Inhalt

Multicultural Skills

PREFACE

Today's World is in urgent need of developing people’s tolerance and empathy in terms of intercultural communication issues, due to the growing number of misunderstandings leading to conflicts.

The sooner the process of developing tolerance skills starts the better it is. University environment is a great space for doing this, due to the multicultural composition of students groups.

English is the best subject which allows to develop multicultural skills, thanks to its cultural bridging origin.

This practice book is aimed at helping university instructors to organise the process of developing intercultural tolerance and empathy skills.

The book includes four main chapters devoted to working on such essential multicultural issues as intercultural basics (fundamental skills of dealing with representatives of different cultures), stereotyping (exercises helping students to overcome intercultural bias), communication in the multicultural World (activities aimed at developing communicative skills and enabling conversational strategies with different cultures) and testing of tolerance level (the tasks and tests depicting students level of tolerance).

There is also one additional special chapter for teachers “Webquest Project World” that consists of a lot of task- , web- , and project-based assignments for your students that can be used as a creative rating exercises for your English curriculum.

PART 1. INTERCULTURAL BASICS

Task1. Below are five alternative definitions of cultures. Which definition(s) of culture do you prefer? You can choose as many as they wish.

1. Objective visible artefacts such as rituals, superstitions, heroes, myths, symbols and taboos.

2. Basic truths about identity and relationships, time and space, ways of thinking and learning, ways of working and organizing, and ways of communicating.

3. Ideals shared by group members to which strong emotions are attached.

4. The `right' and 'wrong' ways of doing things. The rules people live by in practice.

5. Subjective behavioural orientations to do things in one way, rather than another. They are most noticeable in relationship styles, thinking and learning styles, organization and work styles and communication styles.

Task 2.

Think about another country or culture.
Complete the checklist answering Yes, No or Don’t Know to each question.
Where you answer Don’t Know, how will you find out about the answer to this cultural question?

Non verbal communication

Should I expect differences in what is thought of as appropriate 'personal space'?

Should I anticipate differences in the way my counterparts use touch?

Is there anything particular I need to be careful about in giving or receiving business cards?

Should I avoid any particular gestures?

Should I expect differences in the level of acceptable eye contact?

Do I know what body language is taboo?

General Communication

Should I anticipate different attitudes about the acceptability of asking personal questions?

Should I anticipate different attitudes towards the acceptability of humour and emotions?

Should I anticipate different attitudes towards the acceptability of interrupting?

Do I know what type of argument is likely to be most persuasive?

Should I anticipate a different attitude towards addressing difficult issues directly?

Do I know what style of feedback is acceptable?

Should I anticipate different expectations about the expression of criticism?

Should I anticipate different expectations about the expression of anger?

Should I anticipate different expectations about the formality of feedback?

Do I know the range of ways in which disagreement is likely to be expressed?

Should I expect a different style of conflict resolution?

Should I anticipate different expectations about the use of silence?

Should I anticipate different communication styles to be in use?

Do I know when to use first names and surnames?

Do I know what professional titles to use?

Should I anticipate different attitudes towards small-talk?

Should I anticipate different attitudes towards the importance of saving face?

Should I anticipate a different use of tone or pitch when speaking?

Should I expect different attitudes towards displays of affection?

Task 3. Read carefully through the following categorizations.

Missionaries

Missionaries exhibit denial. They simply cannot conceive that others can operate successfully on a completely different value system, or that other ways of doing things have merit and logic. When missionaries see people doing things differently, they do not see the influence of culture. Instead, they make rapid judgements about the individuals concerned, or draw on out-of-date and prescriptive stereotypes. These judgements, based on the missionaries' own conception about how things 'should' be, often classify other people as backward, unsophisticated or uneducated. The missionary sees their role as educating others in the 'right' way to do things.

Expats

Expats exhibit defence. They recognize that there are, indeed, other ways of doing things, but in general judge them to be vastly inferior to 'our ways of doing things' back home. They recognize the existence of another set of values and behaviours, but continue to make faulty attributions or interpretations from their own ethnocentric perceptions, often with negative judgements attached. In the expats' world, there is limited space for shades of grey and precious little empathy with other cultures. Expats often keep contact with people from other cultures at a minimum.

Neo-natives

Neo-natives also exhibit defence. However, in an opposite response to expats, they begin to assume that everything about the new culture is good and nothing bad. They sometimes see the new culture as more spiritual, or in some ill-defined way 'better' than their own. They can even stereotype or deride their own cultural background as inferior. For neo-natives almost everything is black and white and they have little time for their own compatriots. Neo-natives see it as their role to become experts in their new culture, to become 'more French than the French'.

Global villagers

Global villagers exhibit minimization. They admit to a minimal number of differences between cultures, but only at a superficial behavioural level. They consider that 'underneath, everyone is the same' and are unsympathetic to the idea of deeper differences in assumptions and values. They believe that what works here will, with perhaps some simple superficial modifications, work everywhere else. In the global villagers' world, differences are sidelined or ignored. Instead, global villagers see it as their role to identify similarities. They may even disparage those who seek to acknowledge cultural variation as being bigoted or prejudiced.

Now, read each of the quotes below, which have all been adapted from quotes. Decide which of the categorizations above (if any) is applicable to each.

A. 'Since I came to live in Thailand I have realized just how shallow and meaningless life in Europe is. The stress and anxiety that everybody suffers ... and for what? I'll never go back.' (Irish doctor on assignment in Thailand)

B. 'I just can't believe how lazy the British are. Unmotivated, unenthusiastic and disinterested. Now I just do not employ any at all, full stop. We only have Australians or New Zealanders working in the London office.' (US manager of the London subsidiary of a New York-based architecture firm)

C. 'I can't tell you how many stupid things people say about business in China, all this rubbish about Guanxi. * It is just garbage. The Chinese are the same as everyone else. If you have the right business model, the right technology and properly incentivize your staff, you will win business. Full stop.' (Scottish CEO of manufacturing exporter) *System of networking and mutual favours said to underpin business relationships in China.

D. 'Working for a music business our people are much the same all over the world. In fact we look for the same type of people when recruiting. As a result cultural differences don't come into the equation.' (French HR manager)

E. 'Although the older Poles are difficult to deal with, the younger people we employ have just as clear an idea of the importance of meeting deadlines and getting things done on time as people in the US.' (American production director in Polish car components manufacturer)

F. 'We really have such a strong belief in ourselves in this organization, an awareness that we are really unique and different, that where we come from as individuals is irrelevant. We drop our nationality and become "one of us".' (Brazilian employee in a worldwide charity)

G. 'There is really almost nothing in this country that works properly. I know it is wrong, but I can't help comparing everything here with the situation at home. It frustrates me because the people themselves don't seem to understand how much better things could be if they put their minds to it.' (Western European voluntary worker in Africa).

