Labor has ever been central to issues of production. Indeed, Marxists assert that it is the primary factor of production. Labor comes from the demographic stock, population. Recently, social scientists have again resurrected the specter of continued, if not worsening, prospects of poverty in the Philippines, in spite of projected growth of the economy. Their contention is that demographic growth will serve as stumbling block to Philippine development. Students of Economic Planning, let me hear your views on the matter. Students of Sociology of Socio-Political Change, likewise. Please consider this as a sort of written examination. Your posts should reflect your theoretical position, as well as your empirical observations. Citations are most welcome. Due date for your posting is 5 p.m. on September 20, 2008.
Comments
One may think that the thought of being in academe do not invigors conflict but rather imbides
competition which fosters a friendly one because students are here to showcase their abilities, talents, and resourcefulness. in competition, conflict is inevitable since we are living in a diverse performance of societies and economies both at a moment of time and overtime.
If I may quote Charles Cooley, he said that cooperation and conflict are not separable things. One might think that how come cooperation and conflict are not separable? Wherein these two words are different in meaning. Cooperation connotes positive thought and conflict entails a negative one.
A broader perspective should be taken into consideration. In academe, connection, definition, revitalization, reconnaissance, and replication are the basic functions of conflict which serves different among groups. From these five basic functions, you can see again the two sides on how we can see again the two sides on how we can view conflict (either positive or negative note).
If I believe in the beginning that conflict only does harm to a group since it connotes disagreements, discomfort, etc., in this article conflict can benefit a group. Why? because conflict produces energy to an individual to assert relationship to other groups thus manifesting its function of connection.
Let me take that connection and conflict together. These two words are indeed different, but as we can see, connection and conflict can jive together. The last question that may linger here is that who will received the positive effects of the good notion of conflict with regard to connection? Because in reality people as individual players in an organization vies for the benefit. Maybe it will called conflict on a good notion if and only if an individual player benefits from it.
References:
Mathiason,John(1942).The governance:The new frontier of global institutions/Johnson Mathiason,30-45.London;NewYork:Routledge,2009.
Longman,Andrew(2005).The Rational Project Manager: A thinking team's guide to getting work done/Andrew Langman,James Mullins,20-30.Hoboken,NJ:John Wiley & Sons,c2005.
Third, the comments given by Charles Cooley include practical examples that should be taken into consideration by educators and educational managers who want to make a positive contribution to their academic institution. Conflicts are usual scenarios inside the classroom, while holding a meeting or during competitions. It is a part of the school’s everyday life. Thus, faculty unions would annually challenge the administrators to increase the faculty’s compensation. Instructors would often complain about the small teaching load they get for the next semester. A few teachers would gossip about the “favoritism” shown by the head of school to an old teacher. Whatever kind of conflict it is, the fact remains that conflicting groups must act as unit because they are interdependent. As Cooley (1918, as cited in Coser, 1956, p.18) puts it, the “more one thinks of it the more he will see that conflict and cooperation are not separable things, but phases of one process which always involves something of both.”
Fourth, Coser’s arguments, as well as Cooley’s comments, are thought-provoking. They are clear and free from jargons. Practical examples, as noted earlier, provide situations in which conflict may fulfill important functions in groups. Coser’s particular work on the functions of social conflict in the context of schooling seems to be a convincing comprehensive work. It convinces that “conflict is a seminal sociological concept” (Rose, 1957, p. 434). It also convinces that humans cannot go away with conflict.
Conflict certainly would continue to exist as long as individuals and groups can derive benefits from it. There are still other positive functions of conflict that can serve a school. It only depends on how school authorities realize the benefits that would help them reduce the costs of conflict. It is not just clear who gets such benefits and costs. Still, there is a possibility that negative functions will outweigh the positive functions (since they may only be found in few instances). This leads to the question whether a school will be able to reap the benefits arising from conflict despite the presence of a number of serious negative functions. There are still conflicting views that need to be settled.
Works Cited:
Coser, L. A. (1956). The functions of social conflict. New York: Free Press
Nepstad, S.E. (2005). [Review of the book The functions of social conflict]. Sociological Forum, 20 (2), 335-337.
Rose, A.M. (1957). [Review of the book The functions of social conflict]. The American Journal of Sociology, 62(4), 434-435.
