Projects

UltraESB

The UltraESB is a Free and Open Source Enterprise Service Bus [ESB] that facilitates the integration of different systems. Integration is facilitated via "messages" which maybe HTTP/S messages (such as SOAP, REST, JSON, XML, Hessian, AS2, HTML, Binary, Text etc) or messages over many other ... [More] transports such as JMS, Email, TCP, MLLP/S etc, or Files FTP/S, SFTP etc. Messages may carry different types of payloads such as SOAP, XML, Text, CSV, EDI, HL7, JSON, Maps etc., and the UltraESB can accept messages over one transport in one format, and forward it to another system over another transport and another format. Messages passing through the UltraESB can be "mediated" via fragments of Java code or JSR 223 Scripting languages such as Ruby,Groovy,Javascript,etc. It supports Java IDE integration. [Less]

isits

This project presents a framework for the integration of information systems by providing a structurally abstracted and unified communication. This communication is also combined with similarity-comparison methods known as Alignment from Semantic Web Technology. Using implementations of abstract ... [More] Adapters for each IT-platform and conceptual model, this framework is amongst other features a hub and spoke integration system, which transmits five defined Elements of Communication, propagates changes and listens to change events. Each defined Adapter can listen to changes within a model and propagates events at five specific levels into its adapted model. These are classes, subclasses, concepts (individuals), relations (structural and instance) and generic restrictions which can be applied to classes and relations. This framework does not substitute middleware. It makes use of it and exceeds it in a way that communication is lifted on a common, and system and platform independent and comparable level strongly stemming from object-oriented-modeling as well as Semantic Web Knowledge Representation. This communication is supported by integrating methods that are of syntactic nature such as XSLT-Transformations and by semantic methods provided by alignment tools. These transformations are conducted by the integration bridge concept, where adapter-to adapter mapping is processed. [Less]

opensoa-book

This project hosts the source code for the examples used for "Open-Source SOA", which will soon be available as part of Manning's Early Access Program (MEAP). The Open-Source SOA book, as the name suggests, focuses on how to integrate many of the most popular open-source products ... [More] into a compelling SOA platform. The technologies that are described in detail are: Service Component Architecture. Enterprise Service Bus (ESB). Enterprise Decision Management/Business Rules. Web Service Mediation. Complex Event Processing. Business Process Management (BPM). Registry/LDAP Special emphasis will be placed on how to use these solutions together in a complementary fashion. An eclipse project that contains the source code examples (along with all required Tuscany libraries) can be found here. Visit the official project page for ongoing information about the progress of the book. [Less]

conflictresolution

Objective : • It includes an introduction to Conflict and Conflict Resolution. • How we Respond to Conflict • It includes the Causes of conflict. • Managing and Dealing with Conflicts. • Methods Of Resolving Conflicts. • Prevents Conflicts from Escalating. • Manage Conflicts ... [More] Strategically. • Key Factors. • Case study. So, now lets get into the topic and get an introduction to Conflict and Conflict Resolution. In thinking about and practicing Conflict Resolution, its useful to have some historical framework: The history of conflict resolution as applied behavioral science began in the 1940's with social physiologist Kurt Levin and his students are Yale university. the history of conflict resolution as applied behavioral science at workplaces began in he 1960's with NTI institute. Firstly what is Conflict. Understanding a conflict can help people find ways/strategies to resolve it, in turn defining Conflict Resolution. Conflict : Direct opposition, a clash or disagreement between people. As long as you have people dealing with people, making decisions or meeting deadlines - you will have conflict. A few points are worth reiterating before proceeding: • A conflict is more than a mere disagreement - it is a situation in which people perceive a threat (physical, emotional, power, status, etc.) to their well-being. As such, it is a meaningful experience in people's lives, not to be shrugged off by a mere, "it will pass…" • Participants in conflicts tend to respond on the basis of their perceptions of the situation, rather than an objective review of it. As such, people filter their perceptions (and reactions) through their values, culture, beliefs, information, experience, gender, and other variables. Conflict responses are both filled with ideas and feelings that can be very strong and powerful guides to our sense of possible solutions. • As in any problem, conflicts contain