Writing
A1 Business and Technical College The Cultural Incident Discussion

A1 Business and Technical College

Question Description

I’m stuck on a Communications question and need an explanation.

The standard format is described below for Module 4

Label and compose the 3 parts as shown. Follow these content and organization directions carefully

Outline for Standard Module

I. INCIDENT:

This is a detailed description. Open this section with a sentence or two to provide context and set the scene (how did you come to know of it? when did it happen? who was involved? etc.) Then provide a concise description of what happened. Make sure you include a word-for-word, (as accurately as possible; no need to censor) line-by-line transcription of the conversation to the best of your recollection. Do not just do a summary of what was said and done. For example, this is a summary: "They had a big fight, called each other names, and he stormed out of the apartment." A proper "transcript" of the conversation would include verbal & nonverbal details as to who said what, where, when, in what order, and how. Example: She shouted, red-faced and bursting into tears: “Then go!” He took a breath and then yelled, jerking open the door to his room, “OK, but first I’m getting my stuff and you can just stay out of my face!”

II. ANALYSIS:

In this section, employ at least 2 concepts from each of the assigned chapters we are studying for the current module, using the selected concepts to label and explain what happened. Labeling is giving an appropriate name to a behavior using our textbooks’ terminology. Explaining is exploring beneath the surface of the behavior to provide a reasonable answer to this question: WHY DID THIS HAPPEN? Sometimes an explanation for what someone else does is mainly speculative, (that’s where the theories in the chapters help). But if you are talking about your own behavior, the WHY question may be easier to answer and using the textbook can also be of use. In this module section, concisely label and explain the behavior of all persons involved in the Incident you described in part 1. Boldface the text concepts you have drawn from the chapter and cite the textbook page # in parentheses, e.g., (p. 217) next to the boldfaced term or phrase, indicating where the concept can be found in our main textbook. A total of 4 concepts, minimum, shall be employed.

