archive-org.com » ORG » C » CARITAS.ORG

Total: 817

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • View source - Peacebuilding
    no big deal Accommodating is the opposite style of competing People who accommodate may be selflessly generous or charitable and they may also obey another person when they would prefer not to or yield to another s point of view Usually people who accommodate put relationships first ignore the issues and try to keep peace at any price Competing or forcing People who approach conflict in a competitive way assert themselves and do not cooperate as they pursue their own concerns at other people s expense To compete people take a power orientation and use whatever power seems appropriate to win This may include arguing pulling rank or instigating economic sanctions Competing may mean standing up and defending a position believed to be correct or simply trying to win Forcing is another way of viewing competition For people using a forcing style usually the conflict is obvious and some people are right and others are wrong Avoiding People who avoid conflict are generally unassertive and uncooperative They do not immediately pursue their own concerns or those of the other person but rather they avoid the conflict entirely or delay their response To do so they may diplomatically sidestep or postpone discussion until a better time withdraw from the threatening situation or divert attention They perceive conflict as hopeless and therefore something to be avoided Differences are overlooked and they accept disagreement Collaborating or cooperating Unlike avoiders collaborators are both assertive and cooperative They assert their own views while also listening to other views and welcome differences They attempt to work with others to find solutions that fully satisfy the concerns of both parties This approach involves identifying the concerns that underlie the conflict by exploring the disagreement from both sides of the conflict learning from each other s insights and creatively coming up with solutions that address the concerns of both People using this style often recognise there are tensions in relationships and contrasting viewpoints but want to work through conflicts Compromising Compromisers are moderately assertive and moderately cooperative They try to find fast mutually acceptable solutions to conflicts that partially satisfy both parties Compromisers give up less than accommodators but more than competitors They explore issues more than avoiders but less than collaborators Their solutions often involve splitting the difference or exchanging concessions Conflict is mutual difference best resolved by cooperation and compromise These five conflict styles can be put together on a grid with two dimensions 1 degree of concern for the relationship between the parties in conflict and 2 degree of concern for the conflict issues see the figure below adapted from Blake R and Jane S Mouton Intergroup problem solving in organizations from theory to practice in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations Montery CA Brooks Cole 1979 A high degree of concern for the relationship and the issue typically yields a collaborating or cooperative conflict style A high concern for the relationship and low concern for the issue usually generate an accommodating conflict style while

    Original URL path: http://peacebuilding.caritas.org/index.php?title=Conflict_Handling_Styles&action=edit (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Pages that link to "Conflict Handling Styles" - Peacebuilding
    Styles View previous 50 next 50 20 50 100 250 500 1st Module Cooperation and Competition Conflict Styles and Outcomes links Conflict Outcomes Zero sum and Non zero sum situations links Category NEGOTIATION links Contents links View previous 50 next 50 20 50 100 250 500 Retrieved from http peacebuilding caritas org index php Special WhatLinksHere Views Special Personal tools 91 105 69 17 Talk for this IP Log in

    Original URL path: http://peacebuilding.caritas.org/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/Conflict_Handling_Styles (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Conflict Handling Styles - Peacebuilding
    competing People who accommodate may be selflessly generous or charitable and they may also obey another person when they would prefer not to or yield to another s point of view Usually people who accommodate put relationships first ignore the issues and try to keep peace at any price Competing or forcing People who approach conflict in a competitive way assert themselves and do not cooperate as they pursue their own concerns at other people s expense To compete people take a power orientation and use whatever power seems appropriate to win This may include arguing pulling rank or instigating economic sanctions Competing may mean standing up and defending a position believed to be correct or simply trying to win Forcing is another way of viewing competition For people using a forcing style usually the conflict is obvious and some people are right and others are wrong Avoiding People who avoid conflict are generally unassertive and uncooperative They do not immediately pursue their own concerns or those of the other person but rather they avoid the conflict entirely or delay their response To do so they may diplomatically sidestep or postpone discussion until a better time withdraw from the threatening situation or divert attention They perceive conflict as hopeless and therefore something to be avoided Differences are overlooked and they accept disagreement Collaborating or cooperating Unlike avoiders collaborators are both assertive and cooperative They assert their own views while also listening to other views and welcome differences They attempt to work with others to find solutions that fully satisfy the concerns of both parties This approach involves identifying the concerns that underlie the conflict by exploring the disagreement from both sides of the conflict learning from each other s insights and creatively coming up with solutions that address the concerns of both People using this style often recognise there are tensions in relationships and contrasting viewpoints but want to work through conflicts Compromising Compromisers are moderately assertive and moderately cooperative They try to find fast mutually acceptable solutions to conflicts that partially satisfy both parties Compromisers give up less than accommodators but more than competitors They explore issues more than avoiders but less than collaborators Their solutions often involve splitting the difference or exchanging concessions Conflict is mutual difference best resolved by cooperation and compromise These five conflict styles can be put together on a grid with two dimensions 1 degree of concern for the relationship between the parties in conflict and 2 degree of concern for the conflict issues see the figure below adapted from Blake R and Jane S Mouton Intergroup problem solving in organizations from theory to practice in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations Montery CA Brooks Cole 1979 A high degree of concern for the relationship and the issue typically yields a collaborating or cooperative conflict style A high concern for the relationship and low concern for the issue usually generate an accommodating conflict style while a high concern for the issue and low concern

