soon and run away, yet the taxi driver catch him. In the next seconds, the taxi driver hit him then put him into the police office.
Beebe and Redmon 297-300 state that the interpersonal conflict can be divided into three types. They are pseudo conflict, simple conflict, ego conflict.
Pseudo conflict is a conflict caused by the lack of understanding between the individual and parties. Simple conflict happens because of the differences on
definition, goal, ideas, and perceptions. For example there are two students learn pronunciation. Yet their pronunciation is different. Because of that, they argue each
other. The last is ego conflict. It happens when the personal defenses attached to each individual in a group.
c. Causes of Conflicts
Conflicts arise because there is different idea, thought, needs and attitude. People believe that conflicts happen when a person or parties cannot reach the same
goal because the different idea thought, needs, attitudes and behavior appears among them. Isenhart and Spangle 14-15 state that there are seven sources of
conflict. First is data. People often have differences of opinion about the best source, reliability, or interpretation of data. Second is interest. It means that conflict
specifically happens when two or more parties have different interest. Third is procedure. Here, parties will not involve in a discussion if they do not agree with
the procedure in solving the problem. Fourth is value. The hardest conflict will occur when the priority of values is
different. Fifth is relationship. A conflict exists when people cannot trust each other or respect each other’s feeling. Sixth is role. A conflict appears because of the
imbalance role of the people among the rules toward their own roles. Seventh is
communication. Conflict frequently results from how something is said and not interprets among people.
d. Conflict Resolutions
Everybody has their opinion, idea, and thought that may lead to a conflict with others. Worchel and Cooper propose some ways in resolving conflict. They
also state that people must be careful with their intrapersonal conflict. Hence, Worchel and Cooper 460-464 suggest several solutions to handle intrapersonal
conflicts. First is approach-approach type. By this type, people can solve their conflict by defining the motivation to achieve the goal. For example a person who
get two nice jobs but he has to go to one. He has to choose one of two jobs offered to him. The first job is far away from his town, he has to leave his parents, yet the
salary is high. The second job is near from his house, he has not need to leave his parents, and yet the salary is low. These jobs have an equal positive side. Therefore,
the person has to choose which one is the most benefit for him. Theoretically this type of conflict should be easy to resolve.
Second is avoidance-avoidance approach. In this type a person tends to leave the conflict. When someone decides to avoid the conflicts and then leaves it.
It means the conflicts are so difficult to solve. The example is a person having tooth ache and hating to go to the dentist. Here, he has to choose one of the unattractive
alternatives. He continues with the pain that is horrifying for him or going to the dentists, who he also hates. This person is stuck in between two difficult choices he
does not like but ends up doing either. Third is approach-avoidance. A person cannot make any decision toward
the conflicts itself and it is not easy to have a resolution. For example there are a child and a stranger. This child has been taught not to receive candy from a stranger
even a stranger offers himher favorite candy. Shehe wants to take the candy but shehe knows that shehe cannot take the candy from the unknown person. This
child is afraid to do that because shehe remembers about the previous training from herhis parents. From the example given, the resolution for this conflict is by
avoiding the approach given by other person. Fourth is double approach-avoidance. This approach tends to approach and
avoid the goals because people have to choose between two or more goals, each of which has its own consequences. For example, couples who just merit want to buy a
house to live in. they are confused whether choosing a house in a country or city. Choosing a house in the country means they will get fresh air, relax, room to live,
and peace. Live in the country also means need hours to get the office and long distance from city. Choosing a house in the city also has to face the both problem
and advantages of city life. There are two sub-types of conflict resolution. The first sub-type is
determining one goal and as a consequence giving up the other option. The second sub-type depends on the value of each goal. When the positive aspects of goal are
higher than the negative, the goal can be reached. Besides the conflict resolution for intrapersonal conflict, people also have to
pay attention with the conflict resolution for interpersonal conflict. There are some ways to solve the interpersonal conflict. Alder and Towne 376-380, state that there
are three manners in taking decision like do or do not do to solve the problems of interpersonal conflicts. Those three manners are win – lose, lose – lose, and the last
is win – win.
Win – lose solution is when there are two persons are facing the conflict, then there is only one person who can reach the goal and the other person does not
reach his or her goal. It makes one party feels disappointed. Second is lose – lose solution. Nobody feels satisfied with the decision in solving the problem. Yet, many
conflicts occur in this manner. Third is win – win solution. Either of these two sides feel satisfied with the decision which is taken in this manner. Win – win solution
gives the best decision for both sides and does not try to find a mistake. It is good when people can find the right answer of his or her problem without blaming others.
Isenhart and Spangle 45-152, state that there are five alternatives to resolve the conflicts; they are negotiation, mediation, facilitation, arbitration, and judicial
process. Negotiation is as much about a state of mind as it is a strategic choice for managing problem. In having an effective negotiation, people have to be able to
share a lot of information in the discussion about the needs, issues, and interest. There are two types of negotiation. The first one is integrative. It is a constructive
and problem solving process. Between two persons or parties exchange the information and analyze the problem while protecting their relationship and
interests. The second one is distributive. In this type, both sides said their goals and advantages in achieving the goals. Both parties are forcing their demands and
threats. Mediation is a problem solving process in which the third party is needed.
The third party functions as a guide and as a neutral party. It means the third party has no right to argue or influence both parties in achieving their goal. Goldberg,
Sander, and Rogers as cited in Isenhart and Spangle 72 say that mediation will be successful if the disputants are cooperative with the negotiator.
Success of mediation depends on the disputant’s willingness to accept the mediator’s role as a process expert for resolving differences, as well as
disputant’s willingness to share information that might lead to mutual beneficial agreement Isenhart and Spangle 72.
Through mediation, the disputants feel comfortable since in mediation the disputants feel protected because the mediation setting serves as a safe context for
sharing information that might not otherwise be shared. Mediation also changes the focus of discussion. The mediator changes positional statements become interest
topics to discuss that express needs, concerns, and fears. Mediation is good for the disputants who cannot reach the same goal. Since the third person or the neutral
party who is emotionally uninvolved with the dispute is able to identify and clarify the central of underlying issues of a complex situation.
The next alternative is facilitation. According to Frey as cited in Isenhart and Spangle 107 facilitation is any meeting technique, procedure, or practice that
makes it easier for groups to interact andor accomplish their goal. Isenhart and Spangle 107 state that he third party is needed as a facilitator who accommodates
the discussion process. Usually, facilitation applies in a large or complex conflict. Facilitation is the role of a person who serves as an impartial or neutral
discussion leader, who guides a group through a specified set of procedures for the purpose of accomplishing a purpose or goal, and who enforces
ground rules that manage verbal interactions between group members Isenhart and Spangle 107.
Arbitration is an alternative that is applied when the parties cannot find the beneficial advantages goal for both parties. Then the parties who are in conflict
select the arbitrator to make decision for the problem they faced. The last is a judicial process. It is an alternative that combines legal and non legal procedures,
social norms, and legal laws in the process of conflict resolution. A court functions as a third party.
e. Conflict Managements