PART 2. STEREOTYPING

Task 1. A British trainer recently asked colleagues from Australia, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the USA to describe a stereotype that is held in that culture about the British.

Match the stereotype with the culture that holds it.

1. The British have bad teeth.

2. The British treat their children badly.

3. The British are insular.

4. The British do not wash.

5. The British are obsessed by time.

6. The British are hypocrites.

How helpful or true are these stereotypes about people in the UK?

What stereotypes do you hold about the people in other cultures or countries? How helpful are these stereotypes?

Task 2. Think carefully about another country or culture.

Identify some of the key background and environmental factors that influence this culture. Then speculate on the culture's core attitudes and values, and how these are reflected in observable behaviours.

Background facts:

Core attitudes:

Observable behaviours:

How can it help you in building bridges with the representatives of these cultures?

Task 3. Think about your culture. What stereotypes can come to place in the following work situations? Compare your findings with other students in class.

make hiring decisions
conduct your initial orientation interview
mentor employees (or not!)
make job assignments
give people training opportunities
listen to people’s ideas and suggestions
make promotional choices
give performance reviews
decide organizational policy
conduct marketing campaigns
choose board members
treat customers

Task 4. Discuss in pairs the following tips about overcoming bias at the workplace.

Recognize that as human beings, our brains make mistakes without us even knowing it. The new science of “unconscious bias” applies to how we perceive other people. We’re all biased and becoming aware of our own biases will help us mitigate them in the workplace.
Reframe the conversation to focus on fair treatment and respect, and away from discrimination and “protected classes”. Review every aspect of the employment life cycle for hidden bias – screening resumes, interviews, onboarding, assignment process, mentoring programs, performance evaluation, identifying high performers, promotion and termination.
Ensure that anonymous employee surveys are conducted company-wide to first understand what specific issues of hidden bias and unfairness might exist at your workplace. Each department or location may have different issues.
Conduct anonymous surveys with former employees to understand what were the issues they faced, what steps could be taken for them to consider coming back, whether they encourage or discourage prospective employees from applying for positions at your company and whether they encourage or discourage prospective customers/clients from using your company’s products or services.
Offer customized training based upon survey results of current and former employees that includes examples of hidden bias, forms of unfairness that are hurtful and demotivating, and positive methods to discuss these issues.
Offer an anonymous, third-party complaint channel such as an ombudsperson; since most of the behaviors that employees perceive as unfair are not covered by current laws – e.g. bullying, very subtle bias – existing formal complaint channels simply don’t work.
Initiate a resume study within your industry, company and/or department to see whether resumes with roughly equivalent education and experience are weighted equally, when the names are obviously gender or race or culturally distinct.
Launch a resume study within your company and/or department to reassign points based on earned accomplishments vs. accidents of birth – e.g. take points off for someone who had an unpaid internship, add points for someone who put him/herself through college.
Support projects that encourage positive images. Distribute stories and pictures widely that portray stereotype-busting images – posters, newsletters, annual reports, speaker series, podcasts. Many studies show that the mere positive image of specific groups of people can combat our hidden bias.
Identify, support and collaborate with effective programs that increase diversity in the pipeline. Reward employees who volunteer with these groups, create internships and other bridges, and celebrate the stories of those who successfully overcome obstacles.

PART 3. COMMUNICATION IN THE MULTICULTURAL WORLD

Task 1.

Read the descriptions.
Decide which descriptions is more like your country.
Think of another culture or that could match the description?
Can you think of any misunderstandings that might arise when people from the situations described communicate?

1. In some countries, people tend to talk quite quickly, frequently interrupting others in order to get their ideas across.

In other countries, people tend to talk in a slow and considered way, rarely interrupting other people when they are talking.

2. In some countries, people tend to talk quite loudly and are not particularly concerned if people they do not know overhear their conversations.

In other countries, people tend to be more soft-spoken, and take care to ensure that they do not talk so loudly that other people can hear their conversations.

3. In some countries, people use many physical gestures (such as smiling a lot, waving their arms or banging the table) to emphasize what they are saying and to communicate important ideas and feelings.

In other countries, people do not often use many physical gestures (such as smiling a lot, waving their arms or banging the table). Instead, they use words and their tone of voice to communicate important ideas and information.

4. In some countries, demonstrating interest in what other people have to say means maintaining good eye contact with them when they are talking.

In other countries, demonstrating respect for other people means trying to avoid too much direct or close eye contact while they are speaking.

5. In some countries, even people who do not know each other very well will hold hands, embrace, place their arms around each other's shoulders, or touch each other on the arms.

In other countries, people are taught not to touch other people they do not know, and will try to avoid physical contact with strangers wherever possible.

6. In some countries, when people talk to each other they stand or sit a considerable distance apart, sometimes as much as 50 cm.

In other countries, when people talk to each other than stand or sit very close to each other - sometimes so close that they are almost touching the other person.

7. In some countries, people are direct and frank in the way they speak. They will give their personal opinions freely, regardless of whom they are talking to, and will often criticize other people directly if necessary.

In other countries, people are less direct in the way they speak. They will often avoid giving their personal opinions unless they know the people they are talking to well, and will try to avoid saying things that might come across as too critical of others.

8. In some countries, people write e-mails or faxes that are as short, direct and factual as possible. They pose questions directly and ask for information in an explicit and unambiguous way.

In other countries, people sometimes write e-mails or faxes in a less direct and wordier way. They often don't feel the need to spell out precisely and unambiguously the information they require.

9. In some countries, people often prefer to use e-mails, faxes, letters or other forms of written communication to pass on important information and make sure they get the response they want.

In other countries, people often prefer to use face-to-face discussions, telephone calls or other forms of spoken communication to pass on important information and make sure they get the response they want.

10. In some countries, learning foreign languages (particularly English) forms a big part of the educational curriculum. People from these countries often speak other languages very well.

In other countries, learning foreign languages is not an important part of the educational curriculum. People from these countries often do speak other languages very well.

11. In some countries, people are happy to talk about their personal and family life with their colleagues at work. They are also inclined to ask other people questions about their private and family life, even if they do not know them very well.

In other countries, people prefer to keep their private life and their work life separate. They do not tend to ask questions or talk about personal and family life at work, unless it is with close colleagues who they know well.

12. In some countries, people like to make 'small talk' (that is, talk about the weather, football, politics) before they start talking about business.

In other countries, people like to get straight into business without bothering with too much 'small talk' (that is, talk about the weather, football, politics).

13. In some countries, people are happy to talk about their accomplishments without embarrassment or shame. They think it is polite and honest to describe what they have achieved in their lives.

In other countries, people feel uncomfortable talking about what they have accomplished. They think it is polite and courteous to keep quiet about their attainments.

