CONFLICTS AND STRESS MANAGEMENT

The ideas of Nathan and Tom conflict about using the people as assets. According to
Nathan, people are assets that can be used or maybe killed on behalf of him or his
organization. On the other hand, Tom totally disagrees with Nathan and he tries to
prevent civil deaths as much as possible. Tom first perceives and feels the conflict
with Nathan during the operation in Berlin. Nathan ordered Tom to leave the German
man, although he knows that the man would be killed by the police. Tom felt guilty
about the death of this man, since he would survive his life if he did not leave him.
Toms feelings can be observed from his angry behaviors and body expressions. He
cannot know what to do for a moment because the life of the man could cost the
operation. Then, Tom obeys the orders of Nathan unwillingly. For him life of one
person is more important than the operation. However, he behaves in an
accommodating manner that he does not mind his own ideas. He follows Nathans
way of accomplishing tasks. The same thing happens, when the argument arises
between Nathan and Tom after the Berlin operation. Tom prefers to behave in
accommodating intention again. Though Tom disputes the opinions of Nathan and
the way the operation completed, he accepts his ideas. This can be because he is
concerned about his career in spying, which depends on Nathan or maybe this time
only one person died and he thought he could forget this in the future. He chooses
not to break up their relationship. However, this event causes the hostility feeling of
Tom toward Nathan. His accommodating behavior brings Tom to Beirut.

In Beirut, the conflict reaches to the top. Even though Tom tried to complete
the operation without causing any other death by selecting the hard way of doing,
Nathan did not want to leave the task to the chance and used the suicide
commandos. At the end of the operation 75 civil people died. Despite Nathan, who
thinks that the operation was successful since the target man died, for Tom the
operation was a crime. After the Beirut operation, Tom separates their ways with
Nathan. The outcome of their conflict is dysfunctional due to this separation and
smash of the team. Maybe the only way of forming a functional outcome was the
accommodating intention of Tom again, because Nathan was applying the
philosophy of his organization, CIA and Toms understanding had the risk to damage

the operation. Thus Nathan could not change his opinions about peoples deaths.
However, Tom could never confront his feelings and if it was not this time, the next
time separation would occur.
This time Nathan faces with his past ideas about using the people as assets.
CIA sees Tom as an asset whose life has no importance at the point that the welfare
of CIA will be obtained. Nathan conflicts with the opinions of CIA about Tom. Maybe
for the first time in his work experiences, he gives importance to someones life and
he puts himself in a risky situation in which he can lose his retirement and all
savings. Furthermore, he cheats his organization for which he served for 30 years.
He behaves in a competing manner against CIA from the beginning of the film. He
desires to accomplish his own interests which are to rescue Tom and Elizabeth,
regardless of the impacts on the organization. Either he would win, meaning Tom
would be saved; or CIA would win, meaning Tom would die and the relationships with
China would improve. The outcome is functional for Nathan since his goals to rescue
Tom are achieved. However, it is dysfunctional for CIA since the goals of the
organization are not achieved and CIA falls into a crisis situation. On the other hand,
whether CIA had weaker and more flexible culture, it would divert the dysfunctional
outcome to functional outcome by questioning itself and understanding the weak
points of the organization. This event could be a change point for it. In that way, it
would strengthen its weak points and will not face with similar problems or cheatings
in the future. However, in such a bureaucratic and hierarchic organization it is very
difficult to achieve these.
Another conflict is observed between Nathan and his rival Charles in the film.
Nathan irritates Charles. He is in a competition with Nathan, although Nathan is
already at the point of retirement. Charles feels happy and successful when he beats
Nathan. He has great hostility toward Nathan. Depending on these, it can be said
that the reasons of the conflict lies on the personal variables, not on only the
structure of the work that makes them competitors. Charles handles the conflict in a
competitive intention and he shapes his behaviours as assertive verbal attacks to
Nathan and as overt questioning. Nathan answers these behaviours in the similar
way but he does not show his hostility as much as Charles does. At the end, Charles
loses and Nathan wins the conflict.

During the film risky conditions and conflicts create stressful situations for
both Nathan and the other parties. Nathan is a high self-esteem man who trusts on
his skills and intelligence too much. He does not let himself feel the stress easily. At
the times when his stress level increases, he relaxes himself by drinking. That is to
say, he chooses the way to forget the events with alcohol rather than showing it in
the relations. In the arguments with others, he never becomes excited, anxious, or
angry or maybe he does not show his feelings to other people. He always maintains
his calm and relaxed manner. This attitude, which can be his personal conflict
management technique, relaxes the other parties and they behave more logically
rather than behaving emotionally. Tom is not such a person who maintains his calm
manner. His behaviors are directed by his emotions when he is under stress. For
example, he shouts, beats the other party, or breaks the things around. Charles gets
angry and excited easily and he shows his feelings with his facial and body
expressions or with assertive words. No other person in the film is successful at
managing conflict and stress as Nathan.