Anna and I did most of the planning, experimental set-up and bench work. However, our third groupmate, Betty did not contribute in any of these aspects. The fourth member, Carla, did some work but did not make any major contributions.
As a result, Anna and I became very close and confided in one another our feelings and dislike for Betty. Neither of us willingly talked to her and usually avoided her. Betty and Carla, on the other hand, were on better speaking terms and got along with each other.
When it came to the report, Anna and I sent the data to both Betty and Carla in spite of our unwillingness to do so because of their dearth of contribution. However, Betty could not understand the results which we had already explained briefly. She mailed us repeated asking questions we had already answered and we had to give reasons for our decisions in the laboratory to substantiate our results. Anna and I were frustrated as we had to spend a lot of time replying to her and had to work on our reports at the same time. As the deadline drew closer, we just replied as succinctly as possible and only gave the most relevant information.
Finally, Betty wrote a complaint letter to the person-in-charge saying that Anna and I were uncooperative and refused to share the data with her. Anna and I were outraged on knowing this.
Theoretically, resolving conflicts seems to be a very logical process of taking a step back, thinking and negotiating. What then should Anna and I have done to resolve this conflict?
'Peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of creative alternatives for responding to conflict -- alternatives to passive or aggressive responses, alternatives to violence.' -Dorothy Thompson