1

Simple Conflict: Understanding Commitments

Yousef Fareed
COMM-101-008

You didnt tell me that he walked! I said to Sally, as she will be referred as for the rest
of this paper to protect her identity, when I had discovered that her friend had to walk to his
soccer game. This is a credible essay because I experienced this conflict with my friend, cited the
Beebe textbook, as well as authored the following analysis. The central idea of this paper is that
friendship needs to be built on a mutual understanding of commitments in order to avoid a
conflict when loyalties overlap. This essay will discuss the type of conflict, management style,
conflict management effectiveness, conflict management skills, and lastly the impact of culture
on this conflict. From this list, I will start to discuss the type of conflict that occurred.
As described in the textbook by Schmeidler & Boileau (2013), a simple conflict is a
disagreement between two individuals that stems from differences in ideas, definitions,
perceptions, or goals (p. 225). I had experienced this firsthand when differences in definitions
and goals between Sally and I resulted in a misunderstanding and later a simple conflict. I had
made plans in October to attend and perform in the open microphone night held on campus by
the volition magazine. I asked Sally to come with me to the open microphone night because I
wanted to attend the event with a friend. She had said from before that she might not be able to
attend. I told her I would be performing after which she wholly agreed to come along. What I
had initially understood was that she had minor plans that night but cancelled them because she
would rather see me perform. Later I had discovered that she had made plans to watch one of her
friends, Brian, who will be referred as thus for the same reasons as Sally, at his soccer game at
about the same time I would be performing.
This made me realize that we had different definitions as well as different goals. Our
different definitions regarding support from our friendship hindered our understanding of each
others needs as well as each others expectations of how the other person was going to act and

react. I had initially considered that since Sally is my friend, she would be able to make time to
support me while I was performing. Moreover, she had agreed to attend when I told her I would
be performing. Therefore, I was puzzled when she stated that she had other plans. Our different
goals were that I had wanted to her to attend the event I would be performing in while she
wanted to support her two friends by attending different events in the same time frame. I wanted
her to be there for me, while she wanted to be there for someone else. The conflict between Sally
and I was a simple conflict because we had different definitions and goals with minimum
misunderstanding. Although our definition of loyalty was in opposition, our conflict
management styles reflected our disinterest in engaging in this.
As described by Schmeidler & Boileau (2013) in the text, People may sometimes adopt
an accommodation style because they fear rejection if they rock the boat (p. 233). After
realizing that Sally wasnt going to stay for the full event, I started to feel hopeless about her
staying to watch me perform. Note that she had brought her friend Brian along to spectate as
well. This made me question where her priorities lie. I told her we should stay a little longer and
see how fast people were performing. Because Brian had to prepare for his game, he left by
himself to the Field House while Sally stayed with me. I agreed to leave earlier so we can go
watch his soccer game after I performed. Her friends soccer game started at 8:30 p.m. and I was
far from performing. At about 8:10 p.m., I gave up and informed the hostess about my departure
so she could cross out my name from the list. Instead, she allowed me to perform my piece early.
After I finished performing, we left together to the soccer game. On the way to the Field House, I
noticed that she was peering out her window as though she were looking for someone. She then
said, I hope hes still not walking. I was taken aback and a little frustrated that she allowed him
to walk about half a mile to his soccer game. You didnt tell me that he walked! I said to Sally

after discovering this news. She then proceeded to tell me about how it was no big deal and that
he liked walking anyway. What I understood then was that she was initially going to stay for my
performance and then give Brian a ride to the soccer game, but I ruined her plans by staying
longer. I still tried to apologize and tried to accommodate for what I felt was my fault.
An avoidance conflict style is characterized by sidestepping a conflict or trying to make it
seem like there isnt an issue at hand (Schmeidler & Boileau, 2013, p. 232). Sally only restated
what she was planning to do while we were still at the open microphone. She didnt protest us
staying but I did sense some tension from her. I predicted that she was worried about not being
able to attend her friends soccer game. I tried to make accommodations but she seemed ardent
on doing whatever I was comfortable with, though I sensed that she wasnt. After I discovered
that Brian had walked from the Hub to the Field House, I began to try to apologize and explain to
her that she shouldnt have felt pressured into staying with me. She said it was fine and that
Brian had other friends that he walked with anyway. Throughout the conflict, I was
accommodating our differences because I felt I was being selfish and Sally was avoiding conflict
because she didnt want to start an argument. After discussing the conflict management styles, it
is now apparent how effective this conflict was managed.
After discovering that Brian had walked, I apologized profusely and insisted that I had no
ill intentions. At the same time, Sally was telling me that she wanted me to not worry about it
and that it was no big deal. I believe that this conflict was managed effectively though it could
have been managed better. My accommodation demonstrated the fact that I acknowledged the
conflict at hand and that I was willing to apologize before it escalated. On the other hand, Sallys
avoidance could be considered effective management but only if her avoidance was for the sole
purpose of making me feel welcomed. I sensed that this was not the case as she had planned to

