BUSINESS ENGLISH

BUSINESS ENGLISH
Case Study 2 – Reflective Essay
Objectives
To analyse the relationship issues occurring at workplace by using Knapp Relationship
Model.
Topic and Instruction
1.Using KNAPP RELATIONSHIP MODEL which you have learnt in previous lecture,
identify a situation commonly occur at the workplace.
2. Share your personal experience when you encounter the situations (using the 10 stages of
Knapp Relationship Model. Please make sure you provide 10 examples related
to one situation)

Introduction
The Knapp Relationship Model has been a seminal framework in understanding the stages of
relationship development and dissolution. This model is often applied to romantic or social
relationships but has significant applicability in understanding workplace dynamics as well.
The objective of this paper is to delve deep into a specific experience of forming and
eventually dissolving a workplace relationship with a coworker, utilizing the Knapp
Relationship Model as a lens for analysis. Review Studies on workplace dynamics often cite
the significance of quality relationships for job satisfaction, productivity, and overall well-
being (Morrison, 2009; Hoppock, 1935). The Knapp Relationship Model offers a nuanced
understanding of how these relationships form and dissolve over time (Knapp, 1978).

BUSINESS ENGLISH
The first five stages are known as the building blocks of a relationship, while the second five
stages represent the deterioration of a relationship. The model assumes that all steps must be
performed one at a time, in sequence, to ensure they are effective. However, not all
relationships go through these stages of development similarly. Developed by Mark L. Knapp
in the late 1970s, this model is widely used to understand the dynamics of interpersonal
relationships. It is also used to assess the health of an existing relationship or to predict the
success of a potential one. Although Knapp’s relationship model is a useful tool for
comprehending the phases of any relationship, it does have some disadvantages, such as
oversimplifying human relationships and overlooking individual uniqueness and cultural
discrepancies. The model is a generalized representation of relationships and does not
account for the nuances and complexities of any individual relationship. This simplification
can limit its effectiveness in truly understanding and analyzing a relationship.

Moreover, Knapp’s theory does not incorporate the distinct ideas and differences people have
about relationships. Everyone has their own perception of a healthy connection, which can
bring forth different interpretations when understanding this model. Cultural norms, values,
and expectations all impact how people interact with each other and the relationship they
form. Finally, Knapp’s model does not address cultural issues, which can contribute to the
development and dynamics of any relationship.

Here, I will share the strength and weakness comparison of this Knapp’s Relation Model as
per the attached table.

Strengths Weaknesses

Provides a comprehensive understanding of Oversimplifies human relationships and

how relationships progress and develop. overlooks individual uniqueness and
cultural discrepancies.

Offers clarity and invaluable knowledge for Does not incorporate the distinct ideas and
anyone looking to deepen their self- differences people have about relationships.
awareness about what they are experiencing
in life.

Can be used in various relationships, such as Does not address cultural issues, which can
romantic involvements, friendships, and contribute to the development and dynamics
family ties. of any relationship.

Describes a linear progression of stages but
acknowledges that relationships can move
between or skip stages, making it adaptable
to real-life relationships’ complex and
dynamic nature.
Does not acknowledge that many
relationships occur in different stages and
progression is not linear.

BUSINESS ENGLISH
Under this topic, i will use the Knapp Relationship Model to analyze the conflict between
Alex as the Project Manager and Taylor as the Design Manager in the context of their
working relationship towards the completion of the tenancy interior project:
Situation 1 : Workplace Conflict Between Co-workers
1. Initiating:
Two co-workers, Alex and Taylor, are assigned to work together on a project for the first
time. During their initial meeting, they exchange pleasantries and briefly discuss their roles
on the project. Initiating in the Knapp Relationship Model involves initial contact and
forming first impressions (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014). In this stage, it is essential to establish
a positive tone for the working relationship (Leary & Kowalski, 1990). A real-world
reference for this stage comes from the leadership style of Tim Cook, CEO of Apple Inc. Tim
Cook is known for his approachable and respectful demeanor, which sets a positive tone
when initiating relationships with colleagues and partners.
2. Experimenting:
In subsequent interactions, Alex and Taylor engage in conversations about the project's goals
and expectations. They share some personal anecdotes to build rapport and understand each
other's work habits. Experimenting involves sharing personal information and exchanging
opinions and ideas as individuals seek to learn more about each other (Knapp & Vangelisti,
2014). Effective communication is crucial at this stage to build trust (Argyle, 1988).
Microsoft's CEO, Satya Nadella, emphasizes the importance of empathy and active listening
in building strong working relationships. He encourages employees to understand each
other's perspectives, similar to the experimenting stage (Nadella, 2020).
3. Intensifying:
As the project progresses, Alex and Taylor collaborate closely to meet project deadlines. They
hold regular meetings to discuss project updates and strategies, forming a stronger working
relationship. Intensifying is characterized by an increase in the depth and breadth of the
relationship, with individuals engaging in more frequent and meaningful communication
(Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014). Leaders like Daniel Goleman emphasize the importance of
emotional intelligence in building effective working relationships (Goleman, 1995). Mark
Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly Facebook), believes in close
collaboration among teams. He fosters an environment where employees work closely
together, similar to the intensifying stage (Meta, 2021).
4. Integrating:
Over time, Alex and Taylor become indispensable to each other's work. They share ideas
beyond the project scope and often work together on other tasks. They see themselves as a
successful team within the organization. Effective collaboration is essential, as emphasized
by Stephen R. Covey in his book "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People" (Covey, 1989).
Jeff Bezos, the founder and former CEO of Amazon, promotes a culture of innovation and
encourages employees to work together across teams. This integration of ideas and
collaboration aligns with the integrating stage (Bezos, 2017). Integrating involves a
deepening of the relationship, with individuals becoming intertwined in each other's lives,
both professionally and personally (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014).