substantive, procedural, and psychological dimensions to be negotiated. In order to best understand the threat perceived by those engaged in a conflict, we need to consider all of these dimensions. • Conflicts are normal experiences within the work environment. They are also, to a large degree, predictable and expectable situations that naturally arise as we go about managing complex and stressful projects in which we are significantly invested. As such, if we develop procedures for identifying conflicts likely to arise, as well as systems through which we can constructively manage conflicts, we may be able to discover new opportunities to transform conflict into a productive learning experience. • Creative problem-solving strategies are essential to positive approaches to conflict management. We need to transform the situation from one in which it is 'my way or the highway' into one in which we entertain new possibilities that have been otherwise elusive. • Conflict is often needed, It: 1. Helps to raise and address problems. 2. Energizes work to be on the most appropriate issues. 3. Helps people "be real", for example, it motivates them to participate. 4. Helps people learn how to recognize and benefit from their differences. Conflict is not the same as discomfort. The conflict isn't the problem - it is when conflict is poorly managed that is the problem. • Conflict is a problem when it: 1. Hampers productivity. 2. Lowers morale. 3. Causes more and continued conflicts. 4. Causes inappropriate behaviors. • How we Respond to Conflict: Thoughts, Feelings, and Physical Responses: In addition to the behavioral responses summarized by the various conflict styles, we have emotional, cognitive and physical responses to conflict. These are important windows into our experience during conflict, for they frequently tell us more about what is the true source of threat that we perceive; by understanding our thoughts, feelings and physical responses to conflict, we may get better insights into the best potential solutions to the situation. • Emotional responses: These are the feelings we experience in conflict, ranging from anger and fear to despair and confusion. Emotional responses are often misunderstood, as people tend to believe that others feel the same as they do. Thus, differing emotional responses are confusing and, at times, threatening. • Cognitive responses: These are our ideas and thoughts about a conflict, often present as inner voices or internal observers in the midst of a situation. Through sub-vocalization (i.e., self-talk), we come to understand these cognitive responses. For example, we might think any of the following things in response to another person taking a parking spot just as we are ready to park: "That jerk! Who does he think he is! What a sense of entitlement!" or: "I wonder if he realizes what he has done. He seems lost in his own thoughts. I hope he is okay." Such differing cognitive responses contribute to emotional and behavioral responses, where self-talk can either promote a positive or negative feedback loop in the situation. • Physical responses: These responses can play an important role in our ability to meet our needs in the conflict. They include heightened stress, bodily tension, increased perspiration, tunnel vision, shallow or accelerated breathing, nausea, and rapid heartbeat. These responses are similar to those we experience in high-anxiety situations, and they may be managed through stress management techniques. Establishing a calmer environment in which emotions can be managed is more likely if the physical response is addressed effectively. The Role of Perceptions in Conflict: We define conflict as a disagreement through which the parties involved perceive a threat to their needs, interests or concerns. One key element of this definition is the idea that each party may have a different perception of any given situation. We can anticipate having such differences due to a number of factors that create "perceptual filters" that influence our responses to the situation: • Culture, race, and ethnicity: Our varying cultural backgrounds influence us to hold certain beliefs about the social structure of our world, as well as the role of conflict in that experience. We may have learned to value substantive, procedural and psychological needs differently as a result, thus influencing our willingness to engage in various modes of negotiation and efforts to manage the conflict • Gender and sexuality: Men and women often perceive situations somewhat differently, based on both their experiences in the world (which relates to power and privilege, as do race and ethnicity) and socialization patterns that reinforce the importance of relationships vs. task, substance vs. process, immediacy vs. long-term outcomes. As a result, men and women will often approach conflictive situations with differing mindsets about the desired outcomes from the situation, as well as the set of possible solutions that may exist. • Knowledge (general and situational): Parties respond to given conflicts on the basis of the knowledge they may have about the issue at hand. This includes situation-specific knowledge (i.e., "Do I understand what is going on here?") and general knowledge (i.e., "Have I experienced this type of situation before?" or "Have I studied about similar situations before?"). Such information can influence the person's willingness to engage in efforts to manage the conflict, either reinforcing confidence to deal with the dilemma or undermining one's willingness to flexibly consider alternatives. • Impressions of the Messenger: If the person sharing the message - the messenger - is perceived to be a threat (powerful, scary, unknown, etc.), this can influence our responses to the overall situation being experienced. For example, if a big scary-looking guy is approaching me rapidly, yelling "Get out of the way!" I may respond differently than if a diminutive, calm person would express the same message to me. As well, if I knew either one of them previously, I might respond differently based upon that prior sense of their credibility: I am more inclined to listen with respect to someone I view as credible than if the message comes from someone who lacks credibility and integrity in my mind. • Previous experiences: Some of us have had profound, significant life experiences that continue to influence our perceptions of current situations. These experiences may have left us fearful, lacking trust, and reluctant to take risks. On the other hand, previous experiences may have left us confident, willing to take chances and experience the unknown. Either way, we must acknowledge the role of previous experiences as elements of our perceptual filter in the current dilemma. These factors (along with others) conspire to form the perceptual filters through which we experience conflict. As a result, our reactions to the threat and dilemma posed by conflict should be anticipated to include varying understandings of the situation. This also means that we can anticipate that in many conflicts there will be significant misunderstanding of each other's perceptions, needs and feelings. These challenges contribute to our emerging sense, during conflict, that the situation is overwhelming and unsolvable. As such, they become critical sources of potential understanding, insight and possibility. Causes of conflict : 1. Poor communications 2. The alignment or the amount of resources is insufficient. There is: a. Disagreement about "who does what". b. Stress from working with inadequate resources. 3. "Personal chemistry", including conflicting values or actions among managers and employees, for example: a. Strong personal natures don't match. b. We often don't like in others what we don't like in ourselves. 4. Leadership problems, including inconsistent, missing, too-strong or uninformed leadership (at any level in the organization), evidenced by: a. Avoiding conflict, "passing the buck" with little follow-through on decisions. b. Employees see the same continued issues in the workplace. c. Supervisors don't understand the jobs of their subordinates. Conflict Styles and Their Consequences: Conflict is often best understood by examining the consequences of various behaviors at moments in time. These behaviors are usefully categorized according to conflict styles. Each style is a way to meet one's needs in a dispute but may impact other people in different ways. • Competing is a style in which one's own needs are advocated over the needs of others. It relies on an aggressive style of communication, low regard for future relationships, and the exercise of coercive power. Those using a competitive style tend to seek control over a discussion, in both substance and ground rules. They fear that loss of such control will result in solutions that fail to meet their needs. Competing tends to result in responses that increase the level of threat. • Accommodating, also known as smoothing, is the opposite of competing. Persons using this style yield their needs to those of others, trying to be diplomatic. They tend to allow the needs of the group to overwhelm their own, which may not ever be stated, as preserving the relationship is seen as most important. • Avoiding is a common response to the negative perception of conflict. "Perhaps if we don't bring it up, it will blow over," we say to ourselves. But, generally, all that happens is that feelings get pent up, views go unexpressed, and the conflict festers until it becomes too big to ignore. Like a cancer that may well have been cured if treated early, the conflict grows and spreads until it kills the relationship. Because needs and concerns go unexpressed, people are often confused, wondering what went wrong in a relationship. • Compromising is an approach to conflict in which people gain and give in a series of tradeoffs. While satisfactory, compromise is generally not satisfying. We each remain shaped by our individual perceptions of our needs and don't necessarily understand the other side very well. We often retain a lack of trust and avoid risk-taking involved in more collaborative