    Original URL path: http://peacebuilding.caritas.org/index.php?title=Conflict_Handling_Styles&printable=yes (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Conflict Handling Styles - Peacebuilding
    they made a mistake or decide it is no big deal Accommodating is the opposite style of competing People who accommodate may be selflessly generous or charitable and they may also obey another person when they would prefer not to or yield to another s point of view Usually people who accommodate put relationships first ignore the issues and try to keep peace at any price Competing or forcing People who approach conflict in a competitive way assert themselves and do not cooperate as they pursue their own concerns at other people s expense To compete people take a power orientation and use whatever power seems appropriate to win This may include arguing pulling rank or instigating economic sanctions Competing may mean standing up and defending a position believed to be correct or simply trying to win Forcing is another way of viewing competition For people using a forcing style usually the conflict is obvious and some people are right and others are wrong Avoiding People who avoid conflict are generally unassertive and uncooperative They do not immediately pursue their own concerns or those of the other person but rather they avoid the conflict entirely or delay their response To do so they may diplomatically sidestep or postpone discussion until a better time withdraw from the threatening situation or divert attention They perceive conflict as hopeless and therefore something to be avoided Differences are overlooked and they accept disagreement Collaborating or cooperating Unlike avoiders collaborators are both assertive and cooperative They assert their own views while also listening to other views and welcome differences They attempt to work with others to find solutions that fully satisfy the concerns of both parties This approach involves identifying the concerns that underlie the conflict by exploring the disagreement from both sides of the conflict learning from each other s insights and creatively coming up with solutions that address the concerns of both People using this style often recognise there are tensions in relationships and contrasting viewpoints but want to work through conflicts Compromising Compromisers are moderately assertive and moderately cooperative They try to find fast mutually acceptable solutions to conflicts that partially satisfy both parties Compromisers give up less than accommodators but more than competitors They explore issues more than avoiders but less than collaborators Their solutions often involve splitting the difference or exchanging concessions Conflict is mutual difference best resolved by cooperation and compromise These five conflict styles can be put together on a grid with two dimensions 1 degree of concern for the relationship between the parties in conflict and 2 degree of concern for the conflict issues see the figure below adapted from Blake R and Jane S Mouton Intergroup problem solving in organizations from theory to practice in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations Montery CA Brooks Cole 1979 A high degree of concern for the relationship and the issue typically yields a collaborating or cooperative conflict style A high concern for the relationship and low concern for the

    Original URL path: http://peacebuilding.caritas.org/index.php?title=Conflict_Handling_Styles&oldid=152 (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • View source - Peacebuilding
    is a need to focus attention on discovering and eliciting the resources modalities and mechanisms for building peace that exist within a community s cultural setting The erosion of culture We should however keep in mind that there are several factors which have a negative impact on culture and lead to the erosion of traditional cultural authority cultural values and ways of life and which may reduce the impact of traditional means of dealing with conflict Western influenced modernisation has many negative effects on traditional cultures The emphasis placed on western education for example has moved many away from traditional and cultural forms of education It has led to a large migration of young people from their homes in order to attend school Those who wish to continue education at a higher level move to the larger urban areas where they are further distanced from traditional practices and values Many of those who cannot achieve their educational goals find themselves in a cultural no man s land where they do not want to go back and are unable to move forward They gravitate towards the more cosmopolitan cities and towns in the hope of eking out an existence Along the way many cultural values are eroded The worldwide trend towards urbanisation caused by industrialisation has affected most countries This impacts on traditional cultures as the hope of better economic futures attracts large numbers of people to the urban areas and continues the cycle of cultural erosion The impact of war itself has disrupted the traditional life that communities have enjoyed for centuries The massive displacement of peoples caused by modern wars has led to the abandonment or at least neglect of many cultural practices and institutions many of which may be specific to the locality that has to be forcibly abandoned The development of coping mechanisms to ensure survival takes precedence over everything else One of the weapons of modern warfare is the deliberate targeting and destruction of cultural institutions which connect people to their traditions their history and their way of being This can be done by destroying the physical institutions of the community houses of worship and sacred shrines or by eliminating respected leaders or the cultural authority within the community The use of culturally appropriate interventions It may be an important part of the work of Caritas agencies to help re establish the cultural structures which have been destroyed by war and which could play a vital role in post conflict reconciliation It is part of the process of providing space wherein people can reconcile among themselves and with others One example would be helping people bury their dead Relatives friends and community members die during the conflict Some will have died indirectly as a result of violence or because of illness neglect or hardship Some will have disappeared during the course of the conflict executed by the regime or a faction Some will have died violently their deaths unrecorded and the circumstances unknown to their families

