Resolving Conflict through Explicit Bargaining

This article analyzes the impact of conciliatory initiatives on conflict resolution in two-party bargaining. It specifically develops and tests a theory of unilateral initiatives derived from Osgood\u27s (1962) notion of Graduated and Reciprocated Initiatives in Tension Reduction (GRIT). The major propositions of the theory indicate that, given a pattern of mutual resistance or hostility, unilateral initiatives and tit-for-tat retaliation in response to punitive action will produce more conciliation and less hostility by an opponent. To test the theory, a bargaining setting was created in a laboratory experiment in which parties exchanged offers and counteroffers on an issue across a number of rounds while also having the option to engage in punitive action against one another. The results indicated that (1) unilateral initiatives produced more concession making and less hostility than a reciprocity strategy, and (2) tit-for-tat retaliation heightened hostility initially but reduced it over time. The article suggests some general, abstract conditions under which two parties in conflict can produce conciliation and reach agreements without the intervention of third parties

Resolving Conflict

Conflict is dysfunctional to program quality. It is a disruptive factor that can be dramatically reduced with preventive planning. Better communication is a way to help solve these problems

Resolving Conflict through Peaceful Discourse

In lieu of an abstract, below is the essay\u27s first paragraph. Today we live in a world where we are affected by tragedy and loss, death and heartbreak. Our lives are not only overtaken by the grief and sorrow because of destruction in our neighborhoods, but we are flooded with information from the media and government about new acts of violence happening all around the world. This violence is not because of wrong-doing, but because of prejudice, religion, and political power. We are not struck by the inconsistencies in the world and do not seek change. We as humans, only seek power for ourselves, whether it is wealth, fame, or government. We are not concerned with the fate of others if it means advancing ourselves. What does this say about the fate of our race? What does this say about the source and future of our morality? Are we meant to remain power hungry and violent or can we seek a better and more peaceful future for our children

RESOLVING CONFLICT AND BUSINESS ANTHROPOLOGY

Disagreements and conflicts are natural, not abnormal. Various methods of dealing with such struggles exist. Although the standard tools of negotiation and decision making are useful, alternative techniques (such as mediation, arbitration, and litigation) are sometimes needed. In addition, processes of indigenous conflict resolution (that embrace local traditions) have a potential role, especially within small-scale, rural, and/or ethnically distinct communities. Business anthropologists have unique skills for facilitating conflict resolution in many situations

Constitutional Law: Resolving Conflict Between the Right to Travel and Implementation of Foreign Policy

The Supreme Court upheld an areal restriction on travel to Cuba when the passport applicant\u27s purpose was to gather information. The Court pursued a due process inquiry and held the first amendment inapposite in this situation. The Court refused to recognize incidental involvement of peripheral first amendment freedoms and afforded questionable future constitutional protection for the right to travel abroad

Conflict Management and Preferred Style for Resolving Conflict

The purpose of this paper is what the common causes of conflict in Middle East (Egypt, Qatar, Jordan, K.S.A and Kuwait), and what is preferred style for resolving conflict in these countries. Conflict is inevitable and often necessary to management techniques build personality and relationships high-performing teams will evolve through form, storm and norm, so the conflict is not the problem poor management of the conflict is the problem, sometimes use power to win too emotionally involved and others around you can solve the conflict by many methods intended for addressing conflict between opponents also might be considered. This paper will provide an overview of the concepts of conflict, where conflict occurs, differences between competition and conflict, conflict type, Common causes of conflict, how to minimize the conflict, how to build team work, how to manage conflict, conflict strategy and style, prefer style that using when resolve conflict and steps for resolving conflict. We make a questionnaire in much country in Middle East in construction field. First we found that conflict is natural and should be happened between teams up to 95%. Secondly we found the most reason that increases conflict is due personality issues (personal chemistry) up to 90%. At last we found that up to 90% of managers are using collaborating and accommodating as a mode of conflict resolving, which is found to be more commonly used in handling conflict. The paper presents a useful source of information which would benefits organizations in its globalization, which has faded the national boundaries and has brought people of different culture to work together on a single platform

Resolving conflict in decision-making for autonomous driving

Recent work on decision making and planning for autonomous driving has made use of game theoretic methods to model interaction between agents. We demonstrate that methods based on the Stackelberg game formulation of this problem are susceptible to an issue that we refer to as conflict. Our results show that when conflict occurs, it causes suboptimal and potentially dangerous behaviour. In response, we develop a theoretical framework for analysing the extent to which such methods are impacted by conflict, and apply this framework to several existing approaches modelling interaction between agents. Moreover, we propose Augmented Altruism, a novel approach to modelling interaction between players in a Stackelberg game, and show that it is less prone to conflict than previous techniques.Comment: 9 pages, 7 figures. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2007.0718

Does attachment style moderate the effect of computer-mediated versus face-to-face conflict discussions?

Successful conflict resolution is important in romantic relationships. With the advent of computer-mediated communication (CMC), partners can resolve conflict using CMC. But is CMC as effective as face-to-face communication for conflict resolution? And does the effectiveness depend on attachment style? We asked 100 romantic couples to discuss a conflict topic and randomly assigned them to do so face-to-face or via CMC. Levels of distress, anger, and conflict resolution did not differ between face-to-face and CMC discussions.Attachment style did not moderate these findings. A more anxious and a more avoidant attachment style were associated with higher levels of distress andanger. We conclude that there is no indication that resolving conflict face-to-face has advantages over resolving conflict via CMC