Ross, M.G. (1957). [Review of the book The functions of social conflict]. Social Forces, 35(4), 378-379.
ERIC P.
MA DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Lewis Coser’s work, The Functions of Social Conflict, highlights the importance of conflict in social relations, particularly in groups. Social conflict “preserves and strengthens group in numerous ways” (Nepstad, 2005, p. 336). In the context of schooling, conflict can be viewed as a mutual activity wherein the important elements are conflict and cooperation. Individuals or groups of individuals cannot maintain a harmonious or cooperative relationship without some degree of conflict. Conflict thus benefits different groups or a single group through its positive functions namely connection, definition, revitalization, reconnaissance and replication.
The necessity of social conflict, particularly in the context of schooling, was asserted convincingly by Coser for the following reasons. First, Coser offers a new conceptualization of conflict. This is a complete breakaway from considering such concept as “dysfunctional.” This means that the definition of conflict should not be limited only to “competition,” “opposition,” “incompatibility,” “antagonism,” or any dysfunctional or pathological terms. Viewing conflict as dysfunctional (as if like a “social disease”) would tend to make everyone avoid it. In order to correct the balance of analysis, Coser offers the notion of conflict as a positive force. It is then more of a “socializing, rather than a disorganizing, process” (Rose, p.435). Another sociologist, Charles Cooley, views conflict as a healthy and normal occurrence. Conflict is thus necessary for establishing, maintaining and enhancing group identities and relationships.
Second, his work is significant for its emphasis on conflict’s positive functions in social relations. Conflict, being an unavoidable aspect of group life, is important in making negotiations, defining ranks, levels or authorities, revitalizing traditions and norms, gathering information, formation of coalitions and associations and conforming to the rules (Ross, 1957; Coser, 1956). For instance, young faculty members would sometimes have a hard time getting along with the older faculty. Thus, they create a “space,” asserting their being a “fresh breed of educators” against an established faculty power. Still, they have to maintain a civil relationship as part of not liking each other. In this sense, conflict provides the two groups a form of negotiation.
ERIC P.
MA DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
1. Connection I agree with the statement “conflict makes connection.’ A very simple example is the “kampihan” system that happens to children who quarrel among themselves. I think the grown up version of this “kampihan” system is the School Unions but with a very distinct purpose of taking care of the interest and welfare of each member.
2. Definition This function states the importance of authority. On how in a classroom setting the teacher asserts his/her rank by instructing the class what to do.
3. Revitalization I think this is the most important of the five because this tackles the rebirth of the solidarity among the group.
4. Reconnaissance As to what I understand in this function, I think it stresses on the idea of forecasting though information gathering. In my high school years, whenever there are new policies or rules our advisers usually do a “dry run” to see how the students will cooperate or respond.
5. Replication A gathering of subgroups that acts as a large individual group. In the case of school accreditation, students, teachers and school board unites in order to achieve a single goal.
History has proven the significance of social conflicts and I agree with the point raised by Coser that conflict brings internal cohesion, regardless of the initial intent, as it later on contributes to essential transformations.
With this, I strongly argue that conflicts are catalysts of change. While conflict is prevalent in any society, one must realize that it a also as doorsill to positive results. First and foremost, conflict crops up not only from mere differences; it is when a certain group has come to a decision of carrying out an action which is in line with their norms or values that do not conform to that of another group. Differences are basically tolerable. But the moment a faction acts out of these incompatible principles, conflict comes into being.
But conflicts need not to be viewed as solely unconstructive. In fact, it brings about essential changes that further improve a society or a particular institution. Coser outlined the five basic functions of conflict, which are connection, definition, revitalization, reconnaissance and replication.
Revolutions are good examples of major conflicts that have brought positive upshots despite the costs. Like any other ordinary conflict, revolutions are usually rooted from diverging principles. The original purpose may be off-putting, as they may be either assertion of rights, clamour for truth, for freedom or justice, or it may be an upheaval against rulers or public officials. However, the positive results come afterwards.