    Original URL path: http://peacebuilding.caritas.org/index.php?title=Keeping_a_Cultural_Perspective_in_Reconciliation_Work&action=edit (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Revision history of "Keeping a Cultural Perspective in Reconciliation Work" - Peacebuilding
    contribs 12 671 bytes New page Introduction In the section 3 1 Planning a Reconciliation Programme emphasis is placed on the importance of researching and using culturally appropriate interventions in reconcili Latest Earliest View newer 50 older 50 20 50 100 250 500 Retrieved from http peacebuilding caritas org index php Keeping a Cultural Perspective in Reconciliation Work Views Page Discussion View source History Personal tools 91 105 69 17

    Original URL path: http://peacebuilding.caritas.org/index.php?title=Keeping_a_Cultural_Perspective_in_Reconciliation_Work&action=history (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Pages that link to "Keeping a Cultural Perspective in Reconciliation Work" - Peacebuilding
    Hide redirects The following pages link to Keeping a Cultural Perspective in Reconciliation Work View previous 50 next 50 20 50 100 250 500 6th Module Negotiation Conflict and Culture links Category NEGOTIATION links Contents links View previous 50 next 50 20 50 100 250 500 Retrieved from http peacebuilding caritas org index php Special WhatLinksHere Views Special Personal tools 91 105 69 17 Talk for this IP Log in

    Original URL path: http://peacebuilding.caritas.org/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/Keeping_a_Cultural_Perspective_in_Reconciliation_Work (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Keeping a Cultural Perspective in Reconciliation Work - Peacebuilding
    peace constituency there is a need to focus attention on discovering and eliciting the resources modalities and mechanisms for building peace that exist within a community s cultural setting The erosion of culture We should however keep in mind that there are several factors which have a negative impact on culture and lead to the erosion of traditional cultural authority cultural values and ways of life and which may reduce the impact of traditional means of dealing with conflict Western influenced modernisation has many negative effects on traditional cultures The emphasis placed on western education for example has moved many away from traditional and cultural forms of education It has led to a large migration of young people from their homes in order to attend school Those who wish to continue education at a higher level move to the larger urban areas where they are further distanced from traditional practices and values Many of those who cannot achieve their educational goals find themselves in a cultural no man s land where they do not want to go back and are unable to move forward They gravitate towards the more cosmopolitan cities and towns in the hope of eking out an existence Along the way many cultural values are eroded The worldwide trend towards urbanisation caused by industrialisation has affected most countries This impacts on traditional cultures as the hope of better economic futures attracts large numbers of people to the urban areas and continues the cycle of cultural erosion The impact of war itself has disrupted the traditional life that communities have enjoyed for centuries The massive displacement of peoples caused by modern wars has led to the abandonment or at least neglect of many cultural practices and institutions many of which may be specific to the locality that has to be forcibly abandoned The development of coping mechanisms to ensure survival takes precedence over everything else One of the weapons of modern warfare is the deliberate targeting and destruction of cultural institutions which connect people to their traditions their history and their way of being This can be done by destroying the physical institutions of the community houses of worship and sacred shrines or by eliminating respected leaders or the cultural authority within the community The use of culturally appropriate interventions It may be an important part of the work of Caritas agencies to help re establish the cultural structures which have been destroyed by war and which could play a vital role in post conflict reconciliation It is part of the process of providing space wherein people can reconcile among themselves and with others One example would be helping people bury their dead Relatives friends and community members die during the conflict Some will have died indirectly as a result of violence or because of illness neglect or hardship Some will have disappeared during the course of the conflict executed by the regime or a faction Some will have died violently their deaths unrecorded and the circumstances unknown

    Original URL path: http://peacebuilding.caritas.org/index.php?title=Keeping_a_Cultural_Perspective_in_Reconciliation_Work&printable=yes (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive



  •