The case scenario is below. I also included the conflict resolution toolbox I would like to use.

1. Define conflict and explain why it exists - addressing the causes of conflict and multiple aspects of diversity. Title this section Conflict in Diverse Workforces.
2. Evaluate your own behaviors and mindsets toward diversity and inclusion in the workplace based on the Inclusive Leadership Continuum. Title this sectionDiversity and Inclusion.
3. Apply an appropriate conflict analysis model (from The Conflict Resolution Toolbox)
4. Identify a conflict in the case study (from The Conflict Resolution Toolbox: Chapter 3 - The Conflict Story: A Case Study). Title this section Case Study Conflict.
5. Choose an appropriate conflict resolution model (from The Conflict Resolution Toolbox: Chapters 4-12) and explain why it is appropriate for diagnosing the conflict you identified. Title this sectionConflict Resolution Model.
6. Assess one process used to resolve conflict and explain its outcomes. Title this section Process and Outcomes.
7. Provide the strategic direction of the model. Title this section Conflict Analysis Results.
8. Include at least four references from material outside the textbook to support your explanations.

THE CONFLICT STORY: A CASE STUDY Throughout the Toolbox, each of the models described will be applied to the same conflict situation to illustrate both how the model can diagnose a conflict and how it can give guidance to the practitioner based on that diagnosis. The basic outline of the situation is given here. A CASE STUDY The parties were part of a small work team in a government agency. It consisted of two clerks, Bob and Diane. Bob had been in the same posi- tion for over 12 years, with a good performance record. Diane was new, with 1 year in the position. They were both union members and co-equals, meaning that they had the same pay and job classification, a CL-1. They did similar tasks in the office, but for the sake of effi- ciency and personal interest, Bob did more accounting work and Diane did more client-service work. The office supported a large group of professional engineers who were also union employees and reported to Sally, the manager. Bob and Diane also reported to Sally, who was new to the job as of two months ago. After two months of settling in, Sally revealed to the whole depart- ment that she was there with a mandate to revamp the workflows, change and improve the way services were provided, and generally improve the department's slipshod performance and poor quality standards.

MODEL #6: THE LOSS AVERSION BIAS with Cal Furlong BACKGROUND OF THE LOSS AVERSION BIAS Reciprocity, as we have seen, is a powerful heuristic for understanding human behavior in many situations, one that can help us diagnose why certain decisions or choices are made, as well as give us strategies for engaging people in reciprocal relationships. As described at the beginning of the previous chapter, both the Law of Reciprocity and this model operate as virtual "natural laws," deep cognitive patterns that strongly affect our behavior in managing conflict and relation- ships. This second powerful law for understanding behavior is the Loss Aversion Bias. Consider some of these strange but common behaviors: Taxes vs. Rewards: To reduce the use of plastic bags, it was found that imposing a cost of $.05 per bag reduced plastic bag use by 42%. Yet offering to pay a reward of the same $.05 for not using a plastic bag resulted in no reduction at all.1 Free Trials: One of the most commonly used and effective marketing tools is offering a free trial of a service to potential customers. Netflix is one of the most successful companies to market using this 1. Homonoff, Tatianna, "Will a Tax on Disposable Bags Curb Their Use?," (2017), https://thedecisionlab.com/ approach, converting almost every single one of their free trial users into paid subscribers. Many, of course, initially signed up to get free access for a while, fully intending to cancel before having to pay; 93%, however, stay and pay. The Stock Market: When a stock goes up, many people who own the stock choose to sell it and capture the gain. When a stock goes down, however, stockholders are much more likely to hold on to the losing stock, behaving like they haven't lost anything until they actually sell it. What is going on? Why would rational people sell a stock going up in value sooner than sell one that's losing money? Why would many people stop using plastic bags when charged five cents but not stop using the bags when offered the exact same amount as a reward? It turns out that people have a powerful built-in bias, one that motivates us to avoid anything seen as a loss much more powerfully than seeking anything seen as a gain. The thought of losing, in other words, is far more abhorrent than the excitement of winning the exact same amount is appealing. And the vast majority act accordingly, even when it may not be in their best interest. Loss aversion unconsciously guides a great deal of human behav- ior. Although the idea of seeking gain and avoiding loss seems pretty obvious, what isn't obvious is the fact that feeling the pain of losing registers at least twice as sharply as the satisfaction of winning or gaining. 2 In other words, the feeling of losing is amplified by at least a factor of two. The result is that the fear of losing overpowers any desire of winning by a large margin. In our previous examples, this means: Our use of plastic bags is unchanged even when we're rewarded for the behavior, as the gain is simply not as valuable to us as avoiding a tax. When we directly lose money for using the bags, however, we change behavior quickly.