III. EVALUATION:

Provide evaluation and some prescriptions. Here you pass a judgment: how well did this conflict go? Was it creative, destructive, or both? What could you and/or each the persons involved have said or done differently to help prevent or reduce the severity of the conflict? If you were involved in the conflict, focus on your own choices, but also make specific suggestions for changes in words and actions of the other(s), too. If you were just an observer and not directly involved, you can still make prescriptions for how the people who you observed could have spoken or could have behaved differently if they'd been thinking and communicating more creatively.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Cross-Cultural Awareness in Conflict Management Chapter 5  Chapter focus: pseudoconflict (i.e., conflicts emerging from disagreements created by inaccurate communication)  Actual conflict v. Pseudoconflict  In actual conflict, concerns of two or more parties are incompatible  In pseudoconflict, concerns do not actually exist but instead are perceived as existing Assessment  Cross-cultural Pseudoconflict  Mistaken impression that a conflict situation exists derives from cultural differences in how people process info. and communicate  Two (2) areas of study:  Recognize importance of intercultural comm.  To assess nature of cross-cultural conflict, must be familiar with what is meant by culture  First Step: Establish need for and value of cross-cultural comm. skills Assessment: Need for Intercultural Comm.  Moore (1993): “all decision-making and conflict mgmt. procedures are not necessarily universally applicable or appropriate”  Awareness of need for intercultural comm. competency in conflict mgmt. has increased over last 25 yrs…why?  Greater cross-cultural interactions are taking place among multinational corporations  To interact w/others in global arena, individuals must be able to communicate across cultures and w/in other minority subcultures w/in his/her own culture  Cox (1993) defines cultural diversity as “the representation, in one social system, of ppl. w/distinctly different group affiliations of cultural significance”  Intercultural communication: “the sending and receiving of messages w/in a context of cultural differences producing differential effects” (Dodd, 1982)  Culture: hard to define Assessment: What is Culture?  Kluckhohn’s definition of culture: “the patterned ways of thinking, feeling and reacting” and “the total life way of a people, the social legacy the individual acquires from his group” (1964)  In the view of many experts, culture and comm. cannot be separated Acknowledgment: Why Does Culturally Caused Misunderstanding Occur?  Misunderstanding, and from this counterproductive pseudoconflict, occurs when members of one culture are unable to understand culturally determined differences in comm. practices, traditions, and thought processing  Goldstein’s “stained glass window” analogy  Language as a window  Experts believe if sender is careful enough in encoding a message, the receiver will understand it w/o interference  Goldstein argues this is unlikely; message will not be able to pass through comm. window unhindered  Meaning must not be seen as an objective constant  Meaning is in people, not in words  When one or more people involved cling to an ethnocentric view of the world, this may cause cross-cultural pseudoconflict  Ethnocentrism: “the unconscious tendency to interpret or to judge all other groups and situations according to the categories and values of our own culture” (Ruhly, 1976) Acknowledgment: Ethnocentrism  The ethnocentric party views culturally derived variations in communication as wrong rather than as simply different  Ethnocentrism is deceptive b/c members of any culture perceive their own behavior as logical since that behavior works for them  Effective communicators understand how the perception of a given message changes depending on the culturally determined viewpoint of those communicating  Seven (7) factors likely to shift across cultures in a cross-cultural setting; aka LESCANT Attitude        Language Environment and technology Social organization Contexting Authority conception Nonverbal communication Temporal conception  Simplified LESCANT model to four (4) culturally derived influences on comm. in perceived conflict situations     Language Place Thought Processing Nonverbal communication  Very nature of language provides a source for misunderstanding  Accent differences Attitude: Language     How one pronounces, enunciates, and articulates words Social and cultural factors Listeners judge speakers on their enunciation Not all accents possible in given language are judged the same by all of that language’s speakers  Foreign accents judged according to cultural stereotypes w/in each language group  Linguistic differences  Sapir-Whorf hypothesis believes language shapes culture that uses it, affecting the way that its users think  Source of pseudoconflict: even if one can approximate the meaning of a message through translation, it is at best to difficult to convey the ideas connected to the translator’s choice of words in that language  To avoid pseudoconflict, determine the degree of error probable in translating whatever comm. is exchanged Attitude:  For the cross-cultural communicator, main purpose of translation is to “prevent any confrontation between alien thought systems” (Douglas, 1975)  Translation difficulties: Language  Gross translation errors  Though frequent, less likely to cause conflict between parties  Conveyance of subtle distinctions from language to language  Recognizing culturally based variations among speakers of same language  Defined as the physical environment in which one lives and existing technology, or way in which one manipulates that environment  Environment and technology of a culture are interrelated, forming a cultural system Attitude: Place  Many place-related comm. differences relatively easy for the communicator to overcome as sources of pseudoconflict  Based primarily on lack of knowledge rather than culturally intrinsic values  Human climate (e.g., literacy rate, role off mass media) changes greatly between cultures; can cause pseudoconflict  Another cause of pseudoconflict: when ppl. don’t adapt worldview to technological level of sophistication of a given group of ppl. or workforce  The way in which people interpret the world around them  Four (4) variables: Attitude: Thought Processing     Social Organization Contexting Authority Conception Temporal Conception  Social Organization:  “The common institutions and collective activities shared by members of a culture” (Victor, 1992)  Shapes the most fundamental beliefs of members of a culture  Pseudoconflict likely to occur when individual assumes as universal his/her views on issues reflecting the SO of his/her culture  Individuals must remain nonjudgmental when values determined by SO patterns clash w/those w/whom they communicate (hard to do)  Contexting:  “The way in which one communicates and especially the circumstances surrounding that communication.”  