90 minutes (5 minutes for rank ordering; 30 minutes for group consensus; 20 minutes for reporting to large group and group discussion; 35 minutes for debriefing)
General M–H P, T, D, M
1. To experience how different people evaluate the same situation
2. To participate in group decision making regarding a conflict
3. To identify the values that influence how we evaluate conflict
• Perception and Conflict Handout
• Two flipcharts
• Marking pens
1. Write the names (or job title, in one case) of the six people in the “Perception and Conflict” handout down the left side of an easel page. Then write group numbers across the sheet for as many groups as will be doing this activity.
2. Provide each participant with a copy of the “Perception and Conflict” handout. Give them approximately five minutes to individually read and then rank order the six people in the story from best to worst. The person who “acted the best or most honorably” receives a “1,” and the one who “acted the worst or least honorably” gets a “6.” No “ties” are allowed.
Note: This story can be rewritten to fit the environment of the group you will be working with. We have written it for public libraries, manufacturing plants, public schools, and so forth. The important elements to include in your story are: six people: one person who has responsibility for the “rules” (the recreation manager, in this story), the leaders of two opposing groups (Mr. Nguyen and Charles), someone who uses a harsh racial insult (Tom), someone who hears the insult and says nothing (Peter), and someone who damages someone’s property (Mai).
3. Place participants in groups of 4–6 and give the groups 30 minutes to share their rankings and come to a consensus ranking based on their discussions.
4. Returning to the larger group, ask each small group to report their rankings and record them on the chart you have made on the easel.
5. Identify any name that received identical rankings across groups. For example, Mr. Nguyen is very often ranked highest by everyone. Ask the participants to identify why he was ranked so highly. While participants are discussing their reasons for ranking this person(s) the way they did, listen carefully for values and write them on another easel sheet. For example, you may hear Mr. Nguyen’s top ranking as justified because of his responsibility, leadership, and rule-governed behavior. Do the same for other identical rankings.
6. Now identify any names that received different rankings across the groups and ask the groups to explain their decisions. Again, as you listen to the justifications, write any values you hear on the second flipchart. For example, Mai is often ranked “2” because she didn’t tolerate racism, or “6” because she retaliated in kind by destroying property. On the easel you could write social justice or retaliation. Follow this process with each of the six names in the story.
7. Ask the participants what they notice about the similarities and differences of values identified on the second flipchart. For example, one group may have ranked Peter as “1” or “2” because he did nothing but observe, while another group might have ranked him as “6” because he failed to act on his own values. The recreation manager may have been ranked “1” or “2” by one group because he only enforced the rules, but other groups may have ranked him “6” because he was responsible for the facility, he did not take charge of the situation, and he even gave conflicting messages.
1. How did you feel as you read this story? What issues emerged for you?
2. What happened during the small-group discussions? Did anyone take over leadership of the group?
3. Was your group able to come to an agreement on the rankings? If not, what happened?
4. What were the areas of most/least difficulty in coming to consensus about the rankings? Why?
5. Which of your personal values were most challenged as you read the story, participated in the small group discussions, and listened to other groups’ rankings?
7. How can you apply what you learned to your everyday life?
1. Our personal values influence how we evaluate situations and people.
2. It is difficult to reach consensus when we hold different values.
3. If we listen carefully to another person’s point of view—and the reasons for it—we can often find common values and come to agreement.
4. We are often inclined to get into polarized discussions about “right” or “wrong” rather than listening to understand others’ views.
5. It is most difficult to attain consensus when one or more people hold very strong values about an issue (e.g., social justice, responsibility, lack of respect for public property, etc.)
© Executive Diversity Services, Inc., Seattle, Washington, 1997. Adapted from work by Dr. Terrell Jones.
A family of Vietnamese has come to a forest camp. Mr. Nguyen goes to the recreation manager to ask if they may use the recreation facility on Monday evening for traditional dancing. The manager says yes. Monday evening arrives and the Vietnamese enter the recreation facility to find a large group of young men already using the facility. When Mr. Nguyen approaches Charles, the apparent leader of the group, a confrontation ensues. Charles says the recreation facility is “first come, first served” and they were there first. The Vietnamese leave.
The next morning Mr. Nguyen approaches the recreation manager and explains the problem. The manager states that there had been a mistake, that the recreation facility is, in fact, first come, first served. Mr. Nguyen is told he will need to find another place for his activities. That evening when the same group of young men enter the facility, they find that the Vietnamese are already there and have begun their dancing. Another confrontation occurs between Charles and Mr. Nguyen, during which Tom, one of the young men, shouts, “Why don’t you damned gooks just go back where you belong.” Peter, one of the young men, feels very bad about the confrontation and the comment but says nothing.
The young men leave the facility but go to the Vietnamese’ campsite and dump garbage all over it. When Mai, one of the Vietnamese, hears what has happened, she gets angry and smashes the headlight on one of the young men’s cars.
The recreation manager is called in to resolve the situation.
© Executive Diversity Services, Inc., Seattle, Washington, 1997. Adapted from work by Dr. Terrell Jones.