Tomawis, Gazzali Jafar M.

BSA 3-D

What is conflict?

Conflict can be defined as a process that begins when one party believes that another
party has or is about to negatively affect something that the first party values. The scope of this
definition is supposed to be broad. It refers to the point in any continuing activity when a
conversation becomes an interparty conflict. It includes a wide range of problems that people
face in the workplace, such as goal incompatibility, differing interpretations of facts, arguments
about behavioral expectations, and so on. Finally, our definition is broad enough to encompass a
wide range of levels of conflict, from overt and violent acts to subtle forms of disagreement.
Conflict is, therefore, a normal occurrence in our day to day lives. It is something that no one
cannot escape from; that is why we have to learn how to manage it properly.

What are the types of conflict?

Intrapersonal Conflict

This conflict occurs within the individual; it occurs when a person's goals or drives are
obstructed, or when a person is faced with two options and is unable to choose the best option
due to opposing objectives and roles (Chand, 2010). The conflict within the individual is usually
related to value, where there is a misalignment between his role and his values and beliefs (e.g.,
secretaries may sometimes lie that their managers are not in their offices to avoid unwanted
phone calls or visitors, which could lead to conflicts within the secretaries' minds who may have
improved a principle of telling the truths (Chand, 2010). When an individual's behaviors and
attitudes have compatible elements or lead to both positive and negative results that are mutually
incompatible, goal conflicts arise. Incompatibility, unacceptability, ambiguity, frustration,
purpose conflict, and role conflict are some of the key characteristics that produce conflicts
within humans (Evans, 2013).
  When there are two or more options with favorable outcomes, there is a conflict
called approach-approach conflict. In this case, a person must choose between
these two equally appealing possibilities (e.g. a person has the right to select one
of two equally attractive jobs).
 Avoidance conflict is defined as a circumstance in which a person must choose
between two or more bad options (for example, when an employee is threatened
with demotion unless he performs something he dislikes, such as spending extra
time traveling on his job).
 Approach-avoidance conflict occurs when an individual is faced with a decision
that has both positive and negative consequences (e.g. the person chooses to
accept a nice job in an undesired place). (Evans, 2013); (Evans, 2013).

Interpersonal Conflict

It is perhaps the most well-known type of conflict that occurs between two or more
people. This is what most people think of when they think of "conflict" in the workplace, and it
can emerge as a result of differences between two people (Green & Charles 2012). This conflict
could arise between two managers competing for a limited labor and capital resource, or for the
same promotion; they could also disagree on the best marketing strategy for their top client.
Furthermore, this conflict may occur between a management and his superiors, a supervisor and
a worker, or a worker and another worker, and so on. It may also occur as a result of differences
in organizational aims and goals (Kinicki & Kreitner 2008). Personality differences, perspectives
(experiences, education, backgrounds, and education), clashing of values and interests, power
and status inequalities, lack of information, role in compatibility, stress, and scare resources are
all factors that contribute to conflict (Whetten & Cameron, 2012).

Intragroup Conflict

It occurs when one member of a group works toward a different aim than the rest of the
organization. This tension occurs at the organizational level (Barki & Hartwick 2004). It is
natural for all groups, official and informal, to develop operational standards and behavioral
rules that are followed by all group members. A member may have social obligations that
compel him to remain in his organization, yet he may disagree with the group's aims and the
methods for accomplishing those goals. Conflicts between leaders and their followers, as well as
between managers and groups of subordinates, can occur. Managers or leaders may conduct
disciplinary procedures against group members, resulting in conflicts with the group and, as a
result, a drop in the organization's overall productivity. Intra-group conflict can occur when
members of the same group have disagreements (Chand, 2015). Relationship, task, and process
conflict are the three types of intra-group conflict described by the majority of researchers.

The three types of intra-group conflict, however, have significant conceptual and
practical parallels (Dirks & Parks, 2003). When members of a group have interpersonal
incompatibilities such as tensions, animosities, annoyances, and personality clashes, there is a
relationship conflict (Jehn, 1995). A task conflict occurs when there are disagreements over the
contents of tasks and the aims of projects, such as the interpretation of facts, the distribution of
resources, and methods. A task conflict is defined as a difference of opinion, position, or idea
that may be accompanied by personal excitements and intense conversations. Disagreements
over how a task should be completed are referred to as process disputes.

