Week 5 - Post 3

One concept from this weeks reading that I am familiar with are “I-statements”.  I think that this is a great tool to use when in a conflict.  Emphasizing on how you are feeling lets the person know you really are affected by what is going on in the conflict.  In mediation we use this tool a lot and it is a great way to get the parties to express how they are feeling and what they want out of the mediation process.  I feel that “I statements” need to be positive and there can be no poison words used or else it really takes away from the positive effect I statements have on the conflict.  During a class I took when I was at Gavilan made use practice “I statements”.  It can be a difficult tool to use, but when used properly “I statements” can be powerful and really dig deep into the other parties feelings.  

Week 5 - Post 2

My listening skills have really improved as I have been going through my courses as a communications major and as I have been going through my mediation training and internship.  I was never a “bad listener”, but I would be distracted at times with my own ideas or opinions.  I have learned to put that aside and just listen to what people have to say.  Once they are finished with what they are saying, I pause for a second and really think over what they said and depending on the person and situation, maybe what they are looking to hear or my own opinion.  As my listening skills have improved, yes I could write down most of what a person has told me, but I find that to be distracting.  I have learned that if you really are listening there is no reason to write it down, but to be able to say it back to them.  That gives them an opportunity to hear what they have just told you and also let them know you are really listening.  

Week 5 - Post 1

For me I guess it depends on the situation and who the conflict is with when deciding how easy it is to stop a conflict.  I have to say that I am pretty good at stopping a conflict, because you really need to think about if the conflict is really worth it or how the conflict could be solved without anyone being hurt or leaving angry.  My advice on how to stop a conflict is to just let the person know you need a moment, take a deep breath and think about what you are going to say.  Most people end up regretting what they say to someone when they are in the heat of a conflict.  I think that taking a timeout to think about everything is very important; it does not have to be a long time out, just enough time to take a moment to breath and think about what the conflict is really about.  

Week 4 - Post 3

I must say that I was very excited to get to chapter 11 in the book.  The concept of mediation really draws my attention.  As I have mentioned before I am an intern for the mediation program in Santa Clara County, so the reason I took this class was to improve my skills on how to handle conflict.  Mediation is such a great tool to use when involved in a conflict.  The book defines mediation as "a neutral third party facilitates communication between the conflicting parties so that they may work out their own mutually acceptable agreement".  There are so many positives to using mediation, such as the ability for the parties to come up with their own agreement, instead of having a judge make the decision for you.  I think that it is so important for people to be aware of mediation; it is such a positive process and if both parties are willing, they can both get so much out of it.  In the office we always say that an agreement doesn’t always make a mediation successful, the fact that both parties attended, listened and communicated with one another makes a mediation successful.  

Week 4 - Post 2

These techniques, when used correctly, work well in interpersonal conflicts.  The great thing about these different techniques is that they are not only limited to interpersonal conflicts.  They can be used in many different scenarios, such as a small group conflicts or intrapersonal conflicts.  Using these techniques in a small group conflict, for example in a workplace, might be beneficial to the person having to solve the conflict.  By framing and reframing, these techniques help to bring down the tension and harsh language that might be used.  Having common ground with coworkers is important and helpful to make the work environment more peaceful.  I think when people realize they have common ground with others, it is a great thing for them to focus on and stray away from conflict.  When it comes to intrapersonal conflict, which I know we all deal with especially with the stress of school, it is helpful to use fractionation to help break down complex issues (or tasks) into smaller more manageable issues (or tasks).  I know that I use this technique all the time in my intrapersonal conflicts.  I have so much going on between work, school, interning and studying for my LSAT that it is helpful to break down everything I have to do into certain tasks per day.  I feel that everyone should know how to use these tools because it would be beneficial to everyone involved, including ourselves.  

Week 4 - Post one

Communication majors should make good mediators because they know how to communicate and they know how to listen.  I am currently volunteering as a mediator; I have done a lot of case developing and a couple in court mediations.  I have found that is it very helpful being a communications major because I have used a lot of the skills I have learned in class to apply to my conversations.  Sometimes people just want to talk and be heard.  As communication majors we know how to listen and how to communicate.  Another reason is because as mediators our job is to help facilitate the communication between the parties involved.  They request our service because they have trouble communicating and/or understanding what is being said to them.   Mediators are a neutral party and do not represent either party, I think that is a major issue lawyers and psychotherapists will find difficult.  A lawyer’s job is to defend his/her client and a mediator is there to help all parties involved.  Psychotherapists are in the same boat as lawyers, their job is to help their clients and that is their main focus, to listen to their clients and protect their interests not others as well. 

