Is Conflict Resolution the Wrong Goal? | HuffPost
Novak starts right out by admitting that he was wrong
Sometimes people shy away from conflict, and the reasons for this are numerous. They may, for example, feel that their underlying anger may go out of control if they open the door to conflict. Thus, they may see conflict as an all-or-nothing situation (either they avoid it altogether or they end up in an all-out combative mode, regardless of the real severity of the conflict). Or they may find it difficult to face conflict because they feel inadequate in general or in the particular relationship. They may have difficulty in positively asserting their views and feelings. Children who grow up surrounded by destructive conflict may, as adults, determine never to participate in discord. In this situation, the person may never have learned that there are effective, adaptive ways to communicate in the face of conflict.
What, exactly, was he wrong about
Depending on a person’s perspective, one set of rights may be in conflict with another’s perceived set of rights. Who is right or wrong, though, is not necessarily a question that can or should be answered. Since property rights are culturally defined and enforced, no one knows how or when public rights may be broadened over time. This situation can create concern or conflict since the interests of different groups of people vary greatly.
Sometimes one person is right and the other is wrong
Clearly, it is imperative to manage negative conflict in the workplace constructively. Poorly managed conflict causes deteriorated employee and team performance levels, reduced productivity, and interruptions in employee relationships (Bowditch & Buono). Additional unfavorable impacts caused to organizations are increased absenteeism and employee stress, high turnover rates, and monetary losses associated with professional fees such as attorneys and court costs. Lastly, it is important to mention one important note about negative conflict and employees. Employees who are overstressed and have peer relation problems at work oftentimes carry those problems home. Negative conflict affects organizations, ultimately carries over into one’s home life.
Eg, a man and a woman are arguing
We do not intend to denigrate the status or worth of any human being by using it here...The problem with the line of thought in the section above that it takes rights away from many human beings as well as from non-human animals.This is because some human beings (babies, senile people, people with some severe mental defects and people in a coma) don't have the capacity for free moral judgement either, and by this argument they wouldn't have any rights.Some philosophers are prepared to argue that in fact such 'marginal human beings' don't have rights, but most people find that conclusion repellent.The argument can be rescued by rewriting it like this:But this is not an argument; it's a statement that human beings have rights and non-human animals don't, which is pure , and hardly persuasive.It's also vulnerable to the (probably unlikely) arrival of a species of extra-terrestrial creatures who demonstrate the capacity for free moral judgement.