Seeds of unintentional conflict planted  Those from same culture would have more common experiences/shared understandings than those from different cultures Attitude: Thought Processing  A shared set of understanding acts to reduce the inherent uncertainty present in all communication  The level of contexting w/in a culture depends on the nature of the culture itself  High-context cultures: members rely heavily on inferred meaning  Low-context cultures: members rely heavily on literal meaning  Context linked to issues of formality, face saving and respect  Authority Conception: Attitude: Authority Conception  “The degree to which individuals believe that those higher up in the authority hierarchy have the power to influence or command behavior”  Authority can be seen as differing thought, opinion, and behavior  Ppl. in the U.S. can communicate on a much more informal basis than would be appropriate in many other cultures  Flow of comm. varies greatly from culture to culture  Temporal Conception:  “How people view time”  No factor in comm. thought-processing is more likely to create conflict based on misunderstanding rooted in cultural differences than how ppl. view time  Monochronic and Polychronic time orientations Attitude: Nonverbal Comm. Behaviors  Appearance  Kinesics (body language)  Oculesics (eye contact)  Haptics (touch)  Proxemics (space)  Paralanguage  To diminish the possibility of pseudoconflict deriving from intercultural comm. differences: Action             Establish credibility Establish trust Express problem Accurate comm. Recognizing status Establish goals Anticipate reactions Give and receive feedback Maintain adaptability Seek out creative means of problem-solving Maintain open channels of comm. Summarize decisions How Writing Styles Can Create Conflict Chapter 6 Is this you? Points to Be Addressed  Written communication as a potential source of conflict  Assessment: importance of identifying the appropriate aim of written comm. to minimize unnecessary conflict (conceptualization)  Acknowledgment: anticipating reader’s expectations and capabilities (reception)  Attitude: vocabulary variation, language misuse, semantic unclarity as potential sources of pseudoconflict (transmittal)  Action: three (3) checklists to help writer(s) minimize, defuse, and/or avoid conflict Preface  Unlike speech, writing allows for one-sided comm.—a monologue written in writer’s favor  How effectively a writer increases or reduces conflict is based largely on  Tone and style chosen  Situation at hand  Perceived needs of reader  Conflict deriving expressly from the way in which something is written: almost always negative in consequences Assessment: A Matter of Conceptualization  Conceptualization requires writer to assess purpose of his/her writing; core of a great deal of conflict deriving from writing style  Often goes beyond determining purpose of comm.; writers attempt to maintain a certain attitude in their writing (to persuade, to inform, to assign/avoid blame, etc.)  Difficulties arise when writers fail to balance comm. content  “Please provide me with a report on the high rate of absenteeism in your department.”  Writing in potentially explosive situation? Identify and address potential conflict in least antagonizing manner possible  Maintain as objective a tone as possible Acknowledgment: Reception  To reduce effectively possible tensions inherent in a message, writer(s) must thoroughly analyze how reader(s) may receive messages  One of most dangerous conflict-causing errors: write a message as if it were intended for writer(s) alone w/o consideration for reader(s)  Unless writer(s) anticipates message’s reception, ability of writing to influence the message’s reader(s) in desired manner rests on chance rather than choice  Engage in audience analysis; will result in being least likely to create unproductive conflict amongst readers Attitude: Transmittal  This is interim step in comm. process in which conceptualization (purpose) is transmitted to recipient (audience); does not represent true conflict  Transmittal problems in writing often represent perceived disagreements/pseudoconflicts on part of parties who actually do agree  Assumptions or false conclusions could escalate to ego conflict  Conflicting parties become so emotionally involved in their perception of conflict that they can no longer divest themselves of inherently hostile relational transactions w/o losing face or feeling deep resentment  Often seen in contract negotiations Attitude: Transmittal  In writing, pseudoconflict arises from two (2) causes:  Unrecognized linguistic comm. conflict (i.e., errors in writing style)  Tonal error: miscalculation of wording required to best address reader’s needs while fulfilling intended purpose  Transmissional conflict has, at its root, the fact that language itself is a faulty means of comm. (Bloom, 1981; Whorf, 1952).  Three (3) factors contribute to inability to communicate in differing degrees:  Vocabulary variation  Language misuse  Semantic unclarity Attitude: Transmittal – Vocabulary Variation  Dialect differences:  In formal writing, less likely to produce conflict through actual misinterpretation  Regional slang or colloquialisms, however, can cause issues  Sociolinguistic biases re: certain uses of language often encourage some groups to look down upon those using forms they consider substandard (Chaika, 1982; Trudgill, 1974).  Standard American English v. Appalachian dialect  Professional jargon:  Risks confusing reader(s) unfamiliar with it  Acts as a profession’s passwords to exclude those who do not belong to group Attitude: Transmittal – Language Misuse  Ignorance  Ignorant of basic rules governing their language  Misconjugating verbs or vary verb tenses w/o reason  Misspell words (“defiantly” instead of “definitely”, “seperate” instead of “separate”)  Choose words that do not mean what they intend  Use double negatives  Conflict arises b/c grammatical errors reflect only writer’s ability to handle language, not reasoning behind message  Ambiguity  Language misuse that is technically correct but carries more than one acceptable meaning Attitude: Transmittal – Semantic Unclarity  Semantics: meanings or connotations of words  Different views of the world influence subtle variations readers associate w/same words (e.g., pet)  Difficulty of semantic increases when words do not describe something that can be understood through the senses (must be understood in abstract terms)  E.g., What is cheap? What is expensive?  