Peace is one, if not the best product of a conflict. It is achieved when the parties come to an accord and settle on particular course of action. And it is not possible if people would always try to resolve conflicts. Conflict management is as important as conflict resolution. There are things that cannot be resolved right away and that one must recognize the importance of every step in dealing with the conflict. And while things are still on process, conflict management is imperative as to make sure things are transpiring at the right time.
Peace and revolutions are two grandiose ideas when we talk about conflict. But it runs the same with day to day experiences. Conflicts are part of any relationship among and between people or groups of people. At the on-set, this may appear negative, as it serves as impediments to harmonious coexistence. But looking closely to how it works, conflicts are opportunities to improve things, release tensions, strengthen bonds and mend problems or difficulties.
In the society, conflict is one of the manifestations of an active citizenry. It is not something that should be avoided, but should be taken as an opportunity for improvement. Conflicts are catalysts of changes. They break the monotony of social order, draw attention to erroneous parts, open doors to a variety of alternative solutions and establish consensus, promote peace and strengthen alliances.
Zemalyn O. Gutierrez
AB Political Science
M.A. Development Studies
History has proven the significance of social conflicts and I agree with the point raised by Coser that conflict brings internal cohesion, regardless of the initial intent, as it later on contributes to essential transformations.
With this, I strongly argue that conflicts are catalysts of change. While conflict is prevalent in any society, one must realize that it a also as doorsill to positive results. First and foremost, conflict crops up not only from mere differences; it is when a certain group has come to a decision of carrying out an action which is in line with their norms or values that do not conform to that of another group. Differences are basically tolerable. But the moment a faction acts out of these incompatible principles, conflict comes into being.
But conflicts need not to be viewed as solely unconstructive. In fact, it brings about essential changes that further improve a society or a particular institution. Coser outlined the five basic functions of conflict, which are connection, definition, revitalization, reconnaissance and replication.
Revolutions are good examples of major conflicts that have brought positive upshots despite the costs. Like any other ordinary conflict, revolutions are usually rooted from diverging principles. The original purpose may be off-putting, as they may be either assertion of rights, clamour for truth, for freedom or justice, or it may be an upheaval against rulers or public officials. However, the positive results come afterwards.
Peace is one, if not the best product of a conflict. It is achieved when the parties come to an accord and settle on particular course of action. And it is not possible if people would always try to resolve conflicts. Conflict management is as important as conflict resolution. There are things that cannot be resolved right away and that one must recognize the importance of every step in dealing with the conflict. And while things are still on process, conflict management is imperative as to make sure things are transpiring at the right time.
Peace and revolutions are two grandiose ideas when we talk about conflict. But it runs the same with day to day experiences. Conflicts are part of any relationship among and between people or groups of people. At the on-set, this may appear negative, as it serves as impediments to harmonious coexistence. But looking closely to how it works, conflicts are opportunities to improve things, release tensions, strengthen bonds and mend problems or difficulties.
In the society, conflict is one of the manifestations of an active citizenry. It is not something that should be avoided, but should be taken as an opportunity for improvement. Conflicts are catalysts of changes. They break the monotony of social order, draw attention to erroneous parts, open doors to a variety of alternative solutions and establish consensus, promote peace and strengthen alliances.
Zemalyn O. Gutierrez
In terms of connection and definition, the role of conflict is hidden. However, this can be concretely observe in the animal kingdom. A good example is in the tribe of the lion, each groups of lions sets a territory of their own. Each domain is protected and clearly defined. One a stray lion crosses the territory, a conflict will arise and he will be thrown out of the territory. Within the group, a Lion king will have competition for the thrown. This competition marks the existence of conflicts. However, the loser of a fight for the thrown clearly states, “I’m the king, you are the follower and others are my slaves.” In a human setting, this is true. A concrete examples can be seen in the macroscale and microscale.
“Inter-profession Conflicts” arises particularly in their scope of practice. An architect may argue with a Civil Engineer and Interior Designer. A nurse may argue with a physician and physical therapist. However, this set the scope and boundaries of each profession, likewise with the connection exist between them. The nurse is responsible for care, while the physician is responsible for cure. The boundaries are very clear, yet conflict sets up this boundary and the relationship exists between them.
