Find a conflict

Conflicts have existed in every society since ancient times. They were even talked about by Aristotle (4th
century B.C.), who regarded conflicts as a natural consequence of differences in opinions, interests and
values among individuals and social groups.

Commonly, conflict is viewed negatively and unpleasantly. Conventional thinking tells us that it should be
eliminated as soon as possible so that we can return to peacefully enjoying our relationships. When I think
of the word “conflict” I immediately think of a battle of historical, political, social ideological motive and
relate them to the great events of humanity such as World War II for supranational state power or the Cold
War as a clash between two completely discordant doctrines. However, there is no need to resort to such
anecdotes to address a conflict. In every moment of our daily lives when we take action to achieve any goal
(personal, family, business, institutional) one fact is certain, and that is that the more ambitious the goal, the
greater the likelihood of encountering obstacles. The latter are often represented by the opposition of other
people from whose consent derives the possibility of achieving if not success at least an appreciable result,
making the conflict “difficult to resolve.” Conflict appears to be an inevitable and for some scholars even a
desirable social phenomenon since it can be an important lever to spur individuals to solve problems in
innovative and creative ways and foster if addressed and resolved positively increased self-esteem and
mutual trust among the protagonists of conflict situations. In fact, according to Greenhalgh, whether good or
bad, conflicts have a strong impact on relationships. Conflicts can be different in nature: interpersonal,
intragroup and intergroup conflicts. Conflict phenomena can be differently defined as many as there are
situations and sources of conflict and can diversify because of the conditions underlying the conflict
manifestations.

The interpersonal event that marked me the most, where thanks to this scar formed me and taught me how
best to deal with conflicts, was caused by a rather sad motivation, my grandmother's inheritance. When she
passed away, in addition to the sadness we had to deal with the enormous amount of possessions she had left
us, including jewelry intended half for me and half for my older cousin. My idea at the beginning, rationally,
was that each of us would choose the bracelets/necklaces we liked best, and thereafter we would make a
more or less fair estimate of the value of such jewelry. I did not give too much relevance to the material
value of the jewels, for me they represented an emotional value associated with the memory of my
grandmother but it was not the same for my cousin who wanted to take all the most expensive possessions
being the first-generation granddaughter: we had two different conceptions of size at stake since her
magnitude of what she could lose was certainly greater than mine. The conflict had taken the turn of zero-
sum gain where my cousin wanted to win the bigger share, thinking of her personal victory without
compromising which could lead to positive sum gain. However, although the relationship between us has a
history and is long-lasting, we have grown up and will continue to belong to the same family, it is a unique
situation that will not be repeated in the future which made the conflict even more difficult to resolve. Later,
parents also intervened, each taking their respective positions of their daughters, making the situation even
worse and magnifying it even more as they were both emotionally involved. Unfortunately, while I saw the
situation as sad and bleak, and was plagued by emotional pain and had my mind clouded by suffering from
the loss of my grandmother and the self-centered nature that had turned out to be my cousin's. The latter, on
the contrary was rational, could think about the value of objects and with a clear mind gave argumentative
answers showing the strong personality.

The strategy of how I dealt with the conflict is based on Rubin's model: the perception of the end goal was
conspicuously different for me and my cousin, going so far as to use accommodation and giving up the
jewels with greater value in order not to lose the relationship with my cousin. Although it might have been
inappropriate since my cousin was taking advantage of my grief and her strong position to win, I decided to
put her concern for the outcome in front for the sake I love her and because I thought my grandmother
would never want her granddaughters to fight over inheritance.