behaviors. • Collaborating is the pooling of individual needs and goals toward a common goal. Often called "win-win problem-solving," collaboration requires assertive communication and cooperation in order to achieve a better solution than either individual could have achieved alone. It offers the chance for consensus, the integration of needs, and the potential to exceed the "budget of possibilities" that previously limited our views of the conflict. It brings new time, energy, and ideas to resolve the dispute meaningfully By understanding each style and its consequences, we may normalize the results of our behaviors in various situations. This is not to say, "Thou shalt collaborate" in a moralizing way, but to indicate the expected consequences of each approach: If we use a competing style, we might force the others to accept 'our' solution, but this acceptance may be accompanied by fear and resentment. If we accommodate, the relationship may proceed smoothly, but we may build up frustrations that our needs are going unmet. If we compromise, we may feel OK about the outcome, but still harbor resentments in the future. If we collaborate, we may not gain a better solution than a compromise might have yielded, but we are more likely to feel better about our chances for future understanding and goodwill. And if we avoid discussing the conflict at all, both parties may remain clueless about the real underlying issues and concerns, only to be dealing with them in the future. Now since we know what conflict is, lets move on to resolve conflicts through Conflict Management. Conflict Management : Conflict resolution is sustaining Peace. Conflict is a state of opposition between two or more individuals. Conflicts, invariably, arise between individuals at the workplace. Conflict management is the process of alleviating the conflict by making the concerned parties agree on a middle line of thinking and approach. Companies that recognize that internal conflict can be managed strategically will succeed in global marketplace. Conflict resolution is a range of processes aimed at alleviating or eliminating sources of conflict. The term "conflict resolution" is sometimes used interchangeably with the term dispute resolution or alternative dispute resolution. Processes of conflict resolution generally include negotiation, mediation and diplomacy. The processes of arbitration, litigation, and formal complaint processes such as ombudsman processes, are usually described with the term dispute resolution, although some refer to them as "conflict resolution." Processes of mediation and arbitration are often referred to as alternative dispute resolution. How to manage and resolve conflict situations : Conflict Management : • Conflict is one of the drivers for improved team performance. Managed well, conflict can lead to better decisions, more creative ideas and higher quality output from the team. Managed badly, it can stop teamwork and hinder individuals from achieving their personal goals. • The inability to resolve conflicts at the workplace leads to unrestrained loss of organizational time and resources. The Conflict Management System (CMS) is designed to provide the organization with an all-encompassing set of practices that help to prevent, manage, and resolve destructive conflict, and to foster healthier workplaces and work relations. Stulberg recognizes patterns common to all controversies. He calls them the Five-P's of Conflict Management: 1. Perceptions: People associate conflict with negative responses such as anger, fear, tension, and anxiety. Rarely do we perceive any benefits from being involved in a dispute. Our negative perceptions impact our approach in resolving conflict as we strive to eliminate the source of these negative feelings. 2. Problems: Anyone can be involved in a conflict, and the amount of time, money, and equipment needed for resolution will vary according to its complexity. 3. Processes: There are different ways to go about resolving disputes: Suppress the conflict, give in, fight, litigate, mediate, etc. 4. Principles: We determine the priorities of all resolution processes on the basis of an analysis of our fundamental values regarding efficiency, participation, fairness, compliance, etc. 5. Practices: Power, self-interest, and unique situations are all factors relating to why people resolve disputes the way they do. Dealing with Conflict Quickly and Effectively • Attack the problem, not the person • Focus on what can be done, not on what can't be done • Express feelings in a way that does not blame • Accept ownership appropriately for all or part of the problem • Listen to understand the other person's point of view before giving your own • Show respect for the other person's point of view • Solve the problem while building the relationship Methods for Resolving Conflict : Different methods for resolving situations that have reached the stage of open conflict are often used by many different organizations. It is important to understand these methods, so that people can decide which methods will work best for them in their specific conflict situation: Collaboration (One-on-one): Handle the new problem person-to-person. Use as many facts as possible and relate the issue to customer, team, or organizational needs. Be open and honest and conduct the session in a private setting. Document the concerns or issues, the dates, and the resolution, if any, and have both parties sign it Mediation (One-on-one with Mediator): • Mediation: When negotiations fail or get stuck, parties often call in an independent mediator. This person or group will try to facilitate settlement of the conflict. The mediator plays an active part in the process, advises both or all groups, acts as intermediary and suggests possible solutions. In contrast to arbitration, mediators act only in an advisory capacity - they have no decision-making powers and cannot impose a settlement on the conflicting parties. Skilled mediators are able to gain trust and confidence from the conflicting groups or individuals. Now that much of the world population has electronic access to ideas arriving half a world away, its only a matter of fact that self - help mediation offers a better way of managing every day human differences. How to be an effective mediator: An effective mediator needs certain skills in order to achieve credibility and results: • preferably a proven record of success in mediation or negotiation • the ability to gain the trust, acceptance and co-operation of conflicting parties • clear thinking in identifying the real problems and offering practical solutions • knowledgeable about the organisational structures, strategies and attitudes of the conflicting parties; as well as any relevant laws or agreements • tactful and diplomatic with the necessary powers of persuasion and strong character to nudge the participants progressively towards an agreement. How to run a mediation process: The mediation process can be broadly divided into the following three stages: Stage 1: Introduction and establishment of credibility During the first stage, the mediator plays a passive role. The main task is to gain the trust and acceptance of the conflicting parties, so that they begin to believe that he/she will be capable of assisting them fairly as a person on whom they can rely at all times. An experienced mediator will leave most of the talking to the disputing parties, but will listen attentively and ask probing questions to pinpoint the causes of the dispute, obstacles to a possible settlement and to identify the issues in order of priority. Once credibility is achieved and sufficient background knowledge gained, the mediator may begin to persuade the parties to resume negotiations, possibly with a fresh perspective. Stage 2: Steering the negotiation process In the second stage, the mediator intervenes more actively in steering the negotiations. He/she may offer advice to the parties, attempt to establish the actual resistance point of each party and to discover areas in which compromises could be reached. The mediator will encourage parties to put forward proposals and counter-proposals and (when a solution appears feasible) will begin to urge or even pressurise the participants towards acceptance of a settlement. Stage 3: Movement towards a final settlement An experienced mediator will know when to use diplomacy and when to exert pressure towards final settlement of the dispute. Timing and sensitivity to personalities and strategic positions is important to maintain credibility and avoid rejection by one or more parties in the process. He/she might use bi-lateral discussions with individuals or groups and during the final stages may actually suggest or draft proposals for consideration. In the event of a final settlement being reached, the mediator usually assists the parties in the drafting of their agreement, ensuring that both sides are satisfied with the wording, terms and conditions of the agreement. The process of mediation is dynamic and finely-tuned. A good mediator has to be flexible and inventive, must ensure that his/her personal values are not imposed on the conflicting parties. At most a mediator can advise, persuade or cajole them towards agreement. Mediation Guideline: Code of Conduct for Participants: During mediation you need some rules on how each side should behave, especially if there are a lot of people involved in the mediation. This is a checklist of rules and procedures which you can get each side to agree on before you start to run a mediation session. To save time, you can get the sides to agree on some of these issues before you start the formal medication sessions. • Trust and respect for chairperson (i.e. the mediator) and the mediating team (if more that one person) • Should there be translation and who should do it? • Is the venue secure and neutral? • Do the chairs and tables have to be re-arranged? • Size and leadership of delegations. • Should observers be allowed? • Agreeing to behave in a polite and disciplined way. • No blaming, verbal abuse or shouting. • No physical intimidation (e.g. pointing) and violence. • No presence and carrying of weapons. • Should smoking, drinking and eating be allowed? • No other distracting behaviour, e.g. caucussing while the other side is speaking. • How long should sessions be? • Equal time for each side to speak and who should speak first. • Opportunity to caucus and consult when necessary. • How should the mediation be minuted? • What parts of the discussion should be confidential? • How should the agreement be reported back to members? • Should the outcome of the mediation be publicised and how? • Negotiation: This is the process where mandated representatives of groups in a conflict situation meet together in order to resolve their differences and to reach agreement. It is a deliberate process, conducted by representatives of groups, designed to reconcile differences and to reach agreements by consensus. The outcome is often dependent on the power relationship between the groups. Negotiations often involve compromise - one group may win one of their demands and give in on another. In workplaces Unions and management representative usually sue negotiations to solve conflicts. Political and community groups also often use this method • Arbitration: Means the appointment of an independent person to act as an adjudicator (or judge) in a dispute, to decide on the terms of a settlement. Both parties in a conflict have to agree about who the arbitrator should be, and that the decision of the arbitrator will be binding on them all. Arbitration differs from mediation and negotiation in that it does not promote the continuation of collective bargaining. The arbitrator listens to and investigates the demands and counter-demands and takes over the role of decision-maker. People or organizations can agree on having either a single arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators whom they respect and whose decision they will accept as final, in order to resolve the conflict. Game Theory (Win – Win) : Game Theory is a complex and extensive science, but there are some simple elements that can be used in everyday dealings with people at work, including the following principles. Everyone is trying to achieve some kind of "payoff" or benefit, but the payoff may be different for different people and organizations. Examples of 'payoffs' might be: • Gaining a sense of achievement from completing a worthwhile and/or high quality job • Obtaining financial reward • Making a profit for the company • Getting the job done as quickly as possible in order to go somewhere better • Having a feeling of self-esteem or self-worth • Being recognized for one's efforts Team Counseling: The conflict is now a definite issue to the team. Collaboration and/or Mediation could not be done, were not appropriate, or did not work. Handle the conflict at a team meeting; put the problem on the next agenda and invite the necessary individuals. Again, bring up the facts; relate the issue to customer, team, or organizational needs. Be open and honest, discuss it in a private setting, document it, and have all parties sign it. Anyone on the team can put an issue or problem on the team agenda, however, this step should be used only after Collaboration, and Mediation has been ruled out. • Build teamwork and co-operation : Teamwork and co-operation are essential in an organization which aims to be effective and efficient, and not likely to be divided by conflicting factions. The best teamwork Usually comes from having a shared vision or goal, so that leaders and members are all committed to the same objectives and understand their roles in achieving those objectives. Important behaviors in achieving teamwork and minimizing potential Conflict includes a commitment by team members to: share information by keeping people in the group up-to-date with current issues express positive expectations about each other empower each other - publicly crediting colleagues who have performed well and encouraging each other to achieve results team-build - by promoting good morale and protecting the group's reputation with outsiders. resolve potential conflict - by bringing differences of opinion into the open and facilitating resolution of conflicts Collective Bargaining: Especially in workplace situations, it is necessary to have agreed mechanisms in place for groups of people who may be antagonistic (e.g. management and workers) to collectively discuss and resolve issues. This process is often called "collective bargaining", because representatives of each group come together with a mandate to work out a solution collectively. It puts democratic processes in place to achieve "integrative problem solving", where people or groups who must find ways of co-operating in the same organization, do so within their own agreed rules and procedures. Conciliation: The dictionary defines conciliation as "the act of procuring good will or inducing a friendly feeling". The process of conciliation in the workplace, whereby groups who are in conflict and who have failed to reach agreement, come together once again to attempt to settle their differences. This