Intergroup Conflict

Intergroup conflicts occur when conflict arises between distinct groups within an
organization, each attempting to achieve their own goals. Interlocking networks of sections,
work teams, departments, persons, departments, or groups make up organizations. When there is
a demand for something, people tend to form diverse groups (Green, 2012). Because conflicts
arise as a result of fundamental features in organizational structure. As a result, the intergroup
conflict may not be overly personal. For example, there are ongoing and crucial disagreements
between management and labor unions. One of the most common confrontations is that between
line and staff organizations (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2008).

Conflicts can arise due to a lack of collaborative decision-making, resource rivalry, and
differences in aims or perceptions, as well as misunderstandings, competitions, and a set of
boundaries established by team members to others that define their identities as a group. Because
of their distinct objectives and multiple basic disparities between various units of an
organization's operations, processes, or structures, conflicts emerge among different functional
groups within the organization. Each unit is developing its own organizational sub-structure,
which differs in terms of goal and time orientation, formality of structure, and supervisory style
(Jones & Gareth &George and Jennifer, 2008). Intergroup conflicts can also occur between day
and night shift workers when one of them blames the other for missing equipment, a
maintenance issue, or other issues. Harmony among all interdependent groups is regarded a
crucial aspect for the organization's overall performance. When management examines
intergroup behaviors inside a company, any dispute may be identified and dealt with (Kinicki &
Kreitner, 2008).

Intra-Organizational Conflict

Vertical conflict, horizontal conflict, line-staff conflict, and role conflict are the four
types of intra-organizational conflict. They have unique characteristics, although they can
overlap, especially with the role one (Luthans, 1998) Vertical conflicts occur between
organizational levels (e.g. the superior-subordinate conflicts). They frequently occur as a result
of superiors' attempts to exert authority, while horizontal conflicts occur between departments or
employees with similar organizational hierarchical levels (Jones & George, 2008). In most
organizations, there is also a line-staff conflict because line departments are aided by staff
departments. Conflicts can arise in the connection between line and staff departments. Line and
staff supervisors typically have unique personalities. Staff personnel, unlike line laborers, are
younger and more likely to have higher educational degrees. They come from a variety of
backgrounds. Such distinctive personal features are frequently based on diverse ideas, ethics, and
values, which can lead to disputes (Kinicki & Kreitner, 2008). Role Conflicts: Roles are sets of
actions that people in certain positions are required to accomplish.

Inter-organizational conflicts

Inter-organizational disputes occur when organizations rely on one another to some level.
All conflicts that occur at individual or group levels are inherent in organizational levels (e.g.,
conflicts arise between a buyer organization and a supplier organization over policy issues,
delivery times, quality, quantity, etc., or between a government agency that regulates particular
organizations and organizations influenced by this agency, or between workers' unions and their
organizations) (Jones & George, 2008).

Describe the stages of conflict process.

The conflict process has five stages: potential opposition or incompatibility, cognition
and personalization, intentions, behavior, and outcomes.

Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility

The emergence of conditions that generate potential for conflict is the initial phase in
the conflict process. These circumstances do not have to lead to conflict, but at least one of
them must exist in order for conflict to emerge. We divide the conditions (which can also be
thought of as causes or sources of conflict) into three categories for ease of understanding:
communication, structure, and personal characteristics.

Communication - A review of the research suggests that differing word connotations, jargon,
insufficient exchange of information, and noise in the communication channel are all barriers
to communication and potential antecedent conditions to conflict. Furthermore, research has
revealed an unexpected finding: when there is either too little or too much communication, the
risk of conflict increases. A rise in communication appears to be functional up to a point, after
which it is possible to over-communicate, increasing the risk of conflict.