leave early anyway since Sallys attendance of Brians soccer game was already a routine
circumstance. Although there was some underlying tension, the conflict was managed somewhat
effectively because we were both self-aware. While this conflict was effectively managed, we
can still mention conflict management skills that could have improved communication between
us.
In order to improve conflict management effectively, one must monitor nonverbal
messages. Interpersonal power is the degree to which a person is able to influence or control
his or her relational partner (Schmeidler & Boileau, 2013, p. 227). The nonverbal messages that
Sally exhibited in this exchange exemplified who had the power in this interpersonal interaction.
I, being loud and inquisitive, had the interpersonal power throughout the discussion because I
cornered Sally into concealing her true feelings of my decision. While Sally, being submissive as
well as dismissive, suggested that she had no interpersonal power and was simply trying to avoid
conflict. After seeing how Sally had acted after I inquired about Brian walking to his game, she
didnt respond to my apologies nor did she voice her opinions about my actions. She kept her
eyes faced forward on the road and only stated that there wasnt a problem. If I was more adept
at noticing these subtle hints, I may have been able to discuss with her why she didnt tell me
about Brian and whether I shouldve allowed her to leave with him. I also noticed that when I
asked her to stay a little longer, she had already stood on her feet with her backpack on,
indicating that she was not going to stay any longer. She could have simply explained that she
wanted to leave earlier instead of urging me to leave before I perform.
Breathing is another effective strategy we both could have used to relieve some of the
tension that had occurred when I brought up the subject of Brian walking to the Field House.
According to Schmeidler & Boileau (2013), deep breathing the prime strategy women use to

manage the pain of childbirth can be a powerful way to restore calmness to your spirit (p.
239). I immediately started to question why Sally didnt tell me earlier about her other plans
and began to apologize constantly. I should have taken time to breathe, calm myself down, and
realize that it wasnt my fault that she hadnt told me any of this. I was open and honest to her
about my expectations of her and she should have explained to me what she wants from our
relationship.
Our communication would have been more effective if we took time to plan our message.
As Schmeidler & Boileau (2013) pointed out in the text, do not barge in and pour out your
emotions (p. 239). As I stated before, I immediately barged into the conversation instead of
evaluating the causes of our misunderstanding and considering why Sally didnt notify me of her
friends soccer game. I
Lastly, our conflict would have been better resolved had we utilized self-talk. In the text,
self-talk is described as a conflict management skill that involves self-awareness as well as
thoughtful reflection of ones own actions. Schmeidler & Boileau (2013) explain the significance
of this exercise: thoughts are directly linked to feelings, and the messages we tell ourselves play
a major role in how we feel and respond to others (p. 241). After I realized that Brian walked, I
should have taken time to evaluate the situation and ask myself what would be the best way to
approach this issue without causing her to conceal her emotions. This simple conflict that
occurred could have been managed more effectively if we monitored our nonverbal messages,
took time to breathe, planned out our messages, & utilized self-talk. Now that we have covered
the four management skills that would improve this conflict, we can now conclude what we have
learned from this exchange.

The central idea of this paper is that friendship needs to be built on a mutual understanding
of commitments in order to avoid a conflict when loyalties overlap. I took part in a simple
conflict with a friend, because we had differing definitions of loyalty and different goals. Due to
these different definitions, our conflict was resolved, but could have been managed more
effectively if we took time to plan our message, breathe, use self-talk, & monitor our verbal
messages. If we had both understood each others definitions of loyalty, we likely wouldnt have
had any conflict and Brian wouldnt have had to walk. Therefore, a mutual understanding of
loyalties leads to a mutually beneficial friendship.

References
Schmeidler, L.E. & Boileau, D. (2013).
Interpersonal and Group Interaction with Student Handbook:
George Mason University. Edition 2013-2014.
Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions.