Methods in Organizations - Research Paper Example

Research Paper Bargaining and Negotiation: The Best Conflict Resolution Methods in Organizations Introduction Conflict is inevitable in organizations for the simple reason that no two human beings have the same interests and concerns. Often, conflict in the workplace is about trivial and personal issues. Whenever conflict arises between two employees no matter how frivolous the cause, management must get in the middle to address the issue, otherwise the conflict will lead to general frustration in the workplace and subsequently erode its efficiency (Fox & Taylor, 2003). For example, an otherwise conscientious employee suddenly turns difficult and temperamental at work after a promotion he was angling for went to a co-worker. If management leaves this discontented employee alone, productivity is expected to suffer. This paper chose conflict resolution and management as research topic in the belief that such conflict is seldom given the organizational attention that it deserves since it descends to a personal level. There is also the perception that conflict resolution is a costly, complicated and thankless undertaking. In the process of upholding bargaining and negotiation as the best methods of resolving this type of organizational conflict, the paper also discussed related human resource management strategies commonly intended to create a complement of committed and motivated employees. These include: equal opportunity in promotion and advancement; fostering cooperation and camaraderie in the workplace; attending to employees’ physical, emotional and psychological well-being; and hiring people who not only possess the necessary skills but the willingness and capability to work in a team. The research found that conflict resolution is possible without professional counselors such as occupational psychologists, whose services not many organizations can afford. Managers and supervisors can perform this function just as well with some training on non-directive counseling or “listening with understanding (Skaperdas, 1998).” This works because the manager serves as catch basin by which the discontented employee can vent his feelings and thus relieve his frustrations to move to a problem-solving frame of mind. It was also learned that the appropriate HRM strategies mentioned above are good preventive measures. Research Conflict is part of organizational life, which becomes even more pronounced in highly politicized and hierarchical organizations. One view of organizational structure looks at it as the outcome of a political contest for control within the organization, which at the same time provides the participants with further advantages in the political struggles because of their structural positions (Johnson, 1976). Once people of different capabilities and estimation of their self-worth come together, they invariably form a political organization. According to organizational theory, each individual and group in an organization is expected to play a specific role, like organs in the human body, and that all institutions, laws and traditions in a society are designed to support those in power or groups perceived as superior to others. Consequently, conflict arises when any of that individual or group breaks out of its specific role and aspire for a higher position or a greater share of the organization’s resources (Bacal, online). Conflict within an organization is thought of as unpleasant, counterproductive and time-consuming, but it need not be destructive if the energy expended on it is directed towards problem-solving and organizational improvement. Instead of viewing it as a destructive force, it is seen as a factor to stimulate members in increasing their knowledge, skills and contribution to organizational innovation and productivity. Rather than try to eliminate conflict or suppress its symptoms, the best way is to manage the conflict so that it enhances instead of destroys people and organizations. To do this, all parties must understand the nature of conflict in the workplace. The more modern approach to organizational conflict puts a premium on clarity, responsiveness and adaptability as the keys to organizational success, which can only be done by cooperative communication (Skapderas, 1998). Even the notion that the organization is better off avoiding conflicts is one of the major contributors to the growth of destructive conflicts in the workplace (Skaperdas, 1998). Such an attempt at repression often results in non-action, secrecy and administrative “orbiting,” in which management acknowledges the problem but avoids dealing with it. Instead of avoidance, elimination or suppression, Bacal (online) proposes the less confrontational approach of conflict management that would utilize cooperative communication extensively. The intention is to enhance people and organizations rather than destroying them. This more modern approach calls for a functional view that looks at conflict as a productive force that could increase the knowledge and skills of members and stimulate innovation and productivity within the organization. There is some distinction between conflict resolution and conflict management in terms of results. While conflict resolution may end the issue once and for all with the approval of one or the two parties, conflict management is an ongoing process that may never reach a satisfactory solution (Knowles & Saxberg, 1971). An example of the latter type is the conflict started by