Colaborative Conflict in groups

I find that I've been in collaborative conflict when I've worked with groups in school. I think that most people have found themselves in similar scenarios, where relying on others and recognizing the benefit of working together towards a solution is beneficial to all. This happens in school groups most often. I find that im typically in groups that all want the same outcome, to pass the assignment and solve the problem at the benefit of everyone in the group. On a more recent assignment where i had to work with a group, we used the collaboration style to break up the problem into smaller parts to solve it. We organized ourselves in a way that maximized the efficiency of the group, by having people attack parts of the problem that they felt the most familiar with. I think that this 'divide and conquer' technique demonstrated the worth of working collaboratively in a conflicted situation.

I find that I am much more likely to be in a competitive conflict when faced with conflicts at work. This could be because of the importance most place on individually winning in the workplace, instead of working collaboratively for the best of everyone working. This can happen, and has happened to me, when a coworker feels that moving forward, or gaining points with management as an individual is more important than working together with others to impress management.

Types of public speaking

A forum seems to be the type of presentation that compliments community and small political discussions. A forum is a audience participatory meeting that gives individuals an opportunity to speak on an issue in front of the rest of the audience. It is structured and guided by a moderator that allows for all views/opinions to be expressed. This form of presentation seems like something that allows for the most amount of input, but least amount of depth or background from the speakers. It seems like the usual type of presentation found at a community or PTA type meeting.

A panel is when four to eight experts on an issue discuss problem solving of the issue in front of an audience. This format is guided by a moderator, who keeps time and summarizes the positions and aspects of the speakers to the audience. This seems like something similar to a talk show, and can provide some in-depth, well thought out discussion and problem solving. But could lack creativity, diversity or audience participation.

A colloquium is when three to six experts from diverse/divergent views on an issue, discuss the issue in front of an audience. This type of presentation is different in that the purpose is to identify and work through possible solutions with collaboration of the audience and experts. The moderator purposely encourages audience participation and questions, while keeping the discussion on track and moving along. I think this would be an interesting presentation, bring the mixture of deep knowledge and experience from the experts and the creativity and passion form the audience into the problem solving mixture. Although the inclusion of a type of 'open forum' could possible lead to disruption and getting of track.

A symposium is a series of speeches by experts on different areas of a complex problem. The purpose is to present technical information and complicated aspects of the problem. The speeches and speakers are well polished and experienced. There is no audience participation during speeches, but there may be a separate forum for questions after the speeches. This is the type of presentation style for very advanced, scientific, and technical issues. These can be tedious but very indepth.

If I were to use on of these presentation formats I would prefer to view and engage in a panel. I think this would offer the most exciting discussion on an issue, because it uses a focused group of experts, with good background knowledge on the issues.

Cultural Barriers to Communication

Some cultural barriers to creativity include conforming to group norms, expecting practicality, expectations of politeness or social order, depending upon generalizations and stereotypes to much, and trusting logic and reason to much. These cultural barriers could easily keep a group from being creative in a lot of ways. If a group is to focused on everyone conforming, or expecting everyone to agree with the majorities solution, it could severely dampen an individual’s voice and ability to introduce new or different solutions. A barrier that I find particularly annoying is when a group relies to much on the reason or logic behind a previous solution. This can become an issue when trying to get a group to brainstorm for new and interesting ideas. If the group members think that their solutions are to outlandish or illogical, they are less likely to move forward towards new and useful solution. I’ve found that brainstorming, even crazy or illogical things, can really benefit a group, because it brings up new ways of approaching or seeing a problem. And when other group members see or hear an idea, even an outlandish one, it may spawn a similar but more reasonable solution, thereby building a structure that can create a new idea. I feel as though, like most other people, I encounter these barriers on creativity pretty often. But I’ve realized that a lot of these barriers are around for a reason, and understanding those reasons can be really helpful when wanting to move around them, or see the problem form a perspective other than the “way its always been”.

Finding creative solutions

Creativity can mean a multitude of different things. This diversity of what it means to be creative help a lot when trying to think of an example of creativity, outside of working in some artistic way. During my jobs I find that there are constant opportunities to find a creative solution to a problem. This occurs most often during my job at the coffee shop. One thing I’ve found out about working in food service and coffee for a while is that there is always a problem that needs to be fixed, or something is always broken. I’ve also found out that it’s in these chaotic that my strengths in creativity come to surface. I’m constantly collaborating with other managers to figure out a better way to make drinks, improve our speed, or fix a broken machine. More recently we had an issue with our menu, and couldn’t figure out how to fit in all the prices, and who was going to hand write the prices to match the pre-existing font. I suggested that we should try and match the font on a computer, print out some samples, and use the one that matches best. Using printed out prices turned out to be the quickest, most efficient solution to the problem. Looking back, I think this fits in perfectly with how the book describes creativity. The other manager was stuck on the problem by only looking at it form a certain perspective, thinking that the prices had to be handwritten and match the old font exactly. I was able to bring a new perspective, and knowing that a multitude of font are available because of graphic design experience, was able to help find a solution. I’ve found out through working in a lot of groups and teams that I really enjoy collaborating and taking a fresh perspective on old problems. I was glad to read in the book that sometimes you have to throw out old notions to find a new solution, something I always try to do.