Structure - Conflict can be exacerbated by size and expertise. Conflict is more likely as a
group grows larger and its activities become more specialized. Tenure and conflict are found
to be inversely connected; when group members are younger and turnover is high, the
possibility for conflict is greater. The more ambiguity there is regarding who is responsible
for what, the more likely there is to be conflict. Intergroup warfare for control of resources
and territory is exacerbated by such jurisdictional issues. A major source of conflict is the
diversity of aims among groups.

Personal Characteristics – Personal characteristics, which include personality, emotions, and

values, are the last group of potential conflict origins. Personality appears to have a part in
conflict resolution: some people simply have a proclivity for getting into fights. People who
are high in the personality qualities of disagreeableness, neuroticism, or self-monitoring are
more likely to get into fights with others and to react badly when they do. Emotions can also
be a source of contention. An employee who arrives at work enraged after a long morning
commute may bring that anger with her to her 9:00 a.m. shift. What is the issue? Her rage can
irritate her coworkers, which can lead to a tense meeting.

Stage II: Cognition and Personalization

If the conditions listed in Stage I have a negative impact on something important to

one party, the possibility for conflict or incompatibility manifests in the second stage. One or
more of the parties must be aware that antecedent conditions exist, as we indicated in our
definition of conflict. However, just because a disagreement is seen does not imply that it is
personal. To put it another way, "A may be aware that B and A are at odds." . . However, it
may not make A tense or anxious, and it may have no influence on A's fondness for B."  At
the felt conflict level, individuals experience anxiety, tension, annoyance, or hostility when
they become emotionally involved.

If I frame our salary issue as a zero-sum game (if you get the raise you want, I'll get
the same amount less), I'll be much less ready to compromise than if I frame the conflict as a
potential win–win situation (the dollars in the salary pool might be increased so both of us
could get the added pay we want). As a result, the characterization of a conflict is critical
since it often delimits the range of feasible solutions. The second point we'd like to make is
that emotions have a big influence on how people see things. Negative emotions enable us to
oversimplify matters, lose trust, and assign negative interpretations to the behavior of others.
Stage III: Intentions

Between people's views and feelings and their overt behavior, intentions play a role. They
are choices to act in a specific way. Because we must deduce the other's aim in order to know
how to respond to his or her conduct, we distinguish intents as a separate step. Many disputes
escalate merely because one party accuses the other of having bad intentions. In addition, there is
frequently a disconnect between intentions and action, so behavior does not always accurately
reflect one's intentions.

Stage IV: Behavior

When most individuals think of conflict situations, they think of Stage IV because that's
where the problems start to show up. The conduct stage involves the warring parties' remarks,
actions, and reactions, which are frequently overt attempts to carry out their own aims. Overt
behaviors sometimes stray from these original goals as a result of miscalculations or incompetent
enactments.  It's helpful to think of Stage IV as a dynamic interaction process. You put a demand
on me, and I argue back; you threaten me, and I threaten you back, and so on. Conflict intensities
escalate as they move upward along the continuum until they become highly destructive. Strikes,
riots, and wars clearly fall in this upper range. Conflicts that reach the upper ranges of the
continuum are almost always dysfunctional.

Stage V: Outcomes

The disputing parties' action–reaction interaction produces consequences. These

consequences can be either useful or dysfunctional, depending on whether the disagreement
improves or hinders the group's performance.

Functional outcomes - What role does disagreement play in improving group performance? It's
difficult to imagine a situation when open or violent aggression would be useful. However, it's
easy to understand how low or moderate levels of conflict could boost a group's effectiveness.
Let's look at few examples before going over the research evidence. It's worth noting that all of
our examples focus on task and process problems and ignore the range of relationships. When
conflict improves the quality of decisions, inspires creativity and invention, generates interest
and curiosity among group members, provides a forum for problems to be discussed and tensions
to be released, and fosters a climate of self-evaluation and change, it is constructive.