gossip, which can only be managed but never resolved. In other words, the conflict may be prevented from getting ugly so as to cause disruption in the workplace but the ill feelings in the victim of the gossip remains although the symptoms are held in check. In conflict resolution, it is necessary to see how the participants view the conflict. Those who perceive conflict as negative use words like fight, clash and quarrel, while those with a positive outlook prefer words like challenge, diversity and debate (Fox & Taylor, 2003). This particular motivation and behavior will help determine what method of conflict resolution is appropriate, which in turn depends on the conflict-handling mode required by the personalities of the parties and the attendant circumstances, even culture. The conflict-handling modes are competing, collaborating, compromising, accommodating and avoiding. Competing – being adversarial in character, this is done by arbitration and is effective when no ties exist between the involved parties but destructive when both have a shared history. Whatever the outcome, both the winner and loser sustain damages. Collaborating – described as the classic “win-win” situation, this is the most successful conflict resolution because acceptance of the outcome is longer lasting. Compromising – to succeed, this conflict-handling mode requires face-to-face negotiation or mediation. For example, an employee may compromise by withdrawing from the race for promotion to give way to a co-employee. The conflict resolution provides both parties partial satisfaction. Accommodating – this is the most cooperative mode in that one sacrifices his interest for the other party. Avoiding – avoidance is effective when the outcome has little importance and unrelated to the dispute but care must be taken that it does not breed serious problems later on. The avoidance and competition modes have the potentials to become the most destructive to an organization. Avoidance is in fact one of the biggest contributors to the growth of destructive conflicts in the workplace (Bacal, online). When you sweep conflict under the rug, you have people giving up on addressing or resolving the problem and they spend more time and energy protecting their own interests than working for a common goal. Meanwhile, the conflict simmers on until it eventually destroys both people and organization. A strong sense of competition, on the other hand, will bring conflict resolution nowhere if the two parties involved have a shared history and both will be ruined if the conflict goes unresolved. In this case, not one of the parties is expected to give in (Fox & Taylor, 2003). Conflicts can be avoided if organizations fulfill the physical, emotional and psychological needs of their employees. Such needs are not meet when discrimination is practiced in the grant of benefits and promotion. When conflict arises, it is essential that both parties fully accept the agreed outcome. The mediators and managers of conflict need to be aware of the history, background and important issues, which gave rise to the dispute. Equally important will be the perceptions of the individuals and how they see the nature of conflict itself, their own preferred method of dealing with conflict, and the culture or cultures within which they are operating. Issues are relatively easy to resolve; opposing styles are far more intransigent. Like fashion, mediation is about changing perceptions, and the most successful mediators, like the most successful fashion houses, are those who use different modes or styles to suit their different clients, rather than always relying on a single timeless garment to influence hearts and minds (Johnson, 1976). Summary The main concern of conflict resolution is help the participants see the situation as an opportunity for problem solving and for reducing emphasis on personal confrontation and struggle for supremacy by improving teamwork and productivity. In our conflict scenario, where a disgruntled employee makes a scene and snarls at co-workers when he failed to land an anticipated promotion, the resolution depends on that employee’s personality and behavior, including the specific circumstances surrounding the awarding of the promotion. Based on the research, the employee involved may have a negative outlook, in which case mediation or arbitration is necessary through the competing mode. The purpose of conflict resolution is to find through a review if he deserves the promotion more than the other party. If he does, and management recalls the promotion in his favor, he and the organization will have to contend with another disgruntled employee – the one that just lost the promotion. Cases like this could have been avoided if organizations hire people strong on team spirit who will subordinate their interests for the organization as a whole. References 1.Bacal, R. (online). “Organizational Conflict: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.” Available at: http://conflict911.com/conflictarticles/orgconflict.htm 2. Fox, G. & Taylor, D. (2003). “Conflict Management: Style isn’t just for the Catwalks.” Training and Management, August 2003. 3. Johnson, R.A. (1976). “Management, Systems and Society: An Introduction.” Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear Publishing Co. 4. Knowles, H.P. & Saxberg, B.O. (1971). “Personality and Leadership Behavior.” Reading MA: Addison Wesley. 5. Skaperdas, S. (1009). “On the Formation Alliances in Conflict and Contest.” Public Choice 96. Read More