14. In some countries, people will try to remain as reasonable, rational and dispassionate as possible during business discussions and conversations. They believe that the best way to remain objective is to argue based on facts and talk from the head, not from the heart.

In other countries, people feel comfortable following their feelings and intuition during business discussions and conversations. They believe that the best way to get their message across is to talk with passion and conviction, even if this sometimes comes across as being emotional.

15. In some countries, people are happy cracking jokes and telling funny stories at work or in business situations, even with people they do not know very well.

In other countries, people think work is a serious place to be and try to avoid making jokes or telling funny stories unless they know the other person very well.

16. In some countries, people tend to communicate in an informal way, using first names at work or when dealing with customers and colleagues. People rarely use formal titles (like Mr or Mrs, Doctor, Engineer, Architect).

In other countries, people tend to use formal titles (like Mr or Mrs, Doctor, Engineer, Architect) at work, or when dealing with customers and colleagues, people tend to use first names mainly with family and close friends.

Task 2. Study the theoretical tips from Hostede’s theory on dimensions of cultures.

There are such types of cultures basically:

Power distance

Power distance reflects the degree to which a society accepts the idea that power is to be distributed unequally through hierarchical distinctions. The more this is accepted, the higher the country's ranking in power distance. High power-distance culture can be characterized by a strong hierarchal structure within their organizations. In such societies, managers are respected in and out of the organization and are rarely publicly contradicted.

By contrast, low power-distance societies tend to value notions of empowerment for employees and consensual decision-making. In Europe, current levels of power distance rather neatly match the boundaries of the former Roman Empire. Former Roman spheres of influence tend to resolve the essential tension between low and high power distance in favour of the latter. The opposite is true in areas that were not influenced by Roman values.

Individualism versus collectivism

Individualism reflects the degree to which individual beliefs and actions should be independent of collective thought and action. Individualism contrasts with collectivism, which is the belief that people should integrate their thoughts and actions with those of a group (for example, extended family, or employer). In individualistic societies people are more likely to pursue their own personal goals.

In collective societies people are more likely to integrate their own goals with those of other group members and tend to avoid putting people in situations where they might lose face. The cohesion of the group plays a more important role than pursuing one's own individual achievement. 

Uncertainty avoidance

Uncertainty avoidance reflects the degree to which a society feels threatened by ambiguous situations and tries to avoid them by formulating rules and refusing to tolerate deviance. In essence, it relates to an essential tension about the nature of 'truth'. The more a society accepts that truth is 'absolute', the higher it ranks on uncertainty avoidance. Societies that rank high on uncertainty avoidance have highly structured working environments. Employees and managers pay attention to precise objectives and clear rules, detailed assignments and schedules set up well in advance.

Masculinity versus femininity

This dimension relates to essential tension between attitudes towards gender. Masculinity describes the degree to which the focus is placed on assertiveness, task achievement and

the acquisition of material goods. This is contrasted with femininity in which quality-of-life issues such as caring for others, group solidarity and helping the less fortunate are valued.

Long-term versus short-term orientation CDI (Confucian Dynamism Index)

The essential conflict in this dimension relates to attitudes towards what is, and what is not, considered 'virtuous'. Long-term cultures focuses on the distant future and emphasize the importance of saving, persistence and achieving goals that may only come to fruition after several generations. Short-term cultures emphasize the past and the present, and there is respect for fulfilling social obligations and a consistent understanding of morality.

Hofstede claimed that Chinese people have a relatively high Confucian dynamism index value, while American people have a relatively low Confucian dynamism index value. He suggested that this distinction is reflected in business. In China top management emphasizes thrift and perseverance and respect for tradition, and also maintains a long-term orientation (that is, the company is regarded as a family). In contrast, in the USA, top management is said to focus on current needs, creativity and adopting a short-term orientation.

Read the four short incidents described below. Underline any sentences that suggest cultural differences in communication at work and answer the following questions:

• How would you explain these differences in terms of Hofstede's cultural dimensions?

• What hints or tips would you give to each of the people below to overcome cultural barriers?

Sarah

Sarah Marshall is head of the business development group at a US-based law firm. Recently she was assigned the task of winning a contract for a new project with the Colombian government. She was competing with teams from Spain and France.

Sarah had quite a lot of background information on the proposed project and on the packages her competitors were offering. On the basis of this information and her organization's extensive resources she felt confident that the company would win the contract.

Sarah drew up a proposal that was time and cost-effective and designed a presentation based on convincing numbers and a persuasive argument. Arriving in Bogota the day before, Sarah personally made the sales pitch in which she detailed all the relevant facts, highlighted the various ways forward and made a clear recommendation of the best solution. She eventually lost the project to the Spanish team, even though her Columbian counterparts acknowledged the quality of her proposals.

Richard

Richard, an Australian, is part of a team of lawyers based in Paris. Claude, 48, is the team's PA. Claude works from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., with an hour and a half for lunch.

Richard is very pleased with the quality of Claude's, work and her commitment to the team. Unfortunately because of his extensive travel commitments abroad he has never had the opportunity to have lunch with her or spend any time with her and the team outside the work environment. After a while Richard asks to be addressed by his first name and the informal 712. Several months later, however, Claude is still calling him `Monsieur Lafleur' and addressing him with Voulez-vous bien...' although Richard calls her 'Claude' and addresses her with Veux-tu

Richard is puzzled and decides to talk to Claude about this matter in order to clarify the situation.. To his amazement Claude replies that she prefers to call him by his surname and refer to him with the formal vous.

Karl

Karl, a Dutch lawyer, felt that his first business trip to Japan was going fairly well. He was determined to get to know his colleagues better and was particularly pleased to be invited out for drinks after work with most of the team, including the senior managers.

At the bar, everyone was expected to entertain; even the senior staff got to sing karaoke songs or tell jokes. Everything seemed fairly informal and cooperative, with Karl's karaoke version of 'Imagine' winning rapturous applause from the group. One of the senior managers even asked Karl for a repeat rendition later in the evening.

Keeping this informality in mind, Karl used a team meeting early the next morning to present a proposal for resolving a minor logistics problem he had noticed. He was surprised to be met with a wall of embarrassed silence and was noticeably excluded from informal exchanges as people left the meeting.

Rebecca

Rebecca, a recently recruited British executive in an international law firm, was asked to chair a meeting with her French and British colleagues.

From Rebecca's point of view, the meeting went well. She did her utmost to make sure that everyone was heard and the relevant issues discussed and summarized in a diplomatic way. She even changed the agenda and extended the meeting to accommodate new issues that some British delegates had brought up.

At the end of the meeting Rebecca was shocked to hear one French colleague whisper to another `... typical British, just typical. No proper preparation...'. She was even more surprised to hear the reply: 'Yes, and they never say what they mean, do they?'

