Conflict Resolution The Office Quotes

We've searched our database for all the quotes and captions related to Conflict Resolution The Office. Here they are! All 10 of them:

There have been ample opportunities since 1945 to show that material superiority in war is not enough if the will to fight is lacking. In Algeria, Vietnam and Afghanistan the balance of economic and military strength lay overwhelmingly on the side of France, the United States, and the Soviet Union, but the will to win was slowly eroded. Troops became demoralised and brutalised. Even a political solution was abandoned. In all three cases the greater power withdrew. The Second World War was an altogether different conflict, but the will to win was every bit as important - indeed it was more so. The contest was popularly perceived to be about issues of life and death of whole communities rather than for their fighting forces alone. They were issues, wrote one American observer in 1939, 'worth dying for'. If, he continued, 'the will-to-destruction triumphs, our resolution to preserve civilisation must become more implacable...our courage must mount'. Words like 'will' and 'courage' are difficult for historians to use as instruments of cold analysis. They cannot be quantified; they are elusive of definition; they are products of a moral language that is regarded sceptically today, even tainted by its association with fascist rhetoric. German and Japanese leaders believed that the spiritual strength of their soldiers and workers in some indefinable way compensate for their technical inferiority. When asked after the war why Japan lost, one senior naval officer replied that the Japanese 'were short on spirit, the military spirit was weak...' and put this explanation ahead of any material cause. Within Germany, belief that spiritual strength or willpower was worth more than generous supplies of weapons was not confined to Hitler by any means, though it was certainly a central element in the way he looked at the world. The irony was that Hitler's ambition to impose his will on others did perhaps more than anything to ensure that his enemies' will to win burned brighter still. The Allies were united by nothing so much as a fundamental desire to smash Hitlerism and Japanese militarism and to use any weapon to achieve it. The primal drive for victory at all costs nourished Allied fighting power and assuaged the thirst for vengeance. They fought not only because the sum of their resources added up to victory, but because they wanted to win and were certain that their cause was just. The Allies won the Second World War because they turned their economic strength into effective fighting power, and turned the moral energies of their people into an effective will to win. The mobilisation of national resources in this broad sense never worked perfectly, but worked well enough to prevail. Materially rich, but divided, demoralised, and poorly led, the Allied coalition would have lost the war, however exaggerated Axis ambitions, however flawed their moral outlook. The war made exceptional demands on the Allied peoples. Half a century later the level of cruelty, destruction and sacrifice that it engendered is hard to comprehend, let alone recapture. Fifty years of security and prosperity have opened up a gulf between our own age and the age of crisis and violence that propelled the world into war. Though from today's perspective Allied victory might seem somehow inevitable, the conflict was poised on a knife-edge in the middle years of the war. This period must surely rank as the most significant turning point in the history of the modern age.
Richard Overy (Why the Allies Won)
Anyone who commits a crime, misrepresents the facts, or tells a lie may put himself in a situation that forces him to deal with cognitive dissonance. Generally, the person is well aware that doing those things is wrong, and therefore bad. Yet he likely doesn’t think of himself as a wrongdoer, or a bad person, so he’s forced to reconcile these conflicting beliefs. In an interrogation situation, the monologue serves as a means of aiding that reconciliation in a way that’s conducive to a confession, because it relieves the person of the mental discomfort that’s caused by the dissonance. The monologue is meant to prevent the person from focusing on the ramifications of the wrongdoing by keeping him in short-term thinking mode. We help him alleviate the pain he’s feeling by giving him a remedy: a convincing argument, strengthened by rationalization, minimization, and socialization, that resolves the conflict. The resolution allows him to acknowledge the bad act, without having to accept the premise that he’s a bad person.
Philip Houston (Get the Truth: Former CIA Officers Teach You How to Persuade Anyone to Tell All)
A person who takes a gun holds it to somebody’s head, and intimidates them for money or take their property from them. The person who gets into an argument and his only resort is to take a gun or some offensive weapon and eliminate the other person. I understand that many of these persons do not have reasoning skills. They do not have the basic conflict management skills, to resolve basic issues between themselves and others. So they resort to what they know best, which is violence. I’m talking about the animalistic instinct. Former Assistant Commissioner of Police with the Royal Bahamas Police Force, Mr. Hulan Hanna.
Drexel Deal (The Fight of My Life is Wrapped Up in My Father (The Fight of My Life is Wrapped in My Father Book 1))
Dr. Bentz takes the last seat at the table. He seems present and engaged but studiously unperturbed. He loves conflict resolution, Ainsley knows. A poster of Jimmy Carter hangs in his office.
