Running head: CASE STUDY- CONFLICTED 2 1

Prepare/Enrich Case Study- Conflicted Example 2

Jerome Schmidt

Liberty University
Running head: CASE STUDY- CONFLICTED 2 2

Abstract

The case study presents Steve and Cindy, a conflicted married couple as defined by

PREPARE/ENRICH couple typology. Conflicted couples report less satisfaction and lower

positive couple agreement (PCA) scores. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of

the facilitators report and present a realistic ministry plan for the couple. I want to say that raw

data alone is insufficient to write a ministry plan…

Key Strengths and Weaknesses

The PREPARE/ENRICH facilitators report presents Steve and Cindy as a conflicted

couple according to PREPARE/ENRICH typology. Couple typology is determined using

statistical analysis of the couple’s Positive Couple Agreement (PCA) scores. Conflicted couple

typology indicate low scores across many of the core content areas (Olson, 2009).

PREPARE/ENRICH core content areas include: Communication, conflict resolution, partner

style and habits, financial management, leisure activities, sexual relationship, family and friends,

and spiritual belief.

(https://learn.liberty.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-9911735-dt-content-rid-

75064609_1/courses/PACO603_D02_201540/conflicted2.pdf)
Running head: CASE STUDY- CONFLICTED 2 3

As indicated by the graph, the couple scored very low (PCA= 0-20%) in the areas of

communication, conflict resolution, leisure activities, and partner style and habits. Other areas of

concern are financial management and sexual relations (PCA=30-40%). Couple typology is

directly related to couple satisfaction, low PCA scores indicate lower levels of couple

satisfaction.

A review of the couple’s relationship dynamics provides information that may have direct

impact on communication and conflict resolution. Both have difficulty expressing their thoughts

and feelings, as evidenced by the low score on assertiveness. Additionally, Cindy scored very

high in avoidance, indicating a desire to avoid conflict most of the time. Finally, both score

average on partner dominance. This could imply that both want to be in charge, and Cindy may

have difficulty with trust issues. While Steven tends to have more confidence and self-worth, he

also tends to minimize issues.

Background Information

The couple’s family history indicates both come from connected family systems.

The family map provides a visual representation of perceived family relationship. The family

relationship is evaluated in terms of “closeness and flexibility” (Olson, 2015, p. 28). Here, the

family dynamics, though balanced, vary slightly. Steve reports coming from a family where

structure and organization were maintained and occasionally open to change. Cindy reports a

family of origin loosely organized and often open to change. The SCOPE personality scales

support the probability that the couple’s family of origin has impacted the couple’s core beliefs

regarding family, and their preferred level of closeness and flexibility within the family. These

differences should be explored in order to adjust the current family dynamics.

Running head: CASE STUDY- CONFLICTED 2 4

Additionally, there are several areas of concern worth noting. Cindy did not answer the

questions regarding employment and income. Although the implication of a more traditional

marriage is likely, Cindy may feel marginalized in her role as homemaker, because she feels she

doesn’t get enough help around the house and with the children. Cindy’s top two stressors are

lack of sleep and the children. Cindy’s previously failed marriages, combined with the stress of a

blended family are also factors that may be contributing to conflict. Ron Deal writes, “Forty-two

percent of adults in the U.S. have a step relationship… But sadly, two-thirds of marriages where

one or both partners bring children into the relationship end in divorce” (Deal, 2012, p. 11). And

olson states, “The rate of divorce increases with the number of previous marriages (Olson, 2009,

p. 6). Cindy also indicates that there were substance abuse issues in her family of origin and she

suffered abuse in the past. This could indicate that Cindy struggles with trust issues.

Personality Assessment

SCOPE personality scales are based on the “Big Five” personality scales. The five factor

model includes: “openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism”

(Kaufman, 2011, p. 2). SCOPE is an acronym PREPARE/ENRICH designed to represent the Big

Five as an easier way to remember the five traits. Social = extraversion, Change = openness,

Organized = conscientiousness, Pleasing = agreeableness, and Emotional Stability = neuroticism.

Leo & Klohnen (2005), observed, “Satisfaction correlations suggest that similarity on

personality related domains was strongly associated with satisfaction” (Luo & Klohnen, 2005, p.

322). Which suggests personality traits may play a larger overall role in couple satisfaction in the

long term. An assessment of Steve and Cindy’s personality scales indicate that both are fairly

evenly matched, with the exception of openness to change. Because of this similarity, even low

scores that may be problem areas can be viewed positively. In research conducted by Luo &
Running head: CASE STUDY- CONFLICTED 2 5

Klohnen (2005), “spouse similarity on personality domains is associated with marital

satisfaction” (Luo & Klohnen, 2005, p. 316). The couple’s current overall satisfaction can

increase as the couple works to understand each unique personality domain. Further research

concludes that personality changes occur throughout a person’s lifetime (Specht, Egloff, &

Schmukle, 2011, p. 862). The implication is that although personality traits are generally stable

and resistant to change, life circumstances and stage of life can produce change. Open discussion

of personality scales may reduce overall stress.