BUSINESS ENGLISH
5. Bonding:
During a challenging phase of the project, Alex and Taylor offer each other emotional
support. They celebrate project milestones together, marking a sense of commitment and trust
in their professional relationship. Warren Buffett, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway,
values trust and long-term relationships with his business partners. He emphasizes that trust
and bonding are essential for successful collaborations (Buffett, 2019). Bonding is the
culmination of the relationship, marked by a sense of commitment and emotional attachment
(Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014). Leaders like Simon Sinek emphasize the significance of building
trust and strong bonds in the workplace (Sinek, 2009).
6. Differentiating:
As the project evolves, Alex and Taylor begin to have different opinions on the project's
direction. They engage in constructive disagreements during meetings but continue to respect
each other's expertise. Bonding is the culmination of the relationship, marked by a sense of
commitment and emotional attachment (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014). Leaders like Simon
Sinek emphasize the significance of building trust and strong bonds in the workplace (Sinek,
2009). Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, is known for his strong opinions and
innovative thinking. He encourages employees to express their ideas and engage in
constructive debates, similar to the differentiating stage (Musk, 2020).
7. Circumscribing:
Circumscribing is characterized by a reduction in the quality and quantity of communication
as individuals withdraw from certain aspects of the relationship (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014).
Effective communication strategies are needed to address this stage (DeVito, 2011). Due to
their differing opinions and growing tensions, Alex and Taylor start to limit their
communication to project-related matters only. They avoid discussing personal topics or
engaging in small talk. Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Meta Platforms, Inc., advocates for setting
clear boundaries in the workplace. She suggests that focusing on professional discussions can
help maintain a healthy working relationship (Sandberg, 2013).
8. Stagnating:
The relationship in between Alex and Taylor becomes stagnant, marked by reduced
collaboration and a lack of innovative ideas. They exchange minimal information and ideas
during project meetings. They have come to a stage where communication becomes
unproductive, and the relationship remains static (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014 Indra Nooyi),
former CEO of PepsiCo, believes in fostering a culture of continuous innovation. She
encourages employees to avoid stagnation and keep pushing for new ideas, similar to the
stagnating stage (Nooyi, 2017).
9. Avoiding:
Alex and Taylor actively avoid direct interaction with each other whenever possible. They
prefer to communicate through email or delegate tasks to others to minimize conflict and
tension. This character driven by physical or emotional distance as individuals seek to
minimize their involvement with each other (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014). Conflict avoidance
strategies, as discussed by William Ury, become prominent (Ury, 2007). Mary Barra, CEO of

