I had seen a lot of conflicts in the few years in NUS. Most of these conflicts happen during group work. However, conflicts can also occur at mundane day-to-day work. I would now describe a situation where unnecessary conflict had occurred.
There is a machine in a particular room used for purity analysis. Two students needed to use this machine nearing the end of their project. On a particular morning, student A woke up early to use the machine to check the purity of a few samples. He reached the laboratory at 7:30 a.m. eager to start work. He arrives that early to the laboratory as he needs a pure sample to continue with his laboratory work (in order to finish a project) and that he had softball training at 3 p.m. He has thus a limited time to complete his tasks today and he felt anxious that he might not complete his project goals for the day.
However, student A had found that there is a problem with the machine. He started troubleshooting and finally managed to repair the machine at 10 am. At this juncture, student B walked in and demanded to use the machine. Student B had a hectic schedule and would have to rush off at 11:30 am. When student A refused, student B kicked student A’s legs three times (although with little strength) to display his displeasure. This action initiates a fierce argument. Student A felt that student B’s kicks are harsh and vicious probably because student A had been overtrained at his previous softball trainings and his leg is stiff and hyperalgesic. Moreover student A feels that student B is implicitly bullying him. This argument eventually blew into a big verbal confrontation delaying the work of both students. This conflict tells us about the importance of “putting one into the other person’s shoes” in order to avoid conflict. What other ways do you think this conflict could be avoided?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Bernard,
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I feel that B is definitely at fault first because he uses force first. He also did not take the initiative to ask A how long will he be using the machine. Thus resulting in a fierce argument since A felt offended when B kicked him.
However if A can be more cool headed, he could have explained to B about A's occupation over the machine instead of carrying on with the argument.
Thus in my opinion, the conflict could be avoided if both A and B are made to attend a compulsory course on anger management in school. In addition, the laboratory can also set up a form of booking system where by this particular student will occupy this lab for example from 7 am to 12pm, during this period, no other students are allowed to enter unless they have made advance bookings. In this way, it is more systematic and hopefully will be able to prevent such conflicts from happening again.
Ji fang
Hi Bernard,
ReplyDeleteI also feel that B is at fault, as he shouldn't have use physical forces to achieve his aims. A should also be more calm and not get himself involve into the conflict. Clearly, i think this case is associated with the EQ principle of managing feelings and handling stress. If both parties were able to express themselves much better, and negotiate calmly, things could have work out better.
Also, i do agree with JF. The lab booking system indeed does help as the labs in my polytechnic had this system too, and it work out really well =)
Cecilia
Hieyo!
ReplyDeleteI would say this situation happened due to a breakdown in communication. Student A could have explained to Student B that he had spent the last few hours "repairing" the machine and he had to something on at 3pm. On the other hand, Student B could have explained to Student A that he had to leave by 11.30am. Both of them could then have come up with a win-win solution that addresses the interests of both parties.
And yes, I also agree with Ji Fang that the booking system is really effective. I worked in a life science company before and we had this timesheet where we write down the window period we need to use a particular machine. The person who has his/her name written down has the right to the machine during the window period he wanted and everyone else is clear about this.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Bernard
ReplyDeleteThis is a really interesting situation. Student B should control his emotions and refrain from venting it out and kicked student A. From an observer's point of view, I think both students have fault. Student A should apologise that he was not suppose to use the machine at that timing (if he is) and student B should apologise to student A for kicking him. If both of them do not want to give way, I think a neutral third party could possibly help to resolve this conflict.
As for the booking system, I have encounted problems that have made the lab staff frustrated during my period of internship. Although it is a good idea to book in advance, some people would just book the whole day slot for most of the days of the week when the timesheet was just out for booking. In such cases, I think that the lab technicians should set a certain limit to the booking of the slots so that it would be fair for the others who need to use it too. What do you think?
I feel that student B kicking A legs is a childish act, because I feel that violence should not be use in conflicts no matter what, B is old enough, in his adulthood, I assume. People who use violence, maybe due to lack of self-control, have let the body actions overtakes the mind. This can be understood if the conflict is very serious.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I feel that this conflict can be avoided with communication and patience. Both are anxious to finish their work. If they are to be more patient with each other and explain why they need to use the machine, there won’t be big confrontation.
Furthermore, B who needs to rush off at 11.30am should have come earlier or schedule for another slot to use the machine, instead of doing last minute work. Previous working as an intern, having a time sheet is good, but like what Yuan had mentioned, some people need to use the machine or fume hood for long. How I see the lab people do is to communicate to see if the person using the thing for long could spare awhile for the other person to use. Come back to the point that communication is the key and to also use it. :)
Overall, I'd say this whole situation is rather rough and I can certainly see why how both sides would be very frustrated, which naturally leads to a breakdown in communication. Such scheduling conflicts cannot be rare occurrences. Thus, the best course of action is for the school to get more such machines. As that is most likely unfeasible, the previous comments are all correct about the scheduling sheet, though this only solves arguments, not the root problem (B had a small time window, and A's did not go according to plan through no fault of his own, and had there been a schedule, a similar argument would have occurred).
ReplyDeleteThe next-best solution would be to remove some stress the students are under. They are most likely in high competition to get A's, and turning in an assignment late could cost them, especially on a tight bell curve. Both students didn't just see their afternoon plans in jeopardy - they were worried about their future careers.
I would propose scrapping the bell-curve system as it fosters ill-natured competition, and setting a clear bar, so students can help each other get to a higher standard. Considering everyone is an NUS student, it seems reasonable to assume that they have already proven themselves to be exceptional students, and further competition decided by relatively small (practically imperceptible) differences in levels of ability is not constructive.