Revitalization is less seemingly a role of conflict. However, indirectly, it is a function of conflict. As the boundaries and relationship is set to the maximum. A common goal is achieved. In terms of business and marketing, industries of the same kind will have competition in the market. This competition is most likely sets the target markets. The overlapping of target markets increases the business conflicts. As a consequence, the company’s philosophy, mission and visions is being refreshed. Example will be in the different company “tag lines” like “You’re in Good hands”, “Serbisyong Totoo”…
Subsequently, conflicts also remind the micro-level about their “reason” in the group. It is less agreeable that “hazing and initiation” revitalizes membership as the author stated. A better example will be in the academe. In the teaching profession, competition also exists for fame and glory particularly in the “evaluation.” Competition sets a conflict between faculties. Thus, this allows the faculty to understand eventually his reasons as a faculty and to recommit himself to teach as a faculty.
Reconnaissance and Replication are more likely to come together. In the management, SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and Threat) analysis is used particularly in planning development and marketing researches likewise with nursing management and in other fields. A strong institution may be analyzed by a conflicting institution. In order to defeat a party, one must have all the crucial data which includes the SWOT. Thus, spying and investigation is conducted to gather and retrieve information about the weakness for possible assault and for the strengths for possible adaptation. These adaptations of strengths are considered to be a replication.
The insights of the author about conflict are very critical. This offers a different horizon and facet to help in understanding different situations. It reminds us that a mind must maintain its openness regarding different views. A common notion must not blind our thinking regarding matters. Henceforth, everything thing in this world has its own advantage and disadvantage depending on the situation, yet every factor must be considered.
In the article, it stated that a school is seen as monocratic, ruled by a single person, or group of people, I agreed but I argue that the perceptions of the powerholders are the one that becomes the norm for the entire organization. The school is a society composed of societies, and to consider that the word "society" can never refer to anything more than a very large collection of individuals, thus perceptions of the powerholders will not apply to all, and other groups may even neglect and counter these perceptions.
A school may either be expected by people as a temple, factory or town meeting and I argue that it is fixated as a temple. Answers to questions like "what do we teach?" and, "how do we teach it?" (ie: a school's missions and functions) differ depending on how the school is operating. Teaching within a factory environment is very different than one that focuses on a town meeting approach or a temple approach. These functions also have a direct impact on the expectations and characteristics of hired school personnel, as well as curriculum choices and school functions, may be in direct conflict with how parents, the community, taxpayers and others believe that the school should be operating. I would suggest that the school should view its existence in the presence of the expectations of the people (temple, factory or town meeting) as neither is perfect, setting the point at the middle would not suggest that it would end conflict, as it can never be avoided, rather, this set-up promotes flexible and more effective and efficient process leading to consensus where benefits would be more acceptable by the concerned groups. Making the questions: Who does the sweating and who gets the glory? What do they pay and what do they get for it? Answered more fairly.
"I sincerely wish to put an end to this conflict provided that the costs of ending it do not outweigh its benefits." In viewing the Functions of conflict in schools, it is wise to say that the benefits of it should be given much concern and this process of conflict-consensus serves as the connection between groups in which strenthens their existence and the existence of the school itself, without conflict, there would be no reorganization, and with no reoragnization, there is no improvement.
References:
http://www.newfoundations.com/OrgTheory/SchoolasOrg.html
http://muse.widener.edu/~egrozyck/ChanConflict.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism
I am in agreement with what is written in the article that a school as an educational institution should always promote peace and avoid conflict all the time. This is the place where young people acquire not only their knowledge but their values as well. If this is the case, we would not want conflict to be present in this organization. However, we should also consider these individuals (those who engage in union or strike) as an agent concerned with his own welfare. They believe this is the only way where their appeal could be heard. The demand/request of a large group would most likely be considered than that of a single individual.
The role and purpose of conflict as adapted from Coser would make me think that CONFLICT is not entirely negative in its sense. It can serve as collaboration so both parties can work together to find a common favorable solution. It can also act as a compromising agent. Opposing parties can look for a middle ground wherein both parties if not wholly, would be partially satisfied.
Furthermore, Cooley (1918) was also quoted in the article; this leads me to my third theme wherein conflict and cooperation (or consensus) are perceived as two inseparable things. Ayindo and Jenner (2008) believed that conflict is a natural and necessary part of our lives. It is like the husband and wife, mother and child relationship. A cooperation activity that is part of each other and should be performed by both. It (conflict) could both be a force that can tear relationships apart or a force that binds us together.