is usually attempted before the more serious step of a strike by workers or a lock-out by management is taken; and it has been found useful to involve a facilitator in the conciliation process. Skills for Conflict Managers Short course in conflict management: basic skills Advanced abilities and tactics in conflict management Advanced conflict assessment tools "The skills required for conflict management are simple, but they rarely are acquired as part of growing up. Learn them and use them" (Mayer, 1990, 58). The consensus in the professional literature is that if we are to become competent managers of interpersonal conflicts, skills in two arenas must be mastered: • conceptual arena • skill competence arena Conceptual skills. The first arena is conceptual: an individual must understand conflict's causes, styles, strategies, tactics, and world-views. An individual must understand theories of how and why conflicts arise, where and when conflicts habitually occur, and the range of strategies and tactics that may be utilized to manage conflict. Skill competence. The second arena is skill competence. In addition to understanding communication and conflict theory, an individual must become competent in a variety of basic communication skills and develop a working repertoire of conflict management skills. A lengthy of abilities and tactics can be specified for advanced conflict management. However, two basic communication skills are required if parties hope to manage conflict productively: • listening • asking questions Individuals new to conflict management should work first to enhance basic communication skills. Wilmot & Hocker suggest some basic skills for conflict managers. More advanced assessment tools follow these basic skills. Short course in conflict management: basic skills : The skills that serve you well in intimate relationships may be inappropriate with transient, unimportant connections; at work; with casual friends; or with distant family. You will need to adapt these seven general communication skills to each situation: 1. Speak your mind and heart. Someone needs to speak up and say what he or she wants, thinks or feels. However obvious this point seems, the expression of conflict often is bogged down because someone is afraid to articulate needs clearly. Difficulty in expressing preferences directly may result in indirect, passive or aggressive communication .Instead of blaming, switching topics or avoiding, make sure you address the problem as the issue Speak up! 2. Listen well. By this time, you are aware that listening is a skill that underlies all productive conflict management. Focus on what the other person is saying, not your rebuttal. Search for what might be right about what you hear instead of what is wrong and let the other know you are doing this. Give some feedback that indicates that the other has been heard. You might say, “I am intrigued about your idea about taking six months off. I'm worried about how I will cover your job, but let me hear more.” Remember that any sentence beginning with “Yes, but . . .” disqualifies anything you are going to say next. 3. Express strong feelings appropriately. In conflict, you will have very strong feelings at times. You will be angry, hurt, enraged, sad, joyful, hopeful or despairing. Careful, respectful expression of these feelings helps, rather than damages, conflicts. Avoid squelching your feelings; just learn to express them clearly in a nondestructive manner. Never attack, for any reason, if you want a long-term relationship! 4. Remain rational for as long as possible. Remaining rational does not mean staying calm, cool, collected or distant. Rationality means keeping in mind that you are trying to solve a problem and that you must remain connected to the other person throughout the interaction. Anything that diverts you from this task hurts conflict management. Summarize and ask questions. 5. Review what has been said. Ask about points that need clarification, using open-ended questions. Specialize in asking questions for which you do not know the answer. 6. Learn to give and take. Be fair by taking your turn and giving others their turns. No productive resolution comes from a one-sided conversation. You may solve a short-term problem; but in the long term, fairness counts. 7. Avoid all harmful statements. Attacks create enemies. Biting criticism drives people out of the interaction. Making the other person wrong means reducing the chance that you will ever make anything right. As medical doctors are taught by the Hippocratic oath, "Do no harm." Advanced Abilities and Tactics for Conflict Management Abilities. An "advanced" list of abilities required for collaborative negotiation may appear daunting. Refining old skills and learning new ones is a life-long endeavor. • Ability to listen • Ability to distinguish between interests and positions • Ability to elicit interests from others • Ability to convey cooperative expectations • Ability to model cooperative behaviors • Ability to state and explain one's own needs and expectations • Ability