Task 3. Communication strategies for the multicultural World

Explain how you would apply these strategies in your communication with foreigners. Study the examples first:

Examples:

Clarify frequently: Paraphrase what you think you have heard to make sure that you understand the communication accurately.

Emphasize the feelings expressed, as well as the substance.

Confirm that you accurately understand and acknowledge the message, even if you do not agree with it.

Use active listening: Demonstrate interest.

Acknowledge comments with your head or voice.

Avoid mistaking vagueness for ambiguity or disinterest.

Summarise frequently

Aim for dialogue, not debate.

Be structured and clear.

Be open and friendly.

Invite feedback, do not just expect it.

Use questions effectively and often.

Keep positive.

Grade your language to suit your counterpart.

Make sure that your verbal and non-verbal communication agrees.

PART 4. TEST YOUR LEVEL OF TOLERANCE

Express questionnaire "Index of Tolerance»

(G. Soldatova, O. Kravtsova, O. Khukhlaev, L. Shaigerova)

Instructions: Please rate how much you agree or disagree with the statements:

1. Any opinion can be presented in the mass media

2. In mixed marriages, there are usually more problems than in marriages between people of one nationality

3. If a friend betrays, one must take revenge on him

4. The Caucasians will be treated better if they change their behavior

5. Only one point of view may be correct in a dispute

6. Beggars and vagabonds themselves are to blame for their problems

7. It's normal to think that your people are better than everyone else

8. It is unpleasant to communicate with untidy people

9. Even if I have my own opinion, I am ready to listen to other points of view

10. All mentally ill people should be isolated from society

11. I am ready to accept as a member of my family a person of any nationality

12. Refugees need to be helped no more than all the others, since local problems have at least

13. If someone does something rude to me, I answer the same

14. I want among my friends to be people of different nationalities

15. To establish order in the country, a "strong hand"

16. Visitors should have the same rights as locals

17. A person who does not think like I do, irritates me

18. It is difficult for some nations and peoples to treat well

19. The disorder makes me very annoyed

20. Any religious trend has a right to exist

21. I can imagine a black person as my close friend

22. I would like to become a more tolerant person to others

Processing Results

For quantitative analysis, the total result is calculated, without division into subscales.

Each answer to a direct statement is assigned a score of 1 to 6 ("absolutely disagree" - 1 point, "completely agree" - 6 points). Responses to reverse statements are assigned reverse points ("absolutely disagree" - 6 points, "fully agree" - 1 point). Then the points are summed up.

The numbers of the direct statements are 1, 9, 11, 14, 16, 20, 21, 22.

The numbers of the converse statements are 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19.

Individual or group assessment of the revealed level of tolerance is carried out according to the following steps:

22-60 - low level of tolerance. Such results testify to the high intolerance of man and the presence of his expressed intolerant attitudes towards the world around him and people.

61-99 - Intermediate level. Such results are shown by respondents, for whom a combination of both tolerant and intolerant features is characteristic. In some social situations, they behave tolerantly, in others they can exhibit intolerance.

100-132 - high level of tolerance. Representatives of this group have pronounced features of a tolerant personality. At the same time, it is necessary to understand that the results approaching the upper limit (more than 115 points) may indicate the erosion of the "boundaries of tolerance" in a person, connected, for example, with psychological infantilism, tendencies towards connivance, condescension or indifference. It is also important to take into account that respondents in this range can demonstrate a high degree of social desirability (especially if they have an idea of the views of the researcher and the purposes of the study).

For a qualitative analysis of aspects of tolerance, it is possible to use subdivision into subscales:

1. Ethnic tolerance: 2, 4, 7, 11, 14, 18, 21.

2. Social tolerance: 1, 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, 16, 20.

3. Tolerance as a personality trait: 3, 5, 9, 13, 17, 19, 22.

The subcatalogue "ethnic tolerance" reveals the attitude of a person to representatives of other ethnic groups and attitudes in the sphere of intercultural interaction. Subcataly "social tolerance" allows you to explore tolerant and intolerant manifestations in relation to various social groups (minorities, criminals, mentally ill people), as well as study the attitudes of the individual in relation to certain social processes. Subscale "tolerance as a personality trait" includes points that diagnose personality traits, attitudes and beliefs that largely determine a person's attitude to the world around him.

Questionnaire for Measuring Tolerance

(V.Magun, M. Zhamkochyan, M..Magura)

The questionnaire was originally designed to assess the impact of the training tolerance (Soldatov, Shaygerova, Sharov, 2000) on the minds of high school students (Magoon, Zhamkochyan, Magura, 2000). The content of the methodology is not rigidly tied to the specific features of the training, and it can be used in a broader context.

In selecting and constructing questions, the authors relied on general theoretical concepts of tolerance and on the experience of measuring social characteristics in Western social psychology. All questions of the methodology are aimed at identifying various settings, therefore this questionnaire, like the vast majority of other questionnaires, measures, first of all, the tolerance of people's verbal behavior.

The questionnaire included statements aimed at identifying different types of tolerance: tolerance to representatives of other nations, immigrants from other places, representatives of other cultures; tolerance to other views, including views and opinions of the minority; tolerance to deviations from generally accepted norms, rules and stereotypes; tolerance to the complexity and uncertainty of the surrounding world.

Although the questionnaire was originally applied to adolescents, there are almost no age specificities in the questions included in its composition, and therefore, with minor modification, this technique is applicable to the study of representatives of different age groups. In the study of the effectiveness of the training of tolerance, the technique is conducted twice - before and after the training.

Instruction: Please express your attitude to the following judgments according to these positions

Absolutely (do not agree)

Perhaps (do not agree)

It's hard to say, agree or not

Perhaps (agree)

Completely agree

"When I see untidy, slovenly people I do not care;

A good job is a job where it's always clear what and how to do;

There are nations and people that are difficult to treat well;

It is wonderful that young people today can freely protest against what they do not like, and act in their own way;

It is difficult for me to imagine that my friend will become a man of another religion;

Individual freedom in behavior is more important than good manners;

I'm annoyed by writers who use strange and unfamiliar words;

A person should be assessed only by his moral and business qualities, and not by his nationality;

I do not like girls who neglect the moral rules of society;

People who live in accordance with the established order, deprive themselves of the lives of many joys;

There can be only one true religion;

The person who committed the crime can not seriously change for the better;

When a teacher can not clearly determine what he wants to say, it's annoying;

The fact that Russia is a multinational country enriches its culture;

(This question is for men only) For my girlfriend I would prefer a pronounced femininity;

(To this question, please only the girls) For my boyfriend I would prefer pronounced masculinity;

The sooner we get rid of the traditional family structure, where the father or mother commands, and the children are obliged to obey unconditionally, the better;

"A person with a different point of view usually causes me: (choose one thing)

interest and desire to understand his judgments

desire to convince him -

irritation;

Judging by what is happening in the country, we need to use "strong means" to get rid of criminals and bribe-takers;

I like people who doubt everything;

"How do you think it is better to choose a husband (wife) from people of their nationality, or nationality should not attach importance?