Evidence suggests that allowing all perspectives to be weighed, including those that are
rare or held by a minority, can increase the quality of decision making. The antidote to
groupthink is conflict. It prevents the group from passively rubber-stamping conclusions based
on faulty assumptions, a lack of evaluation of important alternatives, or other flaws. Conflict
disrupts the status quo, promoting the generation of new ideas, the re-evaluation of group goals
and activities, and the likelihood that the group will respond to change. These functional
outcomes may be more likely if there is an open conversation focusing on higher-order aims.
Extremely polarized groups are unable to properly handle their underlying conflicts and are more
likely to accept poor solutions or avoid them altogether.

Dysfunctional outcomes - The negative effects of conflict on a group's or organization's

performance are well understood: unrestrained disagreement fosters discontent, which dissolves
common bonds and finally leads to the group's demise. Of course, there is a large body of
research that shows how dysfunctional disagreements can diminish group performance. Poor
communication, a loss of group cohesiveness, and a subordination of group goals to infighting
among members are just a few of the negative repercussions.

Conflict in any form, including functional conflict, appears to impair group member
satisfaction and confidence. Information sharing between members diminishes dramatically
when active conversations devolve into open confrontations between members. Conflict can
bring a group's functioning to a standstill and put the group's survival in jeopardy.

What are the dimensions of conflict handling intentions?

We can identify five conflict-handling intentions using two dimensions: cooperativeness

(the degree to which one party tries to satisfy the other party's concerns) and assertiveness (the
degree to which one party tries to satisfy his or her own concerns): competing (assertive and
uncooperative), collaborating (assertive and cooperative), avoiding (unassertive and
uncooperative), accommodating (unassertive and cooperative), and compromising (unassertive
and cooperative) (midrange on both assertiveness and cooperativeness).

Competing - When one person seeks to satisfy his or her own interests regardless of the
impact on the other parties to the conflict, that person is competing. You compete when you
place a bet that only one person can win, for example.

Collaborating - When parties in conflict each desire to fully satisfy the concerns of all
parties, there is cooperation and a search for a mutually beneficial outcome. In collaborating,
the parties intend to solve a problem by clarifying differences rather than by accommodating
various points of view. If you attempt to find a win–win solution that allows both parties’
goals to be completely achieved, that’s collaborating.

Avoiding - A person may recognize a conflict exists and want to withdraw from or suppress
it. Examples of avoiding include trying to ignore a conflict and avoiding others with whom
you disagree.

Accommodating - A party who seeks to appease an opponent may be willing to place the
opponent’s interests above his or her own, sacrificing to maintain the relationship. We refer to
this intention as accommodating. Supporting someone else’s opinion despite your reservations
about it, for example, is accommodating.

Compromising - In compromising, there is no clear winner or loser. Rather, there is a

willingness to ration the object of the conflict and accept a solution that provides incomplete
satisfaction of both parties’ concerns. The distinguishing characteristic of compromising,
therefore, is that each party intends to give up something.

What are the conflict management techniques?

These techniques allow the practice of being able to identify and handle conflicts
sensibly, fairly, and efficiently. Managers need to resolve conflict in the workplace quickly and
professionally.
Resolution Techniques:
1. Problem solving: Face to face meeting of the conflicting parties to identifying the
problems and resolving it through open discussions.
2. Super-ordinate goals: Creating a shared goal that cannot be attained without the
cooperation of each of the conflicting parties.
3. Expansion of Resources: If conflict is caused by scarcity of resources, such as money,
promotion and opportunities – expansion of resources can create win-win solution.
4. Avoidance: Withdrawal from or suppression of the conflict.
5. Smoothing: Playing down differences while emphasizing common interests between the
conflicting parties.
6. Compromise - Each party to the conflict gives up something of value.
7. Authoritative command - Management uses its formal authority to resolve the conflict
and then communicates its desires to the parties involved.
8. Altering the human variable - Using behavioral change techniques such as human
relations training to alter attitudes and behaviors that cause conflict.
9. Altering the structural variables - Changing the formal organization structure and the
interaction patterns of conflicting parties through job redesign, transfers, creation of
coordinating positions, and the like.