Week three - post three

When reading through chapter three, collaborating caught my eye.  I like this idea of collaborating and I wish more people in conflict would use this tool as an option.  In mediation we tend to hope that towards the end of the mediation we would be able to use collaborating as an option.  According to the book, “collaborating means using integrative behaviors and developing mutually satisfying agreements to solve the problem once and for all”.  I recently mediated a small claims case in court and the parties were very close to reaching an agreement, but they had a really hard time collaborating.  As the mediator it is our goal to help that see what they have in common and try to get them to collaborate a common goal, which for both of them was to not deal with these issues again.  Thankfully we were able to collaborate and they were able to come to an agreement.  It was a great feeling to have reached an agreement, even with the ups and downs with the mediation.  

Week 3 - Post 2

I think there is a fine line between pushing and disciplining a child.  I think that a lot of parents cross that line and most of the time, from experience, it back fires.  My father, whom I do not speak too, crossed that line.  He crossed that line way to many times to the point where I was never allowed to do anything because I was such a "bad" child.  He pushed me away because of the way he abused his paternal authority.  I think that happens a lot more than most would like to admit.  I think pushing your child to the point where they do not want to listen to you anymore does not make a situation better.  Actually punishing the child, in an appropriate manner, when the child deserves it is fine.  There is no reason not to punish a child when they behave badly, but do not cross that fine line of pushing them.  I think that people overstep their paternal authority when they do not know how else to handle the situation. 

Week 3 - Post 1

Well I have to say that in the past I would take the self-centered approach, especially when dealing with my mom or her ex-husband.  I did not and still do not have a relationship with him and I think that was a big part of why I used that type of orientation when dealing with a conflict.  

Recently though, after taking the mediation course and being an intern in the ADR department, I have changed the type of orientation I prefer.  I know favor a relationship-centered orientation.  I want to work things out and deal with conflict in an appropriate way, especially if the relationship really means something to me.  

When I was focused on self-centered orientation I was only satisfied if I “won” in the argument.  Now when using the relationship-centered approach I feel that everyone is satisfied, at least that is how it seems.  It is great to be able to work through conflict in a positive light.  

I try to favor the relationship-centered orientation most of the time, but there are situations with certain people in my life where I tend to favor the self-centered approach, but I have tried to use that less often. I feel that it works to use the relationship-centered orientation and I think that it makes the situation much better, really focusing on getting past the conflict.

Week 2 - Post 3

When reading through chapter two the concept regarding the confrontation avoidance cycle. This cycle reminded me a lot of how my mother is when it comes to my brother.  She would rather not address the situation and let him get away with slacking off or she just let's my step dad deal with the issue and not voice her opinion. According to the book the confrontation avoidance cycle applies to those who do not like conflict or people who tend to be shy.  Another great example is my boyfriend, this is where him and I differ.  I am outspoken and do not mind letting people know when something bothers me. My boyfriend on the other hand tends to hold everything in because he is less outspoken and does not want to deal with conflict.  Along with the confrontation avoidance cycle comes the chilling effect which I think fits perfectly with that cycle.  I think a lot of people worry about the other persons reaction.  Personally I feel that if you have a close enough relationship with a person one should not be concerned with their reaction and just know that your relationship should be strong enough to withstand conflict and if not then maybe that relationship was not as strong as you might have thought.

Week 2: question 2

There have been a couple different times I have taken a non-process view of communication. I think that there are appropriate times in which a non-process view is necessary, but I do not feel that it should be used all the time, especially if you want the relationship to last. An example of a time I have used a non-process view of communication is with my father, whom I do not speak to anymore, by choice. When I read the section in the book when it talks about when we do not take a process view: when we see something as unchanging. I saw that in my relationship with my father. I knew that no matter what I would do or say our relationship would never be a positive one. Maybe I could have changed the way I thought about our relationship and my doubts. Maybe I could have been a little more optimistic and thought that if I tried hard enough, things could work out. But, then again sometimes there is no way around using a non-process view of communication.  It really depends on the situation and what factors are involved.