State ideas more concretely  Misunderstandings increase when abstract terms (e.g., freedom, liberty, etc.) lack even a comparative base Attitude: Transmittal – Semantic Unclarity  Another issue: many words carry more than one meaning  Tonal error also contributes to pseudoconflict in writing style  Tone: “the manner of expression of character prevailing in a given piece of writing  Conflict arises from tone when emotions intended do not match emotions for which situation calls  Immoderation in word choice is generally provocative (e.g., “putrid” or “disgusting”)  Patronizing tones produce ego conflict where substantive disagreements may not have existed  Generalizations such as “always,” “every”, “all” frequently inspire resistance unless empirical evidence supports them Action: Remaining Conflict Free in Conceptualization (Assessment Step) 1. What is my ostensible purpose for this message? 2. What are my underlying reasons for writing? 3. How do I want the reader to react? 4. Is there a possibility of real conflict here rather than pseudoconflict? Action: Reducing Chance of Negative Conflict in Reception Process (Acknowledgment and Attitude Steps) 1. How do I anticipate that the reader will react? 2. To whom am I writing? 3. What details—age, rank, sex, attitudes, area of expertise, experience—do I know about the reader? 4. If the reader is unknown to me, what can I fairly guess about him or her? Action: Reducing Unwarranted Conflict in Transmittal Process (Action Step) 1. Am I using any dialect variations in my language that the reader may not understand or might misjudge? 2. Am I using any professional jargon that is not absolutely needed? 3. If I am using needed jargon, can the reader understand it? 4. Am I writing in a technically proper manner w/good grammar, spelling, punctuation, and mechanics? 5. Can the reader construe what I have written in more than one way? 6. Am I being concrete—that is, am I semantically clear? 7. Am I moderate in tone? 8. Have I avoided patronizing the reader? 9. Have I avoided oversimplification? 10. Have I eliminated any generalizations? SAMPLE MODULE INCIDENT This incident happened between two friends of my daughter that were all eating lunch together. The female in this incident has enlisted into the Navy and reports this fall. The conversation started with us discussing what her initial training would be like. Anna: "I am really excited about getting to travel to Illinois for boot camp. It will be hard but I know I can do it." Billy: "Aren't you nervous about being around and basically competing with mostly men for such a long time?' Anna: "Not really, why should I be?" (when she said this, she had been facing my daughter, but when asked this question, she turned to face Billy and moves closer to him.) Billy: "It's just that you are not what I think of as the military type." Anna: "What is that supposed to mean?" (staring directly at him with her eyebrows raised) Billy: "Calm down. I'm not saying that you shouldn't be able to go into the military, it's just you can't even do a pull up. How are you supposed to save yourself in a sticky situation much less save another full grown man?" (patting her on the head in a joking yet demeaning way) Anna: (Pulling away) Just because I'm a woman doesn't mean that I can't do this job!" Billy: "It's not a matter of you being a woman it just I know I wouldn't want to be paired up with you unless you get a lot stronger because in a combat situation, I wouldn't want to have rely on you with my life." Anna: "I can't believe you just said that!" (leaving the room upset). Billy: (Laughing) "See....this is exactly what I am talking about. You are way too emotional too. Perhaps you need to really think about what you are getting yourself into." ANALYSIS This conversation started out as what looked like any other conversation. However, there were several aspects of nonverbal communication that came spoke just as loud as words. For example, after Billy said that Anna wasn't the "military type", Anna looked directly at him with her eyebrows raised. This was an example of expressive oculesics (p90). With this body language, it was easy to interpret that she was certainly surprised with this comment by him and rather disgusted. Another nonverbal communication identified was when Anna turned to face Billy and moved closer to him. This was identified as proxemics (p92). As described in the text, this spatial change definitely spoke louder than the words that were spoken and at this time in the conversation, the tone changed from move of a friendly dialogue to one that was not so friendly. Next, I identified Billy's patting Anna on the head as haptics (p91). On page 92 of our text, it relates that "a relationship exists between haptics and dominance." This could be gathered from this act of unwanted touching expressed by Anna pulling away from him. Furthermore, Billy used rationality (p117) by using logic by saying that he wouldn't want to have to rely on Anna with his life. He employed this to justify his argument. He also used a qualifier (p132) at the end of the conversation. When he stated that "perhaps" she should rethink her decision it may have been a way for him to soften the statement, but it was not used in a constructive way to allow participation in the conversation. CONCLUSION This conflict did not go well at all. It was destructive. The behavior and body language demeaning at times on Billy's part and very defensive at times on Anna's part. The conversation started out friendly and ended up with hurt feelings. During the conversation if Billy would have stated his concerns regarding Anna entering the Navy in a more creative way it would have probably went over much better and been seen as concern rather than sexist and accusatory. He could have said, "I am just concerned for your safety and well being in this situation."; instead of making accusations that she couldn't hold her own. This would have come across much better and I feel that it would have been accepted better on Anna's part. However, if Anna would not of become so defensive early, with her body language, I do not feel that the conversation would have gotten as h ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Student has agreed that all tutoring, explanations, and answers provided by the tutor will be used to help in the learning process and in accordance with Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Final Answer