Conflict-Stimulation Techniques
1. Communication - Using ambiguous or threatening messages to increase conflict levels.
2. Bringing in outsiders - Adding employees to a group whose backgrounds, values,
attitudes, or managerial styles differ from those of present members.
3. Restructuring the organization - Realigning work groups, altering rules and regulations,
increasing interdependence, and making similar structural changes to disrupt the status
quo.
4. Appointing a devil’s advocate - Designating a critic to purposely argue against the
majority positions held by the group.

What is a labor union?

 A labor union is a group of people who, in most cases, work in the same trade. They
range in size from a few hundred to millions of people. Regardless of size, the organization
employs collective bargaining to negotiate with employers and advance the interests of its
members, which might include better salaries, benefits, and working conditions. Many unions
also push for legislation and vote in local and national elections. The concept is that if members
of a union work collectively rather than individually, they can have more influence and
accomplish better results. Dues to the union are paid by members to help cover the costs of these
services and privileges.
Firefighters and teachers, as well as actors and hockey players, are all represented by
labor unions. Many unions also belong to larger, more powerful umbrella groups, such as the
Philippine Nurses Association. Labor Code of the Philippines as an acknowledgment of Filipino
workers' freedom to self-organize protects the rights of union members and defines the
responsibilities of union officers, regardless of the type or size of the union. Freedom of speech,
a say in dues and fees, and the ability to nominate and remove elected executives and
representatives are among these rights.

What is labor relations?

Employer-employee relations are referred to as labor relations. A variety of variables
influence them, including labor organizations, collective bargaining, the labor market,
government policy, the economy's structure, labor law, and technological change. The idea is to
ensure that workers can be productive and get along with one another while also reinforcing your
workplace goals. The term also refers to ensuring that they receive the resources they need to
advance their careers as quickly as possible while working with you. Labor relations, on the
other hand, aren't solely concerned with your employees' satisfaction. They're also in charge of
assisting in the improvement of their performance. Employee relationships aren't just limited to
the workplace. Labor relations teams will play a key part in this as more activist employees
demand that their leaders and firms take a statement on major social issues. Good employee
relations are vital to employee retention — keeping your team and staff around. If people don’t
feel appreciated or worry that what they do isn’t meaningful, they will look for change.

What is bargaining?
 Negotiation can be defined as a process in which two or more parties decide how to
divide scarce resources. 45 Although we often conceive of negotiation outcomes in one-shot
economic terms, such as discussing the price of a car, every negotiation in organizations
influences the connection between negotiators as well as how they feel about themselves. 46
Depending on how much the parties will engage with one another, establishing a social
relationship and acting ethically may be just as crucial as getting a quick negotiation result.
It's worth noting that we use the phrases "bargaining" and "negotiating" interchangeably.

What are the types of bargaining?

Negotiation can be divided into two types: distributive bargaining and integrative
bargaining. They differ in terms of their objective and motivation, as well as their focus,
interests, information sharing, and relationship duration.

Distributive bargaining

Its distinguishing feature is that it operates on a zero-sum basis, which means that
whatever profit I make comes at your expense and vice versa. Every dollar you can convince
the seller to take off the price of the car is a dollar you save, and every dollar more the seller
can obtain from you is a dollar you pay. Negotiating about who receives what part of a fixed
pie is the essence of distributive bargaining. A fixed pie refers to a predetermined amount of
commodities or services to be distributed. When the pie is fixed, or the parties assume it is,
they are more likely to bargain in a distributive manner. The most well-known example of
distributive bargaining is wage talks between labor and management. Labor representatives
typically come to the bargaining table determined to extract as much money from
management as possible. Because every cent labor bargains raises management's costs, each
side bargains fiercely and views the other as an adversary to be vanquished.

Integrative bargaining

Integrative bargaining, unlike distributive bargaining, is based on the notion that one
or more of the possible settlements can result in a win–win situation. Integrative negotiating,
as the Jake example demonstrates and as we'll discuss later, requires "two to tango"—both
sides must be involved for it to succeed. Integrative bargaining is better to distributive
bargaining in terms of intraorganizational behavior since the former establishes long-term
partnerships. Integrative negotiating brings negotiators together and helps them to leave the
table with a sense of accomplishment. Distributive bargaining, on the other hand, results in a
loser. When people have to work together on a regular basis, it tends to breed animosity and
deepen divisions.