BUSINESS ENGLISH
General Motors, acknowledges the importance of conflict resolution skills in leadership. She
promotes a culture where leaders address conflicts instead of avoiding them (Barra, 2017).
10. Terminating:
The project comes to an end, and Alex and Taylor part ways professionally. Their strained
working relationship concludes with a sense of relief. They have come to the final stage of
the Knapp Relationship Model, where the relationship either ends or transitions into a new
form (Knapp & Vangelisti, 2014). Effective closure and the ability to move forward are
crucial, as emphasized by leaders like John C. Maxwell (Maxwell, 2007). Doug McMillon,
CEO of Walmart Inc., emphasizes the value of closure in business relationships. He
encourages employees to reflect on the successes and challenges of projects, similar to the
terminating stage (McMillon, 2019
Conclusion
The application of the Knapp Relationship Model to the workplace conflict scenario between
co-workers Alex and Taylor provides valuable insights into the evolution of their professional
relationship. This model helps us understand how relationships in a corporate environment
progress through various stages, each characterized by distinct communication dynamics and
levels of engagement. From the initial polite exchanges (Initiating) to the sharing of
information and building rapport (Experimenting), and eventually moving on to close
collaboration (Intensifying) and interdependence (Integrating), we witness the natural
development of their professional connection.
However, the conflict arising in the differentiating stage highlights a common challenge faced
in workplaces—differing opinions and priorities. Here, the Knapp Model offers insight into
the stages of Circumscribing, Stagnating, Avoiding, and ultimately Terminating, as the
strained working relationship concludes with the project's end. This analysis demonstrates the
applicability of the Knapp Relationship Model in understanding workplace dynamics,
particularly in addressing and managing conflicts. By recognizing these stages, individuals
and organizations can navigate relationships more effectively, fostering collaboration and
resolution even when conflicts arise. Ultimately, the Knapp Model serves as a valuable tool
for improving interpersonal communication and relationships in the workplace.

Situation 2 - Conflict Resolution with a Direct Report

1. Initiating:
As a manager, I had a new team member, Sally, reporting directly to me. She greeted me with
warmth and enthusiasm during our first meeting, and we had a pleasant discussion about her
role and expectations. In the beginning, Sally's personality was highly positive and open-
minded. Sally was approachable and expressed her forward-thinking attitude, which was
promising for our team. Her extensive work experience with multinational companies and her
exposure to diverse individuals have greatly illuminated her personality in person. She
consistently met deadlines, communicated effectively, and was approachable during our
interactions. Her professionalism and commitment to her role were evident from the
beginning, instilling confidence in her abilities.

BUSINESS ENGLISH
2. Experimenting:
During the experimenting stage, Sally's open-mindedness became evident as she eagerly
embraced new tasks and ideas. She was approachable and encouraged team members to share
their thoughts and suggestions. She displayed an open-minded approach to problem-solving
and was willing to experiment with new methods to enhance her performance and contribute
to the team. Her determination and adaptability were an asset as she willingly tackled
challenges and sought innovative solutions. These qualities combined to make Sally a
valuable and highly effective team member during the experimenting stage, enriching the
team's dynamics and driving its success.
3. Intensifying:
As our professional relationship intensified, Sally's positive and approachable nature
continued to shine. Her approachability was a key factor in her ability to foster collaboration
within the team. Team members felt comfortable approaching her with their thoughts,
concerns, and suggestions. This open line of communication contributed to a positive and
inclusive work environment where everyone's voices were heard and respected.
4. Integrating:
Sally became an integral part of the team, and her open-minded and forward-thinking
personality contributed to a positive team environment. Her determination to succeed in her
role aligned well with the team's objectives, enhancing the integration of her skills and ideas.
Sally's willingness to adapt to changing circumstances and challenges was particularly
commendable. When faced with obstacles, she did not shy away from them but rather
embraced them as opportunities for growth. Her adaptability allowed her to navigate through
complexities and find effective solutions, which greatly benefited the team's overall
performance.
5. Bonding:
Sally's pleasant personality and determination to achieve team goals fostered strong bonds
within the team. Her positive attitude was contagious, and her forward-thinking approach
inspired confidence in our ability to meet project objectives. She tackled challenges head-on
and demonstrated a strong work ethic. Her determination to succeed and excel in her role
served as a source of motivation for her colleagues, inspiring them to also strive for
excellence.
6. Differentiating:
As the project continued to unfold, a noticeable shift took place in Sally's behavior and
attitude. While she initially exhibited traits of open-mindedness, adaptability, and
determination, several factors led to a differentiation in her approach. Sally, who was once
receptive to feedback and suggestions from her team members, became less willing to
consider alternative viewpoints. She started resisting input and appeared less open to
constructive criticism, causing some frustration among her colleagues. She was once an asset,
began to manifest as stubbornness during this stage. She became more resolute in sticking to
her ideas and approaches, even in the face of changing project requirements. This rigidity
created challenges in adapting to evolving circumstances.

