Management Assignment 2023

Running head: MANAGEMENT
Management
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

MANAGEMENT1
Introduction
The term conflict management can be defined as the practice of identifying as well as handling
conflict in a highly sensible, fair and efficient way (Folger, Poole and Stutman 2017).
Considering the fact that in business, conflict is unavoidable and severe conflicts possess the
potential to impose negative impact on the culture of a workplace as well as the revenue of the
organization, it is highly crucial for the managers of an organization to implement effective
conflict management techniques in order to ensure efficient conflict management. (Prati et al.
2016) In the following paragraph, a detailed analysis of a transcript will be conducted in order to
demonstrate effective conflict management skills (McKibben 2017). The interview whose
transcript will be discussed includes a interview conducted by Jeremy Paxman with his guest
Russell brand. In this report, I will explain how each of the two participants could have
management themselves as well as the interview in a more efficient as well as effective way.
Discussion
Identification of the purpose and characteristics of the interview
The chief purpose of this conversation was to conduct an interview by Jeremy Paxman with
Russell Brand for discussing about voting, revolution and beards since the latter has launched
his guest edit for the New Statesman. The purpose of the host that is Jeremy Paxman, was to
understand the thoughts of the guest that is Russel Brand behind editing a political magazine. On
the other hand, the purpose of Russel Brand was to successfully speak out his thoughts and
perspective about the contemporary voting system and revolution that is associated with his
action of editing a political magazine. The fact that the topic of discussion, that is politics and
voting is highly sensitive fact and thus different individual possess different opinion about the

MANAGEMENT2
same cannot be avoided (joo Kim et al. 2015). Along with this, when it comes to revolution, the
concept of revelation and the strategies that need to be opted to bring about the same, also varies
from person to person. So it can be clearly understood that the concept of the interview topic was
highly conflict prone. According to research, while conversing about a topic that possess high
chance of giving birth to a debate, it is the responsibility of the both the interviewer as well as the
interview to converse in a highly sensible, fair and approachable manner (Zhang et al. 2015).
However, it can be said that the purpose of each of the participant was not to cause conflict but to
manage the same. With the help of this interview, Russel could have spread this perspective and
the way of thinking to a good number of individuals in a highly constructive way. This would of
have the people who had a different mindset compared to that of Russel, understand this point of
view in an efficient way (Michaels and Strawinska-Zanko 2017). However, the approach taken
by the host from the initiation of the interview was highly inappropriate and possessed the
potential to initiate conflict. However, considering the fact that Russell was able to express his
opinion through this interview, the purpose of the interview was partially served. However, the
conflict situations and provocation comments have lowered the quality of the discussion to a
great level.
Discussion on storytelling scenarios and analysis on specific acts of vilification
From the beginning of the conversation, several acts of vilification conducted by Paxman, has
been noticed. For instance, the interview started with the question, “Russell Brand, who are you
to edit a political magazine?” This question though was asked in a sporting manner, was highly
abusive in nature and is enough to offend a guest. However, this question was handled by Brand
in an efficient and sporting way and hence conflict did not take place in the beginning. Another