According to research, a "losing" side that is pleased with the outcome of a previous
negotiation is significantly more likely to bargain amicably in following negotiations. This
highlights a key benefit of integrative negotiations: even if you "win," you want your
opponent to be satisfied with the outcome. Why aren't we seeing more integrative bargaining
in businesses? The answer is in the conditions that must be met in order for it to succeed.
Opposing parties who are honest with information and forthright about their worries, attentive
to the needs and trust of the other, and prepared to preserve flexibility are examples of this.
Because these conditions are uncommon in businesses, it's no surprise that talks frequently
adopt a win-at-all-costs mentality.

Describe the negotiation process.

The negotiation process is made up of five steps: (1) preparation and planning, (2)
definition of ground rules, (3) clarification and justification, (4) bargaining and problem solving,
and (5) closure and implementation.

1. Preparation and Planning - Before you begin bargaining, you must first
complete your homework. What is the conflict's nature? What is the
background to this negotiation? Who's involved, and how do they feel about the
situation? What do you hope to get out of the negotiations? What are your
objectives? If you're a supply manager at Dell Computer, for example, and your
goal is to secure a large cost reduction from your keyboard supplier, make sure
this goal is kept front and center in your negotiations and doesn't get lost in the
shuffle. To keep your attention focused, write down your goals and define a
 spectrum of outcomes—from "most hopeful" to "minimally acceptable." You
also want to assess what you think are the other party’s goals. Relationships will
change as a result of a negotiation, so that’s another outcome to take into
consideration. Once you’ve gathered your information, use it to develop a
strategy.
2. Definition of Ground Rules - You're ready to begin outlining the ground rules
and processes of the negotiation with the opposing side once you've completed
your planning and devised a strategy. Who will be in charge of the negotiations?
When and where will it happen? What, if any, time limits will be in place? What
issues will be excluded from discussion? Will you stick to a set procedure if you
reach a stalemate? The parties will also exchange their initial offers or demands
during this phase.
3. Clarification and Justification - After you've exchanged initial positions, you
and the other party will both explain, expand, clarify, fortify, and justify your
demands. This step does not have to be adversarial. Rather, it's a chance to
educate and inform one another on the issues, why they're essential, and how you
came up with your first demands. Any documentation that supports your stance
should be provided to the opposite party.
4. Bargaining and Problem Solving - The actual give-and-take in attempting to
reach an agreement is the essence of the negotiating process. Both parties will
probably have to make concessions in this area.
5. Closure and Implementation - The final phase in the negotiation process is to
formalize the agreement you've reached and create any necessary processes for
implementing and monitoring it. This necessitates working out the specifics in a
formal contract for big negotiations, such as labor–management disputes, leasing
terms, buying a piece of real estate, or negotiating a job offer for a senior
management post. In most circumstances, though, the conclusion of the
negotiation process is as simple as a handshake.

What is the Catholic social teaching on the dignity of the laborers?

The Dignity of Work and the Rights of Workers

For the Catholic Church, work is more than just a way to make a living; it is a way
to stay involved in God's creation. If the dignity of labor is to be preserved, employees'
essential rights must be honored, including the right to productive work, decent and fair
salaries, the right to organize and join unions, the right to private property, and the freedom
to economic initiative.

On this teaching, Paul wrote to the Thessalonians on the dignity of labour. He chastised
and shunned those brothers and sisters in the church who were idle, because they were not
following the church's established norms. Because he worked night and day, he pushed others to
follow in his footsteps. He despised idleness and did not rely on their financial support to
survive. He worked for a living and paid for his meals (2 Thessalonians 3:6-10). It was made
clear that it is an order, not a suggestion, to work. It is a commandment that whomever does not
labor should not eat. Many people today wish to be able to earn money without having to work.
This delusion has damaged more lives that we can imagine. Many people refuse working,
especially those that are not belonging to their comfort jobs. They refuse to break a sweat. This
issues is more problematic than it sounds, because unfortunately; these people ended up working
or doing something else to put a food on their table. They resorted to doing something hideous
like stealing and other immoral jobs like selling drugs and prostitution.