Attached.

TURNITIN REPORT 2020
by Assesment Two

Submission date: 24-Mar-2020 09:27PM (UTC-0500)
Submission ID: 1281538616
File name: Written_conflict.docx (17.64K)
Word count: 981
Character count: 4688

TURNITIN REPORT 2020
ORIGINALITY REPORT

1

%

SIMILARITY INDEX

0%

0%

1%

INTERNET SOURCES

PUBLICATIONS

STUDENT PAPERS

PRIMARY SOURCES

1

1%

Submitted to California State University,
Sacramento
Student Paper

Exclude quotes

Off

Exclude bibliography

Off

Exclude matches

Off


Running head: THE CULTURAL INCIDENT

THE CULTURAL INCIDENT
Name of student
Name of institution
Due date

1

THE CULTURAL INCIDENT

2
INCIDENT

The incident happened one day during lunch while I was seated on one of the tables
outside the hall. The three fellows I found conversing were quite jokey at the time I joined them
at the table, and they were all busy with their food. However, when I arrived, there was a more
considerable change in conversation, and this is what transpired. One of the guys in the incident
had recently announced that he would join the school football team despite the higher resistance
from the rest of his friends who were all whites.
Steve: “I am looking forward to tomorrow's first training with the team in the new field
esta...

Lincolvin (13625)
University of Maryland

Anonymous
Thanks for the help.

Anonymous
Outstanding. Studypool always delivers quality work.

Anonymous
Tutor was very helpful and took the time to explain concepts to me. Very responsive, managed to get replies within the hour.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4
Similar Questions
Related Tags