BUSINESS ENGLISH
7. Circumscribing:
As Sally's behavior continued to evolve, tensions within the team escalated as her
approachability decreased, and she avoided crucial conversations related to project
adjustments and collaboration. Her growing rigidity and resistance to flexibility had a
substantial impact on team dynamics and effective communication, emphasizing the
importance of open dialogue and adaptability in project environments. This stage marked a
critical juncture in Sally's progression, where her decreasing approachability, avoidance of
essential discussions, growing rigidity, and resistance to flexibility had a significant impact
on team dynamics and effective communication. This phase emphasized the pivotal
importance of maintaining open dialogue, adaptability, and receptiveness to alternative
viewpoints within project environments to ensure successful outcomes.
8. Stagnating:
Our working relationship reached a stagnation point. Sally's deteriorating personality led to
reduced collaboration and innovation within the team. During this stage, Sally's deteriorating
personality and the resulting decline in collaboration, innovation, and project progress had a
profound impact on the team's dynamics. Her determination to adhere to her original ideas
and resistance to change served as significant obstacles to effective collaboration and project
success. This phase underscored the critical importance of maintaining open communication,
fostering adaptability, and being receptive to new ideas in project environments to overcome
challenges effectively.
9. Avoiding:
Sally actively avoided communication with team members who disagreed with her approach.
She no longer sought input or engaged in discussions, preferring to work in isolation. Sally
actively avoided engaging in communication with team members who held differing
viewpoints or disagreed with her approach. She withdrew from discussions that could
potentially challenge her established ideas or require her to consider alternative perspectives.
Her behavior extended to her preference for working in isolation. Rather than participating in
team collaborations, she chose to tackle tasks independently. This isolation was a stark
contrast to the collaborative spirit that had previously defined the team. Her determination,
which was once an asset, now became an obstacle. The Avoiding stage was marked by
heightened tensions within the team. The lack of constructive dialogue and the sense of
exclusion experienced by certain team members contributed to a strained atmosphere that had
a negative impact on overall morale.
10. Terminating:
Eventually, Sally’s inability to adapt to the evolving project requirements and her reluctance
to work collaboratively threatened the project completion. The strain on the team became
unsustainable, leading to her departure from the project. Her persistent inability to adapt to
the evolving project requirements had reached a critical juncture. Her rigid approach to work
and her reluctance to consider alternative methods or viewpoints had become a significant
impediment to project success. Her reluctance to work with colleagues in a constructive and
cooperative manner hindered progress and strained team dynamics and posed a substantial

BUSINESS ENGLISH
threat to the completion of the project. The team was unable to function effectively, and
project goals were at risk of being unmet. Ultimately, the team and project leaders faced a
difficult decision. Recognizing that her presence was impeding progress and jeopardizing the
project and company's objectives, the management must make the challenging choice but to
remove her from the project.

Conclusion
In this real-time scenario, I have applied the Knapp Relationship Model's ten stages
illuminates the gradual evolution of Sally's character. Initially characterized by her positivity,
open-mindedness, approachability, and forward-thinking approach, Sally's personality
gradually underwent a transformation. This shift was marked by an increasing inflexibility
and a determined commitment to her own ideas. The implications of this transformation were
significant, particularly in the context of the ongoing project. It posed a concrete threat to the
project's ultimate success, creating obstacles to adaptability and effective communication
within the team. This scenario underscores the vital importance of maintaining open lines of
communication, fostering adaptability, and prioritizing collaboration to address challenges
effectively in a team setting. The Knapp Relationship Model is an invaluable asset for
studying the myriad ways human beings connect and drift apart. By acknowledging the
duality of coming together and coming apart, the model captures the essence of relational
dynamics in a comprehensive and nuanced manner. Its stages serve as guidelines, allowing
for flexibility and adaptation, thus making it an enduring model that continues to inform and
enrich our understanding of the complicated tapestry of human relationships.

BUSINESS ENGLISH
References
Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2000). "Interpersonal Communication and Human
Relationships". Allyn and Bacon.
Knapp, M. L. (1978). Social Intercourse: From Greeting to Goodbye. Allyn and Bacon.
Rogers, L. E. (1995). "Communication within marital relationships: The influence of
relational and cultural variables". Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 12(3), 399-
410.
Antheunis, M. L., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2010). "Getting acquainted through social
network sites: Testing a model of online uncertainty reduction and social attraction".
Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 100-109.
Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (1984). "Interpersonal communication competence". Sage.
Wood, J. T., & Duck, S. (1995). "Off the beaten track: New shores for relationship research".
Sage.
Morrison, R. (2009). Are Women Tending and Befriending in the Workplace, Gender
Differences in the Relationship Between Work-Related Stress and Social Support. Journal of
Social Behavior.
Hoppock, R. (1935). Job Satisfaction. Harper and Brothers.
Baldridge, V. (2017). Knapp’s relationship model and nutrition. JCCC Honors
Journal, 8(2). http://scholarspace.jccc.edu/honors_journal/vol8/iss2/3
Fox, J., Warber, K. M., & Makstaller, D. C. (2013). Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 30(6), 771–794. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512468370

Pooja, K. (2015). English communication (for AECC course, Delhi university). Delhi: Vikas
Publishing House.

BUSINESS ENGLISH