The last theme was cui bono? (Latin for “who benefits?”); whom does conflict benefit when it benefits a group? It is said that Conflict theories views society as composed of distinct groups with opposing interests, and view social change as resulting from struggle among groups. Different varieties of conflict theory recognize different kinds of divisions, but all view society as fundamentally characterized by conflict rather than consensus. (Read more about Theories of Society on http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/FAS/Bromley/classes/foundations/readings/theories.htm). More so, Butler and Rothstein (1987) acknowledged that the free flow of ideas, even among friends, inevitably leads to conflict. They also believed that disagreement itself is neither good nor bad. I have learned from the article (and during our discussions) that conflict can set forth multitudes of good and bad outcomes. We see conflict everywhere. But why does conflict arise? What causes people to disagree? A person is an agent of change. He is an actor who thinks and acts freely. His thoughts, feelings and actions may differ from those around him. To this level, it is simple enough to say that no two persons see the same thing the same way. Each of us perceives differently because our perception is influenced by our culture and formation and also the society where we belong. Resolving conflicts is not a simple task, but frequently just being able to express one’s perspective, being able to describe one’s position and the reasons for it. Also, no individual exist outside a group. The society, as a mélange of social structures has several functions and responsibilities. As our world becomes smaller and more crowded, it becomes more important to learn techniques for arriving at fair and amicable resolutions to conflicts.
References:
Gunter et. al. (2003). Instruction: a models approach. Fourth Edition. Pearson Education, Inc., Boston. pp.9-10.
http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADM806.pdf
http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/FAS/Bromley/classes/foundations/readings/theories.htm
http://www.learningmethods.com/pdf/on%20conflict%20and%20consensus.pdf
Let me discuss the article in several themes.
First, criticisms on the real motives on public expression of desire (hidden proviso) are expostulated. Here we can see how peace can result from a former disagreement or conflict. Similarly, in the context of schooling, we encounter a lot of innovations on educational directions (issues on Curriculum design and paradigm shifts, globalization and internationalization, etc.). One particular example is the macro goals of education. They are often set to broad educational goals applicable to all courses and toward which all teachers are expected to direct their instruction (Gunter et. al., 2003, p.9). We can see that these goals can be source of controversies inside and out the institution. I agree that conflicts cannot be avoided. But they can be minimized to an extent where violence and war can be prevented. C.T. Butler (1987) said, “if war is the violent resolution of conflict, then peace is not the absence of conflict, but rather, the ability to resolve conflict without violence”. This quote reminded me of our previous discussion where our professor told us that “peace is a result of a previous conflict”.
To continue, the second theme I drawn from the article was on the monocratic similitude of schools (like majority of the organizations). Normally, we notice that power is in the hands of a single person or a group of people. In the article, the board members are seen as powerholders who constantly want the other groups inside the organization (school administrators and teachers) to be in constant antagonism with each other. It was explained that they (the board members) believed it will benefit the SCHOOL if the administrators and teachers are adversary with each other. On one hand, they saw that they were able to do their jobs better that way and it has prevented the school administrators and teachers from forming a cohesive group against them. Here we can see how much the “powerholders” would like to maintain the environment of antagonism in the organization to keep it “functioning”. The article also explained how the five basic functions of conflict (connection, definition, revitalization, reconnaissance and replication) parallel each other both among different groups and within a single group. An analogous was seen in Coser’s (1956) positive aspects that can happen as a result of conflict (cited by Babu Ayindo and Janice Jenner, 2008). The positive functions of conflict were: (1) Conflict helps establish our identity and independence. (2) Intensity of conflict demonstrates the closeness and importance of relationships. (3) Conflict can build new relationships. (4) Conflict can create coalitions. (5) Conflict serves as a safety-valve mechanism which helps to sustain relationships. (6) Conflict helps parties assess each other’s power and can work to redistribute power in a system of conflict. (7) Conflict establishes and maintains group identities. (8) Conflicts enhance group cohesion through issue and belief clarification. When a group is threatened, its members pull together in solidarity. (9) Conflict creates or modifies rules, norms, laws and institutions.