execution of activities effectively, adjusting to multifaceted cultures and a healthy personal relationship with people of multifaceted cultures.

Exploring conflict management in groups
Conflicts are inherent in any group when making decisions and when deliberating on important issues. Group deliberation and decision making as a group is important as it may bring logging heads of groups together (Joseph et al 1983 128). Disagreement and discrepancy is likely to ignite discussion that tests positions against one another and may further the emergence of creative new ideas of any matter to be solved. Critical discussion backs up critical decision making and any possible causes of action if the decision is likely to cause mayhem.

Conflicts have also been found to have limitations as they are likely to arouse negative emotions that may contribute to uncontrolled escalation or repetitive cycles of conflict. If one party is likely to take a competitive or negative action toward another the other is likely to reciprocate to the competitive action. Sometimes opposition to complaints and expressions of negative effect are often responded to be in kind. This propensity to reciprocate tends to set up cycles of competitive behavior which may escalate and impede the groups ability to evaluate ides and options critically. As a substitute decisions are made by forcing or alternatively are not made at all as the ends in impasse.

Communication in conflict management
In order to understand how effective management of conflicts is likely to enforce harmony in a group it is advisable to look closely at group processes. In managing conflicts it is crucial that a lot of time is devoted in creating an arena that is likely to encourage people to dialogue and maybe in the course look at the root cause of the problem. This is likely to be seen as a joke but a strategy to solving some malignant tumor. It also gives people an opportunity to know more about each others background and this is likely to guide them on what they are supposed to avoid when they are together because it is likely to invite trouble as it maybe considered against the cultural doctrines of what other people think of. (Joseph et al 1983 128).This could be made successful by erecting a framework where expression and amicable solving of disputes is appreciated and put high on the list of the preference. Effective communication is likely to cultivate a positive rejoinder to conflict, which is a breeding ground for healthier relationships and increased output in organizations.

Disputes sometimes can sometimes act as an arena for reaching to other people otherwise one could have not reached and sharing out concerns not only related to the problem at hand but how to foster productivity in an organization.. In group conflicts this is an opportunity for everyone to style up and realize that the group is no longer to be run as personal property but as an amalgamation of people with divergent views on issues and varied backgrounds. When addressing conflicts one is presented with a challenge to clarify needs, values, and identify sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. When the source of dissatisfaction has been singled out it means the root cause of the problem has been identified and the way forward is to prescribe some therapy for the same. Dealing with conflicts is likely to bring out some intrinsic goodness that lies within us, and is likely to take one from being fearful and defenceful to being confident, responsive and caring.

The observational system
The observational system I will employ to describe group conflict management processes is has roots to the normative model of conflict management presented by (Walton 1969). The model presents a model of two phases of effective conflict management and in the first phase the problem will be aired out and any possible root causes of the problem which are likely to lead to the second phase which is primarily concerned with integration of the warring parties taking into consideration the differences of the members.  If differentiation is handled aptly, the concerned parties learn about others positions, interests, and issues and develop an understanding based on a common rapport that they are going to work and manage any other conflicts amicably. If integration is appropriately handled, parties develop solutions that take their joint concerns into account, develop commitment to accept and stick to the solution, and develop respect.

If either the differentiation or integration phases are curtailed or futilely executed, conflict execution will be less effectual.  In the process of differentiation if the warring groups dont come to consensus, then understanding of issues which affect each other is not likely to be successful and consequently working together is likely to be a nightmare. (Joseph et al 1983 132).  As a result parties may not move to the integration phase and they may become stuck in continuing cycles of divergence.  There are case where differentiation may be successful but the integration causes problems, in this case they have to live with each others believes.

This two-phase normative model also implies two less desirable conflict management patterns. One, the parties may never surface conflict and thus fail to differentiate at all, that is, they may shun and inundate the conflict.  Two, parties may surface differences, but be unable to work together, in which case one party may force the other to accept hisher favored option or one party may simply acquiesce and give in to the other.  Both of these approaches to resolving conflict engrosses acquiescence of one party and allow the group to move forward, but they are likely to lead to less positive outcomes than will moving through the two phases properly.

In groups conflicts are neither good nor are they bad but what is important is how the problem is handled and any prospected outcome or even the real outcome (Joseph et al 1983 135). Dealing with group conflicts and solving them amicably is likely to foster positive change but avoiding it is likely to be a hub of more problems. Conflicts are like a way of life for any firm and fundamental for mutual relationships with the workers. A conflict will be healthy when used to reach a collaborative agreement or new alternative and unhealthy when used to utter fury, trepidation, and aggravation. Integrity and reliance condense unnecessary conflict and augment the potential for alliance and conformity.