The Concept of Learned Optimism and Coping with Stress

Learned optimism can be explained in terms of the positive thinkers, and it is an idea in the positive psychology that the talent for joy, just like any other aspect, can be cultivated. Learned optimism is made by consciously challenging any aspect of negative self-talk. The concept of the learned optimism relates with coping with stress in such a way that the positive thinkers encounter situations with optimism and in case they encounter stressful circumstances, they appraise the situations as controllable and use the coping approaches that are efficient, problem focused, and functional. The positive thinkers feel that their goals are being met, life is going well, and the resources are enough. Stress does not occur in the event but occurs as a result of an event that is creating it. Through learned optimism, positive thinkers believe that stressful situation determines the intensity of the stress, and they appraise the stressful situation as the less threatening issue, and they cope effectively with stress compared to the negative thinkers (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). For example, when we consider Scotts dilemma, we get that Scott does not blame himself entirely for the challenge he faces. He attributes them to the change of the manager, and he even consoles himself by thinking of how good he used to perform before the change. He also thinks of a way that he can improve himself and perform as per the new boss expectation.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

How framing heuristics affect a manager's escalation of commitment

Framing heuristics is an essential approach for the decision-makers. Framing heuristics will help the managers to receive positive feedbacks rather than receiving the negative feedback about the success of the decision made through the escalation of commitment. Through framed heuristics, managers who are involved in the escalation of commitment get motivated to maintain their course of action in case they have the high need to justify their decisions. Also, through the framed heuristics, escalation of commitment among the managers can be controlled since the managers can receive all the advantages of the action whereas the cost of a failed action is shared by every individual in the organization. Framed heuristics is essential for the managers because the managers can ensure that all of their costs translate to benefits usually termed as mental accounting to avoid waste excessively by becoming more committed to avoiding a fail in action (Jones et al. 2006).

The five conflict-handling modes

The capability to manage conflicts in the organization is an essential aspect of the managerial repertoire. There are five conflict-handling modes in an organization. Accommodating is the first mode in which people will give in to other individuals requirements and may be reluctant to stand for their own. Accommodating people will behave to shy away from conflict and may prefer to do what they are instructed rather than persist the unpleasant interaction. Such people perceive a conflict as a lose-win. Avoiding is the second conflict-handling mode. The mode denotes low cooperativeness and low assertiveness. The mode asserts that avoidant individuals neither assert to themselves nor accede to others. Such people remain above a fray and reject to engage in conflict. Collaborating is the third mode in which it denotes the high cooperativeness and high assertiveness. The mode asserts that the collaborative individuals will claim their needs while trying to work with a team to find the solution of the conflict. Competing is the fourth mode in which it denotes low cooperativeness and high assertiveness. The mode asserts that the competitive group of people will be aggressive about attaining their needs while being insensitive to another group. Comprising is the last mode. Comprising mode denotes moderate cooperativeness and moderate assertiveness. The mode suggests that comprising individuals attempt to arrange middle-of-the-road compromises without considering the depth of the situations (Miall et al. 2005).

Conflict negotiation models and situations in which each would be appropriate

The cooperative strategy, also known as the soft bargaining or arbitration approach is the first conflict negotiation model. The model advocates for the creation of common interests and common grounds. It involves compromise from both parties. The model is suitable when the communication failure occurs for instance between the radiologist and the intern pertaining forwarding of the patient x-ray results. The hard bargaining also termed as competitive strategy model is one in which the party demands everything and offers nothing. Pressure is applied to get what one want it is vital when one must win even the other individuals lose. This strategy is applicable when the dean of the medicine department wishes to compel the chair of a branch to adjust his program so that it remains suitable for all students in the medicine careers. The analytical model involves creating options that benefit all. One focuses on separating the people from the problem, interests, not positions (Miall et al. 2005). The model is applicable when there is a quarrel between the vice president and manager regarding poor performance of subsidiary staff to which no administrative action has occurred due to their positions in the hospital administration.

Professional development

In the professional development especially in nursing, the theoretical perspectives are being integrated into the clinical advancement programs. From Scotts case, professional development is evidence through the reorganization of the hospital facilitating new leaders in different departments. Scott also tries to change his way of doing duties to facilitate better performance and also, gets satisfaction not from the salary but from seeing his patients recover. The employees like Scott can approach their superior when the need arises and this exhibit a level of development.

References

Jones G., Poole D., & Murray P. (2006). The Contemporary Issues in the Management and the Organizational Behavior. Cengage Learning Australia. https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=B3jLCYTl8GIC&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=heuristics+and+escalation++commitment&source=bl&ots=TH3ysaAozH&sig=RjYmvjhKNEJEmzCHqLqJnARhF0g&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=heuristics%20and%20escalation%20%20commitment&f=false

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. NewYork: Springer.

Borkowski N. (2009). The Organizational Behavior in the Health Care. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=R9_AaW1Oq0gC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=Scott+dilemma+in+learned+optimism&source=bl&ots=6sHsqUFmmt&sig=MI3Y55RtnsLx0M2wZE4TSpnTwO0&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Scott%20dilemma%20in%20learned%20optimism&f=false

Miall H., Woodhouse T., & Ramsbotham O. (2005). Contemporary Conflict Resolution: The Prevention, Management, and the Transformation of the Deadly Conflicts. Polity. https://books.google.co.ke/books?id=dZ6au557QYEC&pg=PA8&dq=conflict+negotiation+models+chrone.com&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=conflict%20negotiation%20models%20chrone.com&f=false