Difference Between Parallel Thinking And Argumentative Thinking

Navigating the Different Responses to Conflict Conflict is an inevitable part of human life that produces a variety of responses that reflect the unique characteristics of an individual’s mindset and approach to the conflict. People exhibit a plethera of reactions when going through conflict, from composed conversations to ferocious protests. The manner in which someone chooses to deal with problems reflects their personality and attitude toward resolving conflicts. When you confront a problem calmly and with a positive way of thinking, you will be able to foster empathy and a sense of connection with others, while being able to express your viewpoint clearly. This will enable you to build strong and long-lasting relationships and settle conflicts without hurting you or anyone else.

Disagreements are unavoidable in any business. A humble stage of disagreement can be helpful in creating enhanced thoughts and approaches, stimulating apprehension and resourcefulness, and motivating the appearance of long-suppressed tribulations. Conflict resolution approach must intend at keeping disagreement at a stage at which different thoughts and viewpoints are completely voiced but uncreative conflicts are discouraged. Encouragement of conflict situations is suitable if the project leader recognizes circumstances of 'group-think.' Group-think is a circumstance where disagreement hardly ever occurs because of high-minded group unity, which results in poor choices and insufficient production. Group-think conquers when there are a large number of members in a group that just agree with anything, with the outcome that there is no grim assessment of the circumstances and innovative thoughts are not recommended. Group members connect larger significance to status, stillness and calm in the group relatively than to procedural capability and capability. Members are unwilling to voice their impartial outlook in order to shun away from offending the

If there is any objection, this is when discussion is opened for anyone to express opinions as to why he or she does not agree or agrees with the decision. During this session, all the strengths and weaknesses of an idea can be argued by the members in order to assist in making good decision.

Communication and collaboration are two very useful things arguing or not. It is important to communicate in situations because, without talking correctly, the argument will never end. The University of Rochester says, “The constructive ways of approaching conflict are compromise and collaboration” (Kopecky). Also, In conflict resolution skills the author says,“Emotional awareness—the consciousness of your moment-to-moment emotional experience—and the ability to manage all of your feelings appropriately is the basis of a communication process that can resolve conflict” (Sega). This means that you have to be mentally ready to prepare for what you have to say which also goes along with staying calm and positive. Communication can greatly impact conflicts.

“Agree: Garvin & Roberto (2001, P. 111) states conflict comes in two forms – cognitive and affective. Cognitive, or substantive, conflict relates to the work at hand. It involves disagreements over ideas and assumptions and differing views on the best way to proceed. Not only is such conflict healthy, it’s critical to effective inquiry. When people express differences openly and challenge underlying assumptions, they can flag real weaknesses and introduce new ideas.”

The second form of conflict management is Compromising. This form brings along the idea that losing something is adequate when an individual gains a little. Both sides come to the middle to help serve the team and project on hand while making it possible for each person to maintain a portion of his or her original idea. The drawbacks of using this method are values and objectives can be lost in the process if they are compromised. Some of the demands from the other side may be too severe to come to a middle ground on. This method can also create other conflict if no respect for the compromise or the other team members exists. When this method is used to its full potential people of equal roles are equally committed to the team. “When the issue is to complex to just abandon the others ideas or perspectives and when the specific task that is being dealt with is only moderately important.” (Improving group, organizational or team dynamics when conflict occurs, 2008)

Conflict usually occurs when individuals within a group or organization has differences in opinions. When individuals are in a disagreement about something like policies and procedures or even the overall direction of which an organization or company is heading it can become very frustrating. As we all know conflict the process of conflict usually begins when an individual or party has perceived the other part and it has showed a negative impact or will affect something that another party cares about.

This documentary covers a wide range of issues cognate to technology and concludes on a note that suggests that technology is not going away, in fact it is rapidly adapting, as such the future of the digital nation is unknown and unpredictable. (No kidding, right?) Yet, what I found concretely intriguing was the documentaries discussion of multitasking in relation to inculcation and developing with technology.

With the face pace of everyday life in our society, many times we as individuals are more focused on the end result vs the process it takes to get there. When discussing issues between multiple parties, most people just want the facts and concerns, and then they jump straight to their ideal solution. The thought behind this method is that the more ideas one can produce, the higher the chance and agreeable solution is found. However, the problem with this method is that both parties are more focused on HOW to fix the problem, instead of WHY the problem exists. The key to a successful deliberation is that instead of focusing on how to fix something, the focus must instead by on what causes the problem, and why does it exist.

52). This common belief among users of this style drives them to search for answers using all of the tools at the team’s disposal. The different dynamics of the team become assets. They see the differences that distinguish the members of the team as points of view are respected and viewed objectively. Differences like a male versus a female’s perspective, race, culture, and even social or economic status are viewpoints that give all in the team a bigger picture of the different issues they may need to consider when coming to a conclusion about how best to achieve their goal. Though this style is thought of as the best route for teams to use, it is also one of the most difficult. Even a person who has a natural talent or personality that promotes this style of conflict management has to practice to be effective using this style in a team setting. A person cannot be judgmental and must be sure not to take anything said personally. This is something that most if not all of the team members must have an awareness of. All team members have to feel comfortable with the results and with what was given up from their own personal point of view to arrive at the team’s decision. This style is also very demanding so it requires a good amount of patience. Depending on how quick a decision is needed it is not always possible for a team to achieve and some in the team may not believe that their best interests were achieved.

to hear the other person’s side. Everyone just wants to say their side to automatically make the other person drop the argument. While listening to the other person tell his or her side, he or she should try and put themselves in the other person’s spot. It is very hard to explain one’s feelings. No one can just say exactly why they feel a certain way about something. Both sides could actually be right; a valid explanation could be made for both sides. Rallying in tennis is when both sides hit the ball back and forth until the other person makes a mistake. When the teams are equally matched in tennis, a lot of rallying could happen due to the fact they are both on the same skill level. In an argument, there are usually many rallies. But, just like in tennis, if the skill levels are not equally matched, one person could quickly should they have the stronger

I don't genuinely feel like arguing gets a situation anywhere because you’re not solving the problem. More than likely, you will make the situation worse than what it was at first. Arguments can cause conflict and hard feelings, and this is why I prefer to avoid confrontation; I’m also not very aggressive. Arguments make me uncomfortable and I tend to not participate as much as would if it was a traditional conversation. I truly like to make connections with the person and come

In resolving conflict, ask the question, “How do we keep this from happening again?” The first thing is to be objective. This helps in managing conflict by keeping team members focused on the problem at hand (Huber, 2007)

A discussion should be neutral in many ways and respectable of many views that many people

These methods of thinking include Critical, Rational, Systematic, Reflective, and normative thinking. Each of which helps find a conclusion or truth.