"Giving" your attention

How to basically “give” your attention to someone. To take your attention and focus it solely on what they are saying and how they are saying it, hopefully resulting in the highest possible transfer of meaning between you and the person. But I think that one of the most useful tactics the book offered was how to receive feedback. Receiving feedback is tough, I think partly because most of the time, you really don’t want to hear what other people have to say about you. You might be willing to hear it sometimes, when your properly prepared and in the right context, but it can still be hard, as feedback for most people carries emotions. I dealt with getting feedback a lot during my time as an Art major. It took awhile to get used to the critiques and opinions of others, and not shirking off their advice as insignificant. But after awhile you realize that the reason feedback is so important is that others can see things that you never did, and usually in a totally different, unexpected way. This is a huge benefit in art, and most other areas. The biggest point for me was to realize that feedback is a sharing of perspective, and should be listened to intently and given a lot of weight, because feedback is hard to give as well as receive. The steps given by the book about receive feedback I see as very useful. Taking deep breaths, slowing your thoughts down, relaxing, listening, not interrupting, are all great steps to take in order to receive feedback on something. Making sure to let the person know that they’ve been heard is also very important, building an understanding and relationship between you and the giver. I think that the last piece of advice is one of the best, that if you don’t understand or like the feedback, ask questions from the give that can possibly make it clearer or more constructive.

Memory & Communication

I think that the most common mistake I make during listening relates to my memory. I’ve found, time and time again, that things that come up in conversation slip my mind. I think that the book offered some useful tools for my improvement in this area. The book talks about the distinction between short term memory and long term memory. Short term lasts from 1-60 seconds, during which time the brain decides if the info received is important enough to file over in the long term memory. The long term memory is an unlimited storage space for all types of information, relevant or ridiculous. But, as mentioned in the book, the info coming from short term must gain entrance into the long term through processing, processing that isn’t being taken up by distractions, and interpretations on what is or isn’t important. I think this is where my problem arises.
I’ve often had trouble with the simple conversations. A good example is in my home. I used to constantly be at odds with my mom over things that I needed to do or what she had asked me to do. And where the conflict typically arises is over the details of previous conversations, as she typically is able to recall little details about the conversation, while I typically remember the entire meaning of the conversation. I guess this would pin me as a “big picture” person. I think my problem with listening is that I usually concentrate on the entire scope of the discussion, what it was about, where it was, but most of the time not so much the exact terms and words. I don’t think this is technically an uncommon or bad thing, but it can prove annoying when trying to remember specifics of a lecture or conversation. After reading over the chapter, I think that a way to improve this part of my memory would be to up to make sure I’m adjusting the level of importance of each conversation accordingly. It’s important for me to recognize that the conversation is important and dial in my focus and therefore my memory.

Quick Rundown on Semantics

One concept that I thought could be discussed is the concept of semantics. Semantics studies are guided by three principles that look at the construction of meanings in language. It examines the fact that words alone have no power in meaning, but rather are given meaning as symbols by people. The idea that the words we use have no intrinsic value, except the value we assign to them as individuals, cultures, and societies is very significant. It helps one to understand how confusion and conflict can erupt over language. We are often face to face with disagreements over the importance of our words, and how we use them. A word or sentence that means very little to one person can easily carry much greater significance to another person. When people come to agree upon what a word means, and continue to agree on it, a real meaning for words is developed. I really enjoy the idea that the meaning to words lie in people, not in the words themselves. It helps me understand and realize that if I want to successfully communicate with others, I need to get an idea of how significant the words I use, and how I use them, are to others. A interesting example of this concepts could be found in the movie Citizen Kane (1946). In it, we are given what is, to the viewer, the meaningless word “rosebud”. It is only after watching the film, and understanding the significance of the word to the character, that the importance of using it in the movie is realized.
Other concepts of semantics state that language is a symbolic representation of reality, and it conveys meaning for our observations, inferences, and judgments. The main idea is that words we use are not actually the reality, but they stand in for the realities that we live out everyday. To me, this concept seems fairly simple on the surface. The word cup is obviously not the actual cup, but a representation of such that allows me to communicate to others a meaning for the thing I put my coffee in. Just as the fact I drank coffee this morning cannot be re-lived, or experienced by other individuals, but I can only convey what occurred through the language I use to tell them about the event. This idea follows the previous concept that the meanings we have are in people, not the words. This concept proves true only when individuals understand, transfer, and interpret symbolic representation for the words used.