Values and Conflict in Organisations - Essay Example

HRM512 - Values and Conflict in Organisations Name Institutional affiliation Tutor Date 1. Ethical theories most applicable in conflict resolution Conflict resolution is the process that is involved in resolving conflict in order to bring a conflict into an end. Thus, conflict resolution entails any process that may result to conflict reduction. Conflict resolution may involve procedures like conflict management; the parties in conflict may continue with the conflict but adopt tactics that are less extreme. Parties in conflict reach an agreement on issues that need to be settled; these issues could be the underlying causes of conflict (Wertheim et al, 2006, p.85). The aggressive nature of man makes conflicts to prevail in every environment. The approaches used in conflict resolution are founded on principles, issues, theories and acceptable positions that are viewed by scholars as viable approaches. Conflict resolution approaches should not be ignored as they have proven relevant in resolving a majority of modern disputes in work places. The level of applicability of the many theoretical approaches in conflict resolution may vary from one to the other based on its founding principles and characteristics (Cannarella & Piccioni, 2005, p.18). This part of the report will focus on two of the theoretical approaches which are perceived as most viable. Civil and criminal law This approach focuses on settling disputes and coordinating interests without resorting to lethal force as a means to end dispute. The use of any such force is confined to a single state authority whose aim is to prevent vigilant style justice (Fritzsche, 2005, p.44). Most of the legal jurisdictions in many states have court annexed systems which provide a variety of approaches like alternative dispute resolution, quasi-voluntary and non-voluntary in civil, voluntary and family matters (Kiddler, 2007, p.7). There are also parallel non-legal approaches to voluntary conflict resolutions which provide educational resources as well as any other support in resolving conflicts. Such non-legal systems are for instance, Community Conflict Centres, Conflict Resolution Network and private consultancy firms across NSW. This conflict resolution approach can be considered as the most ethically applicable since the system of law is adversarial. As such, it is not a win/win, mediation oriented or conciliation but instead it coordinates actions and help to resolve disputes (Brown, Giampetro-Meyer & Williamson, 2004, p.63). Therefore, the two parties in a civil suit contend in a win/lose situation for either monetary relief or for a verdict to be declared guilty or innocent arising from the relief determined by a jury or a judge and not the two parties. The determination by the judge or the jury is based on the existing legal frameworks like arbitration, legislation and private judging (Nabatchi, Bingham & Good, 2007, p.51). Any of the process selected by the jury or the judge may be determined by such factors as relationship between the parties, remedies, cultivated differences, cost, and confidentiality among others. This report considers civil and criminal law as one of the most ethical approach to conflict resolution as long as the legal process is fair and credible. The main reason why credibility is important in the legal process is because the ruling made by the judge or the jury should not be influenced by other factors that