Elin Hilderbrand (The Identicals)
On the other hand, if you are ambitious and have a low tolerance for pain, then you are likely setting yourself up for a very difficult life indeed. In this case, your ambition may have deeper psychological roots which are causing you to continually sabotage yourself. Furthermore, regardless of who you are and what your situation is, your childhood wounds, traumas, and tragedies will keep recreating themselves on the battlefield. While psychological warfare in life is inevitable, this is not an excuse for not being psychologically healthy and strong. Work on your psychological health, through counseling or any other means available to you, in order to be as psychologically fit as you can be; for when psychological battles occur, you don't want to self-destruct from your own uncontrollable nueroses.
Mark B. Warring (The Art of Psychological Warfare: 51 Principles of Conflict Resolution, Negotiation, Strategy, Office Politics, Career Building, Self Help, & Motivation for Success & Happiness in Business & Life)
The master warrior constantly works on and refines his personal psychology so that the actions of others don't cause him to self-destruct as a result of taking attacks personally.
Mark B. Warring (The Art of Psychological Warfare: 51 Principles of Conflict Resolution, Negotiation, Strategy, Office Politics, Career Building, Self Help, & Motivation for Success & Happiness in Business & Life)
You are reading the words of a complete schmuck, so take everything I say with a grain of salt.   Wouldn't it be nice if all authors admitted what I just said? The world would surely be a lot less confusing if they did...
Mark B. Warring (The Art of Psychological Warfare: 51 Principles of Conflict Resolution, Negotiation, Strategy, Office Politics, Career Building, Self Help, & Motivation for Success & Happiness in Business & Life)
There is no King of Kings. We all answer to somebody. This includes the world's wealthiest and most powerful people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. All of us are Paupers to somebody. We are all somebody's bitch. In a sense, we are in the same boat.
Mark B. Warring (The Art of Psychological Warfare: 51 Principles of Conflict Resolution, Negotiation, Strategy, Office Politics, Career Building, Self Help, & Motivation for Success & Happiness in Business & Life)
A college student who wants to file a complaint of sexual assault within the campus disciplinary system informs a university employee such as an assistant dean for student life, or perhaps the Title IX coordinator. That person eventually forwards the complaint to a university disciplinary panel that may be composed of, for example, an associate dean with a master's degree in English literature, a professor of chemistry, and a senior majoring in anthropology. Unlike criminal prosecutors, members of the disciplinary panels do not have access to subpoena powers or to crime labs. They often have no experience in fact-finding, arbitration, conflict resolution, or any other relevant skill set. There is, to put it mildly, little reason to expect such panels to have the experience, expertise, and resources necessary to adjudicate a contested claim of sexual assault. Making matters worse, most campus tribunals ban attorneys for the parties (even in an advisory capacity), rules of procedure and evidence are typically ad hoc, and no one can consult precedents because records of previous disputes are sealed due to privacy considerations. Campus "courts" therefore have an inherently kangoorish nature. Even trained police officers and prosecutors too often mishandle sexual assault cases, so it's not surprising that the amateurs running the show at universities tend to have a poor record. And indeed, some victims' advocacy groups, such as the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN), oppose having the government further encourage the campus judicial system to primarily handle campus sexual assault claims, because that means not treating rape as a serious crime. A logical solution, if federal intervention is indeed necessary, would be for OCR [US Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights] to mandate that universities encourage students who complain of sexual assault to report the assault immediately to the police, and that universities develop procedures to cooperate with police investigations. Concerns about victims' well-being when prosecutors decline to pursue a case could also be adjudicated in a real court, as a student could seek a civil protective order against her alleged assailant. OCR could have mandated or encouraged universities to cooperate with those civil proceedings, which in some cases might warrant excluding an alleged assailant from campus.
David E. Bernstein (Lawless: The Obama Administration's Unprecedented Assault on the Constitution and the Rule of Law)
with Mark, it will be me.” Jack could have pushed back, but nothing in Tucker’s voice even hinted that the matter was up for debate. “Then we’ll need two days for prep.” “That’s fine.” The extra day was to talk him out of it, not to prep. But Jack let it be for now. “All right, then. See you Wednesday morning.” CHAPTER 15 At 10:00 a.m. Friday morning, Mark Towson was seated at the end of a long rectangular table in Peabody Hall. His father was at his side. They were in one of the oldest buildings on campus, a restored redbrick gem in the heart of the university’s historic district. Peabody was originally Teacher’s College, and it was still home to the College of Education when Mark’s great grandparents had met at the University of Florida. It was now the Office of the Dean of Students, including Student Conduct & Conflict Resolution—the site of Mark’s disciplinary hearing. “Just try to relax,” his father said. They were alone in a room that was much smaller than Mark had expected. Lying awake all night, he’d envisioned something on the order
James Grippando (A Death in Live Oak (Jack Swyteck #14))