It is always easier to trust credible people (professionals, respected citizens or religious leaders) than to listen to all sorts of talkers who cause confusion in people's minds;

Our country needs more tolerant people - those who are ready to make concessions for the sake of peace and harmony in society;

I have established (for myself) clear life rules and believe that others should do the same;

I would like to live in a foreign country;

A person of a different culture usually scares or worries others;

There is nothing wrong with sexual relations before marriage;

Respect for elders is one of the most important values that should be taught to children;

A strong personality does not show his feelings;

It is very important to protect the rights of those who are in the minority and have different views and behaviors;

I'm very annoyed by the view of the uncleaned room;

I never judge people until I am sure of the facts;

People with a different color of skin (another race) can be normal people, but as friends I would prefer not to take them;

There is nothing immoral or pathological in the sexual relations between people of the same sex;

The fact that people in our country hold different and even sometimes opposing views is a boon for Russia;

When making decisions, I consider it compulsory for me to take into account the universally recognized norms of behavior;

Some people are too complicated to be understood;

There is no such interethnic conflict that could not be resolved through negotiations and mutual concessions;

It would be better for everyone if the authorities imposed censorship on television in order to protect public morality;

If I saw that the children are fighting (choose one thing):

I would let them figure out their relationship
I do not know what I would have done
I would try to understand their quarrel;

I like to communicate with people who have everything clearly and definitely;

Most crimes in our city are made by visitors;

I do not see anything reprehensible in girls visiting pubs;

Many problems will be solved if we get rid of mentally ill people;

Combating a difficult task is often more fun;

Many of our rules regarding modesty and sexual behavior are just conventions, and do not take them too seriously.

Diagnosing general communicative tolerance

The method of diagnostics of general communicative tolerance, proposed by V. Boyko (Practical Psychodiagnostics, 1998), allows to diagnose tolerant and intolerant personality attitudes, manifested in the process of communication.

According to the author of the technique, communicative tolerance, or tolerance in communication, is subdivided into situational, typological, professional and general. The level of situational tolerance is determined by the attitude of a person to a particular partner in communication (spouse, colleague, casual acquaintance), typological - attitude towards the collective type or group of people (representatives of any nationality, profession, social stratum). Professional communicative tolerance manifests itself in the working environment, in interaction with those people who have to deal with the type of activity (clients, patients). General communicative tolerance is conditioned by life experience, character properties, moral principles and to a large extent predetermines other forms of communicative tolerance.

Below are the items of the questionnaire, grouped into 9 scales.

Instructions: Assess how far the following judgments are correct in relation to you. If you answer, use points 0 to 3, where

0 is completely wrong,

1 is true to some extent,

2 - it is true to a great extent,

3 - right to the highest degree.

Scale 1. Rejection or misunderstanding of the individuality of another person

№

Statements

Points

Slow people usually get on my nerves

I am annoyed by fussy, restless people

Noisy children's games I can hardly endure

Original, non-standard, bright personalities most often act on me negatively

Perfect in every respect, a person would alert me

Total:

Scale 2. Using yourself as a reference in assessing behavior and thinking

№

Statements

Points

I am usually unbalanced by an unbalanced interlocutor

I am amazed by amateurs to talk

I find it difficult to talk to an indifferent fellow in a train (an airplane), started on his initiative

I would be burdened by the conversations of an occasional fellow traveler who is inferior to me in terms of knowledge and culture

10.

I find it difficult to find a common language with partners of a different intellectual level than I have

Total:

Scale 3. Categoricity or conservatism in the assessments of other people

№

Statements

Points

11.

Modern youth causes unpleasant feelings with their appearance (hairstyles, cosmetics, clothes)

12.

The so-called "new Russians" usually produce an unpleasant impression either by lack of culture or by self-effacement

13.

Representatives of some nationalities in my environment frankly do not like me

14.

There is a type of men (women) that I can not stand

15.

I can not stand business partners with a low intellectual or professional level

Total:

Scale 4. Inability to hide or smooth out unpleasant feelings when confronted with non-communicative qualities of partners

№

Statements

Points

16.

I believe that you should respond to rudeness in the same way

17.

I find it difficult to hide if a person displeases me

18.

I am irritated by people who want to insist in their argument

19.

I am displeased with self-confident people

20.

Usually it is difficult for me to refrain from commenting on an angry or nervous person who is being pushed in transport

Total:

Scale 5. Aspiration to remake, re-educate partners

№

Statements

Points

21.

I have a habit of teaching others

22.

Ill-bred people revolt me

23.

I often find myself trying to educate someone

24.

I habitually constantly make comments to someone

25.

I love to command my relatives.

Total:

Scale 6. The desire to adjust the partner for yourselves, make "convenient"

№

Statements

Points

26.

I'm annoyed by the old people, when they are in the rush hour in public transport or in shops

27.

Living in a hotel room with a stranger is just torture for me

28.

When a partner does not agree in some way with my correct position, it usually irritates me

29.

I am impatient when they object to me

30.

It annoys me if a partner does something in his own way, not in the way I want

Total:

Scale 7. Inability to forgive others for mistakes, awkwardness, unintentionally caused you trouble.

№

Statements

Points

31.

I usually hope that my offenders will get what they deserve

32.

I am often reproached in grumbling

33.

I remember for a long time the insults inflicted on me by those whom I value or respect

34.

You can not forgive co-workers tactless jokes

35.

If a business partner inadvertently touches my pride, I'm on him, though, I will be offended

Total:

Scale 8. Intolerance to physical or mental discomfort created by other people

№

Statements

Points

36.

I condemn people who are crying in someone else's vest

37.

Inwardly, I do not approve of my acquaintances, who at a convenient opportunity tell about their illnesses

38.

I try to get out of the conversation when someone starts complaining about their family life

39.

I usually listen without special attention to the confessions of friends

40.

I sometimes like to annoy someone from family or friends

Total:

Scale 9. Inability to adapt to the nature, habits and desires of others

№

Statements

Points

41.

As a rule, it is difficult for me to make concessions to partners

42.

I find it difficult to get along with people who have a bad character

43.

I usually have difficulty adapting to new collaborative partners

44.

I try not to maintain a relationship with a few strange people

45.