to be open to creative solutions • Ability to create a pool of possible solutions • Ability to integrate options for solutions • Ability to negatively reinforce unnecessary competition • Ability to forgive and permit others to save face • Ability to differentiate among types of issues and to match responses to issues • Ability to set criteria for solutions • Ability to deal with difficult people • Ability to analyze the problem from the other’s perspective • Ability to check perceptions without unilaterally acting on one’s own beliefs • Ability to differentiate emotional from substantive issues • Ability to adapt to the style of other disputants • Ability to act "as if" the other party is negotiating collaboratively Tactics. Some specific tactics related to the abilities listed above include: • Listen in order to defuse emotion • Listen for facts • Paraphrase and validate emotions • Paraphrase substantive content • Ask "How" and "What" questions • Make "I" statements • Know one's own BATNA • State needs clearly • Ignore positions and negative attacks • Identify interests • Reframe statements into mutually solvable issues • Identify issues • Identify commonalities • Establish objective criteria for solutions • Establish ground rules for negotiation • Set the agenda for formal negotiation • Brainstorm or use other strategies to generate options. Advanced Conflict Assessment Tools Assessment tools help to analyze a conflict. Based on analysis, one can make a more informed choice when responding to a conflict. Four useful assessment tools are: • Wilmot-Hocker assessment guide • Australian conflict map • Metaphor analysis • Typology of conflict (Ref: http://www.cios.org/encyclopedia/conflict/Eskills4_assessmenttools1a.htm) Key Managerial Actions / Structures to Minimize Conflicts: 1. Regularly review job descriptions. 2. Intentionally build relationships with all subordinates. 3 Conduct basic training about: Like: Interpersonal communications, Conflict management, Delegation. 4. Welcome suggestions from everyone. Key factors also include : • Great Listening Skills • Flexibility • Willingness to Change Case study: In case study, people provide their perspective on conflict The argument You're a manager in a busy campaigning organization. A conflict between a staff member and long-term volunteer has been developing. Trudy, the volunteer, wants more responsibility, while Chris wants to stay in control of the project that he has been working on for months. You've been working in your organization’s other office for the last two months. On your return it's clear that the situation has really deteriorated, both of them are very upset and say that they can't work with the other. Options u can try : Get them together to discuss what is going on. 2. Arrange to keep Chris and Trudy apart for a while. 3. Arrange to meet them both individually. • Now if we select option 1:Lets get them together to discuss what is going on. We can face any of the 3 options. Chris isn't in the office at the arranged meeting time. People think he's at lunch, but he's been gone a long time 2. Chris and Trudy agree to the meeting, but after a few minutes start to raise their voices and accuse each other of being unreasonable 3. Chris and Trudy refuse to sit down with each other, saying their differences are too great. • Suppose Chris and Trudy land up with the 3rd option saying they can’t manage with each other, their differences are too great. What would u do ? Warn them that this could become a disciplinary matter 2. Say they will have to come and see you separately 3. Say you will review the project and their roles You decide to meet Chris and Trudy separately. Outcome • Talking to Chris and Trudy separately is essential to find out more about what is going on. Getting this information is the first step in being able to work towards a solution. However, we have to be really clear that were adopting a different strategy rather than giving one person preference over the other. This will help one knew what difference the 2 have with respect to each other and can help us find a middle solution to solve their problems. Bibliography : http://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#what http://www.cios.org/encyclopedia/conflict/index.htm http://www.managementhelp.org/intrpsnl/basics.htm http://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/index.asp For Case study : Voluntary Matters 3. http://www.voluntarymatters3.org/conflict_management/scenario/conflict_1_1_c_b.html [Less]

Sirocco Multi-Cloud Manager

Sirocco is an open-source multi-cloud manager that provides unified access to multiple heterogeneous Cloud Providers through a single point of entry. Sirocco exposes a unified IaaS API that is an implementation of the DMTF CIMI standard. This API is extended to allow users to express placement ... [More] constraints on the resources they want to provision across multiple clouds. Sirocco performs the matchmaking between these constraints and the capabilities of the providers using a rule-based system and a planning engine. [Less]