Take pride in your work since no job is indispensable, and all jobs are complementary.
You should not consider any profession to be trivial, and you must strive to support yourself so
that others can learn from your example. Stop waiting for a quick buck and get to work. If you
don't work, you won't be able to have, and if you don't have, you won't be able to help others
who are in need. When the Bible declares that anyone who does not provide for his family and
relatives has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever, it is speaking the bitter truth
(1Timothy 5:8). Poverty is but a result of weak hands, and it is a process. Therefore, it can be
avoided.

Write a short reflection on the plight of ordinary employees today in general, and in the
midst of the pandemic in particular.
 The COVID-19 epidemic had far-reaching effects on economic activity, jobs, and our
way of functioning. All of these shocks, in turn, have the potential to have a significant impact
on subjective well-being. During the spread of COVID-19, the global economy is
experiencing a severe downturn. Individuals are already experiencing immediate income and
employment losses. The central victims of the pandemic, however, are the ordinary
employees. They took the toughest blow from the pandemic; so heavy that most of them had a
hard time in putting bread on the table. They were suffering so unequivocally hard that they
relied on government ayuda just to feed their family on a day to day basis. They were forced
to sell their personal belongings, such as their personal vehicles and other unexpected things.
The lockdown took their jobs in an instant, no severance pay, no retirement, no back-up plan.
But some people are really amazing. In my hometown, when the pandemic hit, after the ECQ,
they immediately got back up. Many establishments opened as a result of these “ordinary
employees” being unemployed. They became self-employed in no time. Some were even more
successful while some just retained their old income. The pandemic sure did took us on a
surprise, but it sure did not break the infamous Filipino resiliency.

REFERENCES:

1. Kinicki, A., & Kreitner, R. (2008). Organizational Behavior: Key Concepts, Skills &
Best Practices. New York: The McGraw - Hill Companies,16- 17.
2. Luthans F, (1998) Organizational Behavior, IRWIN/McGRAW-HILL.
3. Robbins, S. P. (2005). Essentials of organizational behavior. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
4. Borisoff, D. & Victor, D.A. (1998). Conflict Management: A Communication Skills
Approach. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon, A Viacom Company. 78-80.
5. Conrad, C (1991). Communication in conflict: Stylestrategy relationships.
Communication Monographs, 58: 135-155.
6. Bowles, Babcock, and Lei, “Social Incentives for Gender Differences in the Propensity to
Initiative Negotiations.”
7. E. T. Amanatullah and M. W. Morris, “Negotiating Gender Roles: Gender Differences in
Assertive Negotiating Are Mediated by Women’s Fear of Backlash and Attenuated When
 Negotiating on Behalf of Others,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98, no. 2
(2010), pp. 256–267.
8. L. J. Kray and M. P. Haselhuhn, “Implicit Negotiations Beliefs and Performance:
Experimental and Longitudinal Evidence,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
93, no. 1 (2007), pp. 49–64.
9. B. Barry and R. A. Friedman, “Bargainer Characteristics in Distributive and Integrative
Negotiation,” Journal of Personality & Social Psychology (February 1998), pp. 345–359
10. R. P. Larrick and G. Wu, “Claiming a Large Slice of a Small Pie: Asymmetric
Disconfirmation in Negotiation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93, no. 2
(2007), pp. 212–233.
11. Zellmer-Bruhn, Maloney, Bhappu, and Salvador, “When and How Do Differences
Matter?”
12. Jehn, Greer, Levine, and Szulanski, “The Effects of Conflict Types, Dimensions, and
Emergent States on Group Outcomes.”
13. Thomas, “Conflict and Negotiation Processes in Organizations.”
14. E. Wilson, “The Trouble with Jake,” The New York Times (July 15, 2009),
www.nytimes.com .
15. R. Lewicki, D. Saunders, and B. Barry, Negotiation, 6th ed. (New York:
McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 2009).
16. J. Fried, “I Know You Are, But What Am I?” Inc. (July/August 2010), pp. 39–40.