Most often I insist on the principle of my own, even if I understand that the partner is right

Total:

Processing Results

For each scale, the total score is calculated. The maximum number of scores on each scale is 15, the total for all scales is 135. The higher the number of points scored by the respondent, the higher the degree of his intolerance to others. On average, the surveyed recruit: caregivers preschool institutions - 31 points, nurses - 43, doctors - 40 points. Consideration of answers on individual scales allows to reveal the most characteristic aspects and tendencies of manifestation of communicative tolerance and intolerance.

Acceptance skills

(Bogardus Social Distance Theory)

In the 1920s, American sociologist Emory Bogardus developed a scale for measuring social distance, which he viewed as a degree of intimacy or alienation between two groups of people.

Bogardus formulated a list of seven judgments, reflecting a different degree of social distance. In the survey, the respondents noted the judgment that corresponded to the proximity they allowed to members of a given group.

Instruction: Before you there is the list of statements and the list of groups***.

A. For each group from the proposed list, indicate the only true statement for you, which can be the end of the following phrase: "It is possible for me personally and preferably to have a representative of this group ..."

as a close relative (for example, a marriage partner)

as a close friend

as a housemate

as a colleague at work

as a citizen of my country

as a guest (tourist) in my country.

I would not like to see him or her in my country.

***Note to the teacher: The list of groups is compiled according to the study topic. If necessary, representatives of sexual minorities, certain adherents of political parties and social movements can be included in the list. Thus, the Bogardus scale can be used to measure social distances, not only between racial and ethnic groups, but also between groups that differ in a variety of ways: age, sex, profession, religion, etc.

Measurement questionnaire for general social attitudes

(E. Frenkel-Brunswick)

This questionnaire allows an indirect examination of the existing level of prejudice in adolescents. Else Frenkel-Brunswick found that highly prejudiced against other ethnic groups, children tend to share certain views that are not directly related to ethnic attitudes. Based on this conclusion, she created a questionnaire for measuring general social attitudes in children. The connection of each of the statements of the questionnaire with prejudice is confirmed by research.

Instruction: Answer yes or now to the following statements

There is only one right way to do something.

If a person is not afraid of anyone, he may be trapped.

It would be better if the teachers were more open-minded.

Only a person like me has the right to happiness.

Girls should learn only what will help them in their household chores.

Wars will always be a part of human nature.

Character and personality are given to man by nature.

Processing Results

According to the author of the methodology, the more the child agrees with the large number of the above statements, the more likely that he will be prejudiced against other ethnic groups.

Ethnical Identity

(by G. Soldatova)

This method allows to diagnose ethnic self-awareness and its transformation in the conditions of interethnic tension. One of the indicators of the transformation of ethnic identity is the growth of ethnic intolerance (intolerance). Tolerance / intolerance - the main problem of inter-ethnic relations in the face of rising tensions between nations - was a key psychological variable in the design of this questionnaire. The degree of ethnic tolerance of the respondent is assessed on the basis of the following criteria: the level of "negativism" with respect to one's own and other ethnic groups, the threshold of emotional reaction to the foreign ethnic environment, the severity of aggressive and hostile reactions to other groups.

Types of identity with different quality and degree of ethnic tolerance are identified on the basis of a wide range of ethnocentrism ranging from "denial" of identity, when negativism and intolerance towards one's own ethnic group are fixed, and ending with national fanaticism - the apotheosis of intolerance and the highest degree of negativity in relation to to other ethnic groups.

The questionnaire contains six scales that correspond to the following types of ethnic identity.

1. Ethnonigilism is one of the forms of hypoidentity, which is a departure from one's own ethnic group and the search for stable socio-psychological niches not according to ethnic criteria.

2. Ethnic indifference - the erosion of ethnic identity, expressed in the uncertainty of ethnicity, the irrelevance of ethnicity.

3. Norma (positive ethnic identity) is a combination of a positive attitude towards one's own people with a positive attitude towards other peoples. In a multi-ethnic society, a positive ethnic identity has the character of a norm and is characteristic of the overwhelming majority. It sets such an optimal balance of tolerance in relation to one's own and other ethnic groups, which allows considering it, on the one hand, as a condition for the independence and stable existence of an ethnic group, on the other, as a condition for peaceful intercultural interaction in a multi-ethnic world.

Strengthening of destructiveness in interethnic relations is caused by transformations of ethnic self-consciousness by the type of hyperidentity, which corresponds to three scales in the questionnaire:

4. Ethnoegism - this type of identity can be expressed in a harmless form on the verbal level as a result of perception through the lens of the construct "my people", but it can suggest, for example, tensions and irritation in communicating with representatives of other ethnic groups or recognition for their people of the right to solve problems for "someone else's" account.

5. Ethno-isolationism - the conviction of the superiority of its people, the recognition of the need to "cleanse" the national culture, a negative attitude towards inter-ethnic marriage unions, xenophobia.

6. Ethnophanatism is a readiness to take any action in the name of somehow understood ethnic interests, including ethnic cleansing, denial of the right to use resources and social privileges to other peoples, recognition of the priority of the ethnic rights of the people over human rights, justification of any victims in the struggle for the welfare of their people.

Ethno-egoism, ethno-isolationism and ethnophanatism are stages of the hyperbolization of ethnic identity, which means the emergence of discriminatory forms of inter-ethnic relations. In interethnic interaction, hyperidentity manifests itself in various forms of ethnic intolerance: from irritation arising as a reaction to the presence of members of other groups, to upholding the policy of limiting their rights and opportunities, aggressive and violent actions against another group and even genocide (Soldatova, 1998).

As a result of a series of expert assessments and pilot studies, 30 judgments were selected that interpret the end of the phrase: "I am a person who ..." Indicators reflect the attitude to one's own and other ethnic groups in various situations of inter-ethnic interaction.

Instruction: Below are the statements of various people on issues of national relations, national culture. Think about how yours coincides with the opinion of these people. Determine your agreement or disagreement with these statements:

Agree

Basically Agree

Agree partly

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

I'm a man who ...

