University Conflict Management Analysis and Evaluation Report

This report provides a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the conflict management strategies employed during the BBC Newsnight interview between Jeremy Paxman and Russell Brand. The analysis begins by examining the participants' initial purposes and assessing how these purposes contributed to or detracted from conflict resolution. It delves into the narratives each participant constructed, identifying instances of vilification and exploring any perceived threats. Furthermore, the report scrutinizes instances where opinions were prioritized over facts, highlighting the impact of these choices on the interview's trajectory. The evaluation section offers a critical assessment of the participants' behaviors, proposing alternative strategies rooted in effective conflict management principles. It emphasizes the importance of clear communication, collaborative problem-solving, and the use of factual information to de-escalate tensions and achieve more productive outcomes. The report concludes by synthesizing the findings and offering recommendations for improved conflict management in similar scenarios.

Running head: CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Conflict Resolution
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author’s Note:

2CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
1. The purpose of each participant at the Interview
Jeremy Praxman: Jeremy Praxman was very rude to ask Russell brand that who he was to
edit a political magazine. In other words he questioned the very existence and the professon
or the person al choice of Brand. They were taking part in the interview process because they
were trying to discuss the solution on the purpose of voting and the different issues that are
created by the tough political system that is prevalent in the society. Praxman wanted to solve
his purpose of asking why Brand has not showed any interest towards voting and why is he
calling for a change all of a sudden
Russell Brand- Brand answers light with a witty and funny tone. He wanted to prove his
purpose that he does not abide by any age old political paradigm. He is looking for
something that is good for the common people.
2. The stories the participants are telling themselves and any specific acts of vilification
Russell Brand- Brand answered in a very polite and light tone from the beginning of interview
which shows that there was no abusive words used by him. He was trying to make sure that there
is no usage of any kinds of bad or un-healthy exchange of words or statements. There are
evidence that the ongoing interview sessions were having several conflicts or many quarrels
within them. However, these conflicts or these quarrels were not being done on any intentional
basis. There was evidence that the two persons were having some kinds of misunderstandings
regarding the right to vote and the kind of measures that have been taken by the Government for
the betterment of the common people.

3CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
Paxman- Praxman asked Russell Brand if he was calling for a revolution. Brand understood the
question and answered that he was calling for it. The ending of the interview shows that Brand as
really agitated and he said that they would do anything for bringing about a change in the whole
existing political system rather than thinking about asking for any permission. This shows that
somewhere or the other there is surely a lack of patience and people do want to reach out to an
instant solution without thinking much about what can will happen later (Bercovitch 2019).
Morton’s Fork theory holds good here. This theory shows that people often try to avoid
confronting or discussing things with others as they feel that there are only two options and they
have to select from any of the two. To do this, they always try to avoid asking or discussing as
they feel that there will be more harm rather than any good or positive impacts. However, this
kind of mindset can be solved by following some methods like small group discussions. These
activities usually involve the acts of narrating personal experiences and the lessons that have
been learned by different people. This is evident from the fact that people who had some bad
experiences in the past will be able to understand the situation and make sure that they are no
making any mistakes. They will try to handle the situation patiently and reach to some proper
conclusions. There are some methods like collaborating and problem-solving. In this interview
session, it was seen that both participants were trying to make their opinions seen justified rather
than listening to one another. However, to solve the issue or the conflicts, there must be a proper
collaborative response so that all the involved parties can understand the conflict that is going on
around and can reach out to the right kind of solution (Wallensteen 2018).
It is evident from the interview session that there was the exchange of some angry and some
abusive words going on around between the two participants that is Russell Brand and Jeremy
Paxman. However, this could have been avoided if there was a kind of mutual understanding

4CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
among the two and they could somehow be able to reach out to a certain point of understanding.
Compromising is also said to be one of the most useful methods of conflict resolution. This
method must have been used in this context so that the two participants could understand about
the points and the opinions of one another and then make up their minds to reach to some kinds
of the solution together. However, it was seen in the interview session that none of the two
persons were ready to make any kinds of compromises. They kept on sticking to their points and
thought that they will be able to reach out to any particular decision in this manner. However, it
is true that. To reach to any particular solution of any kinds of issues, it is the responsibility of
the two persons to take up their opinions, respect the same and then try to reach put to any
particular resolution.

5CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
3. Instances in the interview where any of the participants became threatened
Russell Brand -At one point in the interview, it has been seen that Brand was asked by Jeremy
Paxman that would Russell Brand ever be motivated to cast his vote if he gets someone suitable.
However, it was seen that when Brand was questioned on this, he got angry and he replied in a
very harsh manner that he feels threatened to stay in this kind of a political setup and what he
wants is freedom from there (Lacity and Willcocks 2017). He was also of the belief that this
situation will surely change and people will be able to take their steps towards the improper
action that is going on around in the society. Brand angrily answered that he wants to raise his
voice against the system of economic exploitation and the improper practices that are being faced
by the people of the society in general and by the women in particular.
He also agreed to the fact that he was getting angered and he is raising his voice and
calling for a change. Thus it can be said that both the participants were getting moved or affected
due to the varying opinions that were being given by each other. Particularly, the ending of the
interview session is evident in the fact that conflicts can end on a note of misunderstanding and
anger. Brand says that he wants to see the change in the society and he alone will fight for it. He
does not need to take permission from anyone.
Praxman-It is seen that Praxman told Brand that he was really a very insignificant man.
This shows that Jeremy Praxman was really getting threatened by the energy and the vigor with
which Russell Brand was giving him all the different answers.
4. Participants were relying on opinions rather than facts
Jeremy Praxman- He asked Brand that how he can get stuck with such an attitude even
before the age of 18. This statement shows that he has been able to throw a question on Brand

6CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
based on his opinion or his idea rather than thinking about what are the facts for which he has
been able to understand the facts or reasons behind that situation.
Russell Brand- He is saying that he belonged from a certain socio economic class where he
left out, helpless and also from an undeserving class. It can be said that he was staying within the
facts as per his understanding rather than thinking about the different other ways in which he can
solve it.
The method of negotiation can be used for solving the problem. At some parts of the
interview session, it seemed that both Brand and Russell were getting agitated and also feeling
threatened from one another. This was mainly because of the difference in the opinion of each
other (Binder 2016). In other words, if Brand and Praxman took the help from a negotiator then
they could have realized that in order to deal with the issue of voting and the current political
system that is going on around they will have to wait and will have to sketch out the right kind of
solution, then the interview would have ended in a much peaceful manner.
Thus it can be concluded that to avoid any kinds of conflicts both the two parties must be
able to understand the point of view of each other and then follow the method of collaboration
(Mehr and Krasnow 2017). Compromising and collaboration are some of the most essential
aspects of conflict management. This is helpful as it will always help the involved parties to
reach to any particular kinds of the solution in a very peaceful and respectful manner. It was seen
in the interview that both the parties were trying to communicate with each other but at some
points of time there was the reflection of anger and also some kinds of agitation spotted. Thus to
solve all these issues it is needed that there are a proper understanding and collaboration among
one another that is the number of individuals who are involved in the process.

7CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
References
Bercovitch, J., 2019. Social conflicts and third parties: Strategies of conflict resolution.
Routledge.
Binder, J., 2016. Global project management: communication, collaboration and management
across borders. Routledge.
Gerard, C. and Kriesberg, L. eds., 2018. Conflict and Collaboration: For better or worse.
Routledge.
Lacity, M. and Willcocks, L., 2017. Conflict resolution in business services outsourcing
relationships. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 26(2), pp.80-100.
Press, M.O., Hall, A.N., Morton, E.A. and Queitsch, C., 2019. Substitutions are boring: Some
arguments about parallel mutations and high mutation rates. Trends in Genetics.
Rebocho, A.B., Southam, P., Kennaway, J.R., Bangham, J.A. and Coen, E., 2017. Generation of
shape complexity through tissue conflict resolution. Elife, 6, p.e20156.
Rebocho, A.B., Southam, P., Kennaway, J.R., Bangham, J.A. and Coen, E., 2017. Generation of
shape complexity through tissue conflict resolution. Elife, 6, p.e20156.
Rossi, C.R., 2015. Impaled on Morton's Fork: Kosovo, Crimea, and the Sui Generis
Circumstance. Emory Int'l L. Rev., 30, p.353.

8CONFLICT MANAGEMENT
Rossi, C.R., 2015. Impaled on Morton's Fork: Kosovo, Crimea, and the Sui Generis
Circumstance. Emory Int'l L. Rev., 30, p.353.
Wallensteen, P., 2018. Understanding conflict resolution. SAGE Publications Limited.