Another conflict that scarred me and jeopardized a relationship concerned me and my ex-boyfriend who
belonged to two groups with different ideas “vax” and “no-vax.” Such disputes actually took place in many
countries around the world. My partner and I, started dating at the height of the pandemic, when vaccines
had not yet been invented. However, as soon as they started administering the first doses, the dynamics
changed and the conflicts between us increased. I, pro-vax, was trying to explain to him why vaccines were
needed, that Covid had caused thousands of deaths and that we could finally get out of the pandemic while
he, thought they were harmful to health and that a better cure could be found. Of course, the conflict was not
only about me and him but about the such groups taking the 2 various positions, nationwide, those who
wanted the mandatory vaccine for the common health and those who thought they were a conspiracy or
useless. The issue was serious and no one wanted to give up their ideals. In addition, it was a new (and
relatively short-term) situation where one group did not want to accommodate the other. Even among the
leaders of the political parties and journalists there were many differences, who did not want to give up, and
the 2 positions proved to be compact and strong. However, as time went on, the no-vax group felt more and
more “marginalized” and hurt by the measures. However, the Italian government decided to act with a
compromise by putting the Green Pass (vaccine or Covid test) to participate in some activities (theater,
stadium, cinema...) but not making the vaccine mandatory. As for my relationship, it was compromised
since we could not do many couple activities. However, we tried to find compromises by doing activities
that were still fun but did not need the vaccine (only the test). In this case, it was impossible to find a
solution that satisfied everyone to the fullest, and a compromise was the best solution so as not to increase
discontent and maintain healthy safety. Both parties won (the no vax by not vaccinating and the pro-vax by
not compromising their health in indoor places being a serious and complicated situation.

Finally, when I think of intragroup conflict I reminded to the the disputes within my ASP association over
university elections. We had been part of the community for three years, I was the treasurer, and the issue in
question had arisen after our defeat for the first time in the elections. The reasons were lack of
communication and transparency, as the leader and vice president did not communicate to us their campaign
dynamics and strategies; competition for control and influence within the group because some members
(including me) or event managers wanted more decision-making power; and differences of opinion and
personality due to how to handle activities and opposing parties. As an association we have always been
united but in this case we were each on our own way, just at the time when the actions of one affect the
whole association (i.e. when the president insulted sharply with one from another association, the whole
community was perceived with bad eyes, not just the leader). After the election result, however, with the
prospect of winning the following year's election, we went to the table to try to find a solution and start over
from the same mistakes. The chairmen and deputies blamed us assuming that we had not all been involved
in the events and activities of the campaign, we blamed them since they had not behaved right and we
wanted to decide for ourselves. We had all been disappointed, especially after the time and effort we had
put in, and everyone cared about coming back to win. We had been brainstorming solutions all year, figuring
out the goals, needs, interests and priorities and how not to repeat the same mistakes; no one wanted to
relive a defeat. Even those who had been passive during the elections were showing their interest here,
proposing engaging initiatives and activities.

We acted and “collectively evaluate these alternatives from the viewpoint of their mutual welfare.”1 After
months of meetings and effort, we managed to achieve our goal and win the election the following year.

All the conflicts I experienced, even minor ones, helped me to grow, to avoid making the same mistakes
again and to know how to behave in future situations because from mistakes we learn. In ancient times
conflicts were resolved in a bloody, violent manner in which one side has the decisive upper hand over the
other. From the very distant past this seems to have been the most frequently adopted procedure. But this
conduct in the long run, throughout the history of our species, will certainly have been regarded as a
diseconomical practice. In contrast, a “sophisticated” mode of resolving conflicts, disputes and controversies
of varying nature and with varying degrees of significance is negotiation. Conflicts are part of our lives and
cannot be eliminated. In particular, they show the importance of recognizing and managing the ego
mechanisms that underlie much of the distortion and dysfunctionality in conflict dynamics. Conflict
represents a lesson, and if we are experiencing it, it means we have an opportunity to learn that lesson.

References

Greenhalgh, Leonard. "SMR Forum: Managing Conflict." Sloan Management Review 27 (1986): 45-51

Rubin, Jeffrey Z., Dean G. Pruitt, and Sung Hee Kim. Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement.
Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, 1994.

1
Rubin, Jeffrey Z., Dean G. Pruitt, and Sung Hee Kim. Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement. Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, 1994. Pag. 139
Rowe, M.; “Is the Other Person Competing? Collaborating? Possibly Intending Harm? Ideas to Consider
in a Negotiation”. Working Paper, MIT, 2022.