1. prefers the way of life of my people, but treats other nations with great interest

2. considers that interethnic marriages are destroying the people

3. often feels the superiority of people of a different nationality

4. considers that the rights of a nation are always higher than human rights

5. believes that in everyday communication, nationality does not matter

6. prefers the lifestyle of only my people

7. usually does not hide his/her nationality

8. considers that true friendship can only be between people of one nationality

9. often feels ashamed of people of native nationality

10. considers that any means are good for protecting the interests of its people

11. does not give preference to any national culture, including its own

12. often feels the superiority of his people over others

13. he loves his people, but respects the language and culture of other peoples

14. considers it strictly necessary to preserve the purity of the nation

15. difficult to get along with people of native nationality

16. considers that interaction with people of other nationalities is often a source of trouble

17. indifferent to their nationality

18. is stressed when he hears someone's speech around him

19. ready to deal with a representative of any people, despite national differences

20. considers that his people have the right to solve their problems at the expense of other peoples

21. often feels inferior because of his nationality

22. considers his people more gifted and developed than other nations

23. considers that people of other nationalities should be restricted in their right to reside on its national territory

24. is irritated by close communication with people of other nationalities

25. always finds an opportunity to peacefully negotiate in an interethnic dispute

26. considers it necessary to "purify" the culture of native people from the influence of other cultures

27. does not respect his/her people

28. considers that on his land all rights to use natural and social resources should belong only to his people

29. never took seriously the interethnic problems

30. believes that his people are no better and no worse than other peoples

Processing Results

The answers are translated into points according to the scale:

Agree - 4 points

Basically Agree - 3 points

Agree partly - 2 points

Disagree - 1 point

Strongly Disagree - 0 points

Then the number of points for each type of ethnic identity is calculated (in parentheses points are indicated that work for this type):

1. Ethnonigilism (items: 3, 9, 15, 21, 27).

2. Ethnic indifference (5, 11, 17, 29, 30).

3. Norma (positive ethnic identity) (1, 7, 13, 19, 25).

4. Ethno-egoism (6, 12, 16, 18, 24).

5. Ethno-isolationism (2, 8, 20, 22, 26).

6. Ethnophanatism (4, 10, 14, 23, 28).

Depending on the sum of scores collected by the subject on a given scale (the possible range is from 0 to 20 points), one can judge the severity of the corresponding type of ethnic identity, and comparing the results across all scales allows one or several dominant types to be distinguished.

PART 5. CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Conflict management, like effective communication skills, is another important element of social competency. This chapter promotes the use of several forms of conflict management such as negotiation and self-control. The main aim here is to educate the students about ways to communicate effectively when trying to resolve a conflict and/or reach a compromise.

Activity 1: Review of Communication Observations

The instructor should take 5 minutes to ask students to share their experiences of observing how people communicate in daily interactions.

Activity 2: Blind Drawing Activity

Task Objectives: Listening and communicating, reading verbal and nonverbal cues, cooperation

Materials: 2-4 simple, pre-drawn pictures for each group; paper and pencils

Instructions: “Listening and communicating can sometimes be frustrating. Each and every day, it seems as though someone is giving us directions or information that we need to pay attention to, using verbal and nonverbal cues.”

After handing each student 3 pieces of paper, one student will be the “explainer” and will hold a picture in his or her hand and will give directions to the other students, the “drawers”, about how to draw the picture as accurately as possible. None of those who are drawing the picture gets to see it, only the person who is explaining it gets to look at the picture. The “drawers” also have to turn their backs to the explainer, while drawing the picture. That is, the explainer only gets to use his or her voice (with no body language or facial expressions) to explain what the picture looks like. You may not ask the explainer any questions.

After students compare their drawings with the picture, ask students to say how easy or hard the task was for them and what made it easy or hard. Next, tell them they are going to draw two more pictures that two more of the students will describe and then you will discuss the activity in more detail.

Pick a student to be the “explainer” and give him or her the first picture, set a time limit (e.g.,“you have 5 minutes”) and tell the “explainer” to begin describing the picture to the “drawers.”

When time is up, have the explainer show the group the picture and have members compare how they did. Ask students to say how easy or hard the task was for them (get a hand showing for: very easy, some what easy, somewhat hard, very hard).

Select a different person to be the “explainer.”

PROCESS QUESTIONS:

What was the most frustrating part of doing this activity?

What helped you as the “explainer” to do the best job describing the picture?

What helped you as the “drawer” to understand what you needed to draw?

What did you do when you were having difficulty explaining the picture?

What did you do when you had difficulty understanding what to draw?

In real life when you do not understand what someone is telling you, how do you react to that situation? What are the things you do to understand them better?

Why is it important to take the time to understand what someone is trying to tell you?

What do you do when you are trying to tell someone something and they do not seem to understand you?

Why is it important to take the time to explain something important to someone when at first they do not understand what you mean?

Point out that feeling frustrated is natural. Finding ways to understand what a person means or to be understood if you are the person talking can help to reduce frustration and conflict that can result when people are not understanding each other.

Encourage the group to discuss the differences in communication that were used, the effectiveness of one type of communication over another, and conclusions about what good communication really is.

Negotiation Game

Task Objectives: learning how to discuss and negotiate as a means of reaching a compromise; learning how to see and respect another person/groups’ point of view. The ultimate goal is learning to work together to negotiate a solution (i.e., reach a compromise) that both parents and teens think is acceptable and fair.

Instructions:

Materials: flip chart and markers; make signs that say things like: “good job” “too aggressive” “slow down” “take turns” for jury to hold up during the negotiation

Step 1: Have the students form two groups (the parent group and the teen group – pick an age for the teen group that is 1-2 years younger than the students, e.g., 14 years old). Select a topic: teen drinking alcohol, teen smoking, curfew, teens’ style of dress, teen’s amount of (unsupervised) time with friends, teens’ educational activities (both during school and at home), teen responsibilities (e.g. chores, conduct, effort in school) and teen freedoms (unsupervised time with friends, dating, weekend activities with friends, ... (it can include other topics suggested by the group).

Explain that the group will be engaging in collaborative problem solving as the play the negotiation game. Collaborative problem solving involves six important steps:

· Step 1: Establish ground rules

· Step 2: Reach mutual understanding

· Step 3: Brainstorm

· Step 4: Agree to one or more solutions

· Step 5: Write down your agreement

· Step 6: Set a time for a follow-up discussion to evaluate your progress

Explain to all the participants that ground rules must be established first, such as: no yelling, listen without interrupting... Have the students make a list of 3-4 ground rules to ensure everyone will be able to work together. Post the ground rules on the wall for all to see (step 1: ground rules).

Next, have all participants agree that they are there to work out the problem they have selected (step 2: mutual understanding about the problem to be solved).

Third, have the teen and parent groups move to different parts of the room and have each group brainstorm (step 3) all possible solutions to the problem (remind the group playing parents, that they need to take their parents’ perspectives; remind the teen group to remember back to when they were “fourteen” or “fifteen” and how they felt about the issue).

Have each group select 2 participants to play the “jury.” The jury will watch the parent and teen group discuss ways to solve the problem and will evaluate how well the process goes. Give the jury signs that say: “slow down” “speak louder” “take turns” “be calm” “good job” (add other signs as needed). The jury will hold up these signs as the negotiation process is occurring. The parent and teen group members should be asked to heed the jury’s signs.

Bring the groups together and move to Step 4 “the negotiation process”: Have the group review the list of possible solutions that the teen and parent groups generated. Have them discuss the pros and cons of the solutions. Mark out solutions that both groups say will not work. Have the group keep working until they arrive at one or more solutions to the problem that both think will work. To finish the negotiation, write down the agreed upon solution and agree on a time frame for testing out the solution (steps 5 & 6).