(https://learn.liberty.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-9911735-dt-content-rid-

75064609_1/courses/PACO603_D02_201540/conflicted2.pdf)

Social

The couple scored low on the social scale. Since both are introverted and reserved, this

area might be used as a strength for the couple to build on. However, it also may put undue

pressure on the spouse to be their partners everything, or cause feelings of total isolation. The
Running head: CASE STUDY- CONFLICTED 2 6

introverted couple can brainstorm activities that will allow avoiding large social gatherings, but

still enjoy each other’s company.

Change

As indicated on the family map, both partners vary somewhat in the way change and

flexibility were modeled in their family of origin. The family pattern is repeated in the change

scale score. Steve scored low on openness to change, indicating a preference for structure and

organization. Cindy scored average on this scale, preferring to remain open to the possibility of

change. Because the differences on this scale reflect each partner’s family of origin map,

discussing each family’s pattern may bring clarification and appreciation of the differences.

Organized

The couple scored low on the organized scale. Both can be easily distracted and tend to

be more spontaneous. Although spontaneity and lack of detail can at times add flair to a

relationship, too much disorganization can become problematic. Both partner’s indicate there are

things around the home that don’t get done. Olson suggests setting goals and seeking ways to

compensate for a lack of organization may prove helpful (Olson, 2009, p. 73).

Pleasing

The couple scored average on the pleasing scale. Olson states, “Couples who both score

in this range typically know how to balance consideration for one another with assertiveness and

straightforward talk” (Olson, 2009, p. 74). However, both also scored low on assertiveness,

therefore, the couple’s attempts to placate one another may indicate the influence of their shared

spiritual beliefs rather than their ability to be assertive. Toelle & Harris, (2012), write, “When

both the wife and husband were religious, they reported higher levels of marital adjustment”
Running head: CASE STUDY- CONFLICTED 2 7

(Toelle & Harris, 2012, p. 2). Approached correctly, the capacity for marital adjustment can be a

positive motivator for change.

Emotionally Steady

The couple scored average on emotional steadiness. According to Olson, (2009), this

indicates the ability to remain relaxed and in control of their emotions during times of stress.

High levels of stress can produce anger, depression, or anxiety. However, Olson also states that

when both individuals share an average score on this scale, their “communication skills, good

problem solving and flexibility” can mitigate stressful circumstances (Olson, 2009, p. 75). It is

noteworthy that although the couple scored in the average range on this scale, their score was in

the low average. Therefore, since communication skills and conflict resolution are low at this

point, the focus on counseling should reflect a shared low score. Olson writes, “Being good

listeners and supportive partners during times of stress will maximize their ability to weather

life’s challenges together. They should each work to develop positive coping skills for managing

stress in their lives” (Olson, 2009, p. 75).

Ministry Plan

Following the PREPARE/ENRICH program with several feedback sessions and working

through pertinent sections of the couple workbook would be a good place to start. Groups and

mentors… mentors may be unwelcome due to the couples age and length of marriage. However

small groups with married couples in the same life stage may work well.
Running head: CASE STUDY- CONFLICTED 2 8

References

Deal, R. L. (2012). Dating and the Single Parent: Are You Ready to Date?, Talking with Your

Kids, Avoiding a Big Mistake, Finding Lasting Love. Bethany House.

Kaufman, A. (2011). Personality, Partner Similarity and Couple Satisfaction: Do Opposites

Attract or Birds of a Feather Flock Together? Retrieved from: www.prepare-
enrich.com/pe/pdf/research/2011/personality_and_couple_satisfaction_kaufmann_2011.p
df
Luo, S., & Klohnen, E. C. (2005). Assortative mating and marital quality in newlyweds: a
couple-centered approach. Journal of personality and social psychology. Doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.304

Olson, D. (2009). PREPARE/ENRICH certification training kit. Minneapolis, MN: Life

Innovations Inc.
Specht, J., Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2011). Stability and change of personality across the
life course: the impact of age and major life events on mean-level and rank-order stability of the
Big Five. Journal of personality and social psychology, 101(4), 862.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024950

Toelle, S. C., & Harris, V. W. (2012). Are you marrying someone from a different culture or
religion. Gainesville, FL: Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and
Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Retrieved from:
https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fy1337