Ken could have approached Jan with the acknowledgement …show more content…
Ineffective communication can damage relationships, negatively impact someone’s emotions, and deter any potential resolution (Wood, 2012). The tone both parties used could have attributed to the defensiveness of both parties. This would also include the use of aggressive body language. The aggressive body language was displayed when Jan pointed her finger at Ken, all while bobbing her head and raising her tone. Ken did the same when he used sharp hand gestures and decreased his tone in frustration. Using these cues both parties were setting an aggressive climate and inadvertently increasing the aggravation of the other person. When Ken stated that, “Maybe neither one of us can trust the other, and maybe we shouldn’t tell each other anything.” He was indicating that Jan could not be trusted. This, in my opinion, was offensive to Jan, and only solidified her reasons for being upset. Jan however inferred that her loyalty with Shannon was greater than with Ken by discussing the situation with her instead of discussing it with Ken first. Both Ken and Jan stated that they valued their relationship with the other, but their actions contradicted these statements. The result of the situation and how it was handled created a tension in their friendship which is now tainted with trust …show more content…
By distinguishing each other’s needs, and focusing on how they present themselves with both body and verbal language, it promotes cooperation and respect (Wood, 2012).
This guarantees that the communication is guided towards constructive communication. Constructive communication focuses on dual perspective, expressive support of one another, and validation of each other’s feelings (Wood, 2012).
Of the eight skills of conflict-management that Jan and Ken could have used are, taking responsibility of your feelings, issues, and thoughts and listening mindfully, while looking for points of agreement (Wood, 2012). None of these skills were used in this transcript. Neither party listed to the others complaints, nor did they observe the situation with a dual perception. Ken and Jan did not come to a point of agreement, or take responsibility for their part in the conflict.
Jan should have offered a sincere apology, and Ken should have displayed more respect towards Jan. Both parties should have been able to come to a resolution and continue their friendship, but with both of them behaving in the manner they have, that was not the