After the negotiation process is over, ask the jury to rate (on a scale of 1(did not do well) to 5 (did very well) how well the participants did on the following:

-taking the discussion seriously

-listening to each others’ views

-trying to compromise

-accomplishing the overall goal of the activity

Discuss with the group how they could have improved their negotiation process.

Have participants from the two groups shake hands to end the game. If there is time – pick a second topic, have the two sides switch roles (teen group plays parent group; parent group plays teen group) and repeat the game.

Apply the experience to real life:

What kinds of responses help to end a conflict between parents and teens?

What kinds of response make a conflict get worse?

What helps parents and teens come to an understanding of one another’s points of view?

What are some things you have done in the past to work out a disagreement with your parents?

How does the negotiation process apply to conflicts with people of your own age?

What have some of you done to work out a disagreement or conflict with another person of your age?

Creative Experience:

Observe on television shows you watch this week any conflicts between 2 or more people about your age; think about how you would have handled the conflict.

Optional task:

In small groups or with a partner, consider the following statements:

Conflict is a contest

Conflict is negative.

Are either one of these two statements generally true or generally false?

If one or both are generally true, explain your reasoning and give one or two examples.

If one or both are generally false, explain that reasoning also, with one or two examples.

Optional task:

Identify a workplace conflict that you might be personally involved with and not pleased with the outcome. The situation you use for this exercise should be a one-on-one example not you vs. a group or organization. The situation should be from an actual experience, not a hypothetical story. Individually respond to the following questions:

What did you do to contribute to the conflict?
From your point of view, what is the worst part of what happened?
If you could do it over, what, if anything would you do differently?

Now, in your group or with a partner, explain your situation by telling them the story of this conflict, but only tell them what happened, not who or where it happened. Just tell them the story, rather than share the answers to the questions.

Optional task:

When conflict remains unresolved in the workplace, it can negatively affect employee performance and productivity. Employees may exhibit some of the following symptoms:

Self– doubt
Higher stress
Inflexibility

Irritability

Low productivity

Disorganization

Suspicion

Poor teamwork

Indecision

What are the benefits of effective conflict management? Discuss the impact of appropriate conflict management on the people and productivity at the work unit level.

Optional task:

In order to effectively resolve conflict it is helpful to first identify the source of the conflict. There are many sources or causes of conflict in the workplace. Some of the categories included are:

Different perceptions

Making assumptions

Judging others

Biases and prejudices

Inaccurate or incomplete information

Past Relationships

Job Dissatisfaction

Opinions

Personalities

Communication Styles

Values

Backgrounds

Interests

Wants, needs, preferences or goals

As a group, pick one of professional situations to work on.Which of the causes that we just talked about probably led to the conflict in the scenario chosen by your group?

Case Study:

Joe is an analyst in your department at the Louisiana Legislative Auditors. Joe is a bright and young recruit from Louisiana State University. He sticks out in your department for many reasons. First, Joe learns on the job quickly. He turns in his work faster than the others and the work is usually more accurate. However, unlike the other analysts in your department, he is loud, animated and is a big talker. You constantly hear him teasing the other co-workers, laughing and talking louder than the others. You and the

other analysts think he is annoying, offensive and you wonder if he is creating a verbally harassing environment.

You are going to have to travel with Joe to a local state agency to conductan audit, and you are worried about how to handle Joe. You don’t wanthim to blow this big assignment for you. In addition, you are not looking forward to spending so much time working with this annoying co-worker.

Consider the next four questions:

How important is the issue to you?
What is the nature of the relationship with the other person?
What are the possible consequences?
What conflict management style should you use, if any?

Case Study:

You work in a back office area in the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Your work is detailed and tedious and you require quiet to ensure that your work is accurate. However, Sabrina, your co-worker enjoys listening to the radio. You can hear it at your desk most days. It is, in your opinion, too loud for the office especially since everybody works in cubicles rather than offices with doors on them.

You’ve heard

contact with external customers so that she can listen to her favorite songs on the radio. Sabrina is well-liked and has an important social position inthe office. Furthermore, you haven’t heard anybody else complain aboutthe music. You spend a lot of time trying to concentrate and tune out the music.

Consider the next four questions:

How important is the issue to you?
What is the nature of the relationship with the other person?
What are the possible consequences?
What conflict management style should you use, if any?

Case Study:

You are leading a team that is responsible for completing a project that involves producing a report that is due in one month. Sam, one of the team members has not drafted her part of the report because she says she is too busy with her other duties. In the last team meeting, you told her that she had until today to catch up. But she didn't even come to the meeting.

Today, you called her to ask her why she didn’t show up to the meeting and it didn’t go exactly how you planned. Sam questioned your authority and said that she is currently focusing on other projects. You’ve been asked to lead this team and your supervisor expects you to deal with any problems that come up in the team yourself. This project is important to the agency and is a high visibility assignment. You are hoping to prove yourself in the organization and need Sam to do her part on the project.

Consider the next four questions:

How important is the issue to you?
What is the nature of the relationship with the other person?
What are the possible consequences?
What conflict management style should you use, if any?

Creative activity:

The Elephant List. This activity mingles problem resolution, communication, and team building. It is relevant for an adult workplace situation, or sports and academic teams. Often times when a workplace is experiencing contention, or workers are unhappy with the environment they work in, no one feels safe enough to express their concerns. No one feels like their opinion on how to make the team better would be valued.

This activity allows for open, honest communication that will help the team experience camaraderie and allow management to solve real issues. For students this is a nice opportunity to experience one of the professional cases and try solving them.

Place an experienced and trusted student in charge of this activity. Prepare some sticky notes or pieces of paper with elephants on them and give each individual their own set.

Begin the exercise by explaining to the students that the objective of the activity is to create an environment conducive to open communication. Explain to them that they don’t need to fear reproach for expressing their honest concerns or the “elephant in the room.”

Have each student spend five minutes writing one of their “elephants” and label them according to the C-I-A principles: issues they have control over, issues they can influence, or issues they have to accept.

Collect the elephants and read them aloud to the group. Place each elephant on a circular or U-shaped chart with sections for C, I, and A and put the elephants in the section the individual chose.

Discuss with the group whether the elephants in each section should be in the section they were placed.

Once agreed upon, let the A elephants go and spend time discussing ways to resolve the C and I elephants. Ask questions through the four W’s.

“Why are we doing this?/Why is this happening?”

“What are we doing about it?”

“Who can resolve this issue?”

“When can we resolve this?”.

Creative activity:

Impressum

Tag der Veröffentlichung: 30.11.2022

Nächste Seite

Seite 1 /