How my personality contributed to solving a conflict
- Hits: 4878
The following essay is a sample paper for an essay on how my personality contributed to solving a conflict. It should not be used as a ready paper for your assignment as it is already in our website. In case you want an original paper on the same topic please order for the essay at our site and our able writers will work on it from the scratch.
How my personality contributed to solving a conflict
The quality of a person is in the way he manipulates his or her way up in the ladder of success, and part of this success is in solving some of the conflicts that are along the way. In this paper, a case study has been looked at where two groups were at cross roads, and the problem needed to be solved so that their problems may not be the company’s problem. That is why there was needed an external person to solve the issue, and as a person who was best placed for that, I used my personality trait, that is, as an artisan in solving the issue amicably.
Conflicts at work can best be solved not by machines or technology, but by employing personal techniques we have, we can overcome anything, which can appear as the barrier to achievement of what we desire. In a research study done as noted by Wood (July 2008), it was indicated that personality measures are significant in conflict resolution and can be good indicators of good style preferable in mediation and negotiations. Different personality traits are suited in different environments, and this is to mean that not all personality traits are suited for any kind of situation. Particularly as noted in this discussion, my personality trait as an artisan worked well in a situation that needed personal and dedicated input. Were it not for the employment of creativity, especially where I was needed to ignore other inputs and use my own hands, then, the situation would have escalated to a situation of no control.
My current position is a Corporate Affairs Manager in a busy service oriented service, but it too has many sectors some of which solely require manual work for progress. The engineering sector is one of the leading departments that have contributed to the overall success of the company, and as a person whose job is to analyze all departments for cohesion and coordination; I spend my entire time scanning what is happening in all sectors. This particular case takes me to the engineering department, which had for a whole week grumbling over ways to improve the sector for market competitiveness. My constant scanning of the departments does not mean that I always interfere with what happens but at times gives independence to enhance creativity.
My personality traits
I am an enterprising person, and as a person possessing, the artisan personality trait I get what I want by use of creativity and working with objects. I have developed a keen sense of working with my hands and can disable anything for the sake of coming up with what I think can work at a particular situation. Anything-solid gives me comfort and I do not relent when it comes to disabling and manipulating anything for the sole purpose of creating what I think can work. Prior to being employed in my current position in the company, I was a university student, and this is where I discovered that I could bring forth change. This is where I was virtually a leader of any other group, which I was a member; and particularly, I earned necessary respect from my colleagues. Perhaps my strength is in the way I turn around things to appear as though funny, exciting, and therefore attracting admiration from even rivals in a particular situation.
In my own evaluation, I can note that I possess all types of an artisan, that is, I am a composer, a performer, a crafter and a promoter. In addition, I have a strength that is making a situation seem as though that of playfulness and this makes a complex situation appear light. Then, after guiding through other people on what to do after making it light, I leave it to them to carry over, but would be monitoring at a distance to see how much they can do, and in case they are stuck, I emerge to solve the whole issue. I am a person of variety, and this means that what I used as the trick to solve a previous case that is generally involving conflict may not be used in solving another one. I give every other case a unique approach, and this makes me earn much respect and appreciation from others.
The conflict situation
Last month, I had received a number of conflicting reports from the engineering department in the company I represent. Usually, this department is placed as an important and therefore independent one on which all other departments look up to to come up with new techniques of improving our services. At that particular instance, I had recommended to the department to come up with a new way of conquering the market, and particularly, and technologically, wade through the competitive market and come out as the best. However, I also had the knowledge that two particular groups had emerged in the department and which seemed to have leaders who were always at loggerheads. Nevertheless, I gave the department an ultimatum as to when I would be expecting the reports fully thought about by the whole department for my consideration.
That week, I was getting two major reports, all pointing differently with only a few commonalities. At first, I ignored hoping that groups would then harmonize and then give me one report so that I could consider. However, things were getting for the worst, and one early morning, I received information that the previous day there was a real tug of war literally. The contention was on which group and the leader was being recognized in the department by the organization, with the issue arising from the technological advancement each group had. Particularly, the issue at hand was on the best software they were making which I had foreseen that the company would be able to take the market by surprise. I actually also learnt that due this conflict, one group had given a real competitor the techniques being developed and claiming that it was the report to be considered by my department.
I immediately recognized that I had a task to handle, a task that needed not to beat up people for letting information out of its confines, but to lead the way. I thought of a lasting solution and not the current situation to end the row and reconnect the groups. However, I used an artisan way, and since I had some prior knowledge on software development, I took that direction in an effort to bring up the morale all over again, and end the simmering row. In the afternoon, I unexpectedly made a go to the engineering department armed with the conflicting reports, sought the engineers attention and made to their computers. Everybody was alarmed because of the thought that I was there either to criticize or to reprimand anyone for what they have been doing. I did the opposite, and actually used some of the bits they had completed especially the common ones, manipulated everything and with their help came up with a very strong idea. The lecturing came later, but it did not concentrate on the row but on the need to live up to the tasks.
The above strategy did the magic, and as I note here, the department has come to work together, and actually, just last week, the department released one of the most comprehensive report regarding an innovation and what is most encouraging is how they cooperated in doing so. The department is live and as one of the employee in the department opened up to me, the sense of humor and tendency to lead the very practically worked the magic. They realized how wrong they were and the fact that I used their techniques in coming up with a comprehensive idea hammered the sense in the two simmering group that if they were to work together and in a most cohesive way, everything is possible. To date, I revisit the idea in my mind and appreciate the techniques I used in solving the conflict.
The Trick in the Case Study of Conflict Resolution
Perhaps, what did the magic in the above case study is being open to experience, and I can note that after solving amicably the case at hand, I developed a very new level of experience on the area. I have since then put any other case I encounter, however minimal it may be as a way of adding my repertoire. As (5c module) notes, the openness to experience helps describe a kind of dimension of the styles that need cognition and creativity. It is a way of distinguishing imaginative, creative and people who are down to earth, and as the case study may show, I came out as a person who possesses the three styles. I knew right from the start that if I solved the simmering conflicts, I would stand tall and earn amicable respect from the groups, and too from the rest of the organizational staff. The open cognitive as is noted by model 5c is a kind of facility or opportunity to think in kinds of symbols, and in essence create some abstractions that can later be turned to realities.
In this description as well, what is coming out as a score are the self-efficacy, dutifulness, achievement striving, and more to it, orderliness. I conducted myself with order such that I did not reprimand anyone as would have been expected, but conducted myself with demeanor. There was the self-discipline, being dutiful and faithful to what I was obliged, and lot of self-efficacy. Above all, what came as a result is that I achieved what I had desired, and was to have a cohesive team at the department that could drive the company.
Personality traits and conflict resolution
In life, what is most needed to excel to the heights that one desires is the use of one’s mind on which cannot be compared to any other person. As we have noted in our earlier discussion, personality traits are the key driver to settling some of the conflicts that can emerge in one’s life. In essence, the personality traits define how one can manipulate his ways until he or she achieves his desired goals in life. A psychosocial perspective is most important where the argument is in having a sense of togetherness in a most social and psychological way (Frick, 1991). When this is the case, then, a person is able to solve any kind of difference that can occur between you and your environment; the environment here being the persons that you relate to. Therefore, here, the psychosocial crisis is when there is a mistrust of something, and therefore, the contention being trust versus mistrust.
The psychosocial perspective or theory of personality characteristics gives a direction or talks about how individuals’ growth is dependant or entwined with the social factors of life and the events (Frick, 1991). The society helps shape who we are, and even though we are at liberty to choose what we want in our lives, essentially, our environment dictates our undertakings. That is why there exist many personality traits, with one as it has been discussed above being the trait of artisan. This kind of personality trait denotes that a person is more mindful of what happens around him or her and can easily engage him or herself to the actions. In this case, such persons are seen to take the problems that clobber their way into success with a mind of success, and they can even use their hands to free themselves from their problems.
Some of the trait theories as analyzed by Coon (2008) are the humanistic theory, behaviorist and social learning theories and psychoanalytic theory. The psychoanalytic theory tends to base its argument on biological instincts and the impact of sexuality. However, these have been seen corrected and mostly just specifies that everybody has a mind of his own and they tend to be emanating from the biological instincts. On the other hand, the behaviorist and social learning theories tend to point out that the trait of a person has a way of creating a kind of behavior in somebody on how he or she behaves in the presence of other persons. The last of the theory is the Humanistic theory and this tends to point on the direction that the traits a person possesses shows out the human nature in him, especially in the way he approaches issues affecting him or her.
The argument then leads to the analysis as to whether in any way, the traits that are in every other person is a strength in conflict resolutions, and as Deutsch (2006) highlights, some of these theories are of the view that the trait of a person can help combat a problem. In this case, it can be noted that when a person approaches an issue in the way he or she knows it best, then, there is a possibility that everything can go down. The trait of a person is also like a defense mechanism, and in such a case, the issue is to make the traits coming from different people come to a meeting point. Usually, a conflict is created when there is no harmony in decision-making, and in such instances, an external mind is needed. The external person uses his or her knowledge of the problem to offer the solutions that meet the expectations of the people in the conflict.
This is the way I was best placed to handle crisis in an organization did, and the approach was to use my own traits and the strength in giving an appropriate way forward. Actually, with my artisan type of personality trait, I approached the issue by taking everything in my hands and solving the problem, and the result of that was seen in the way the conflicting groups harmonized their ideas later. It worked because I used what they had come up with as two different groups and then gave a quality conclusion of the whole problem.
Personality traits are bad and good bad because at times they can create a great division in people, and good because they define a person. In this case, the personality trait I possess, that is, as having an artisan kind of personality helped in a case where, two groups that are supposed to be working together were having minds that were conflicting. The problem was solved when I took my own creativity and the strength of using my own way to bringing the two together, and even though it was aimed at solving the then current stalemate, it ended being a solution to the simmering row.
Coon, D. (2008). Introduction to psychology: Gateways to mind and behavior. Belmont: Wadsworth CengageBrain Learning.
Deutsch, M. (2006). The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. New York: John Wiley & sons
Frick, W. (1991). Personality theories: Journeys into self: An experiential workbook. New Jersey: Francis & Taylor publishers
Wood, V. (July 2008). Predicting interpersonal conflict resolution styles from personality characteristics. Journal of personality and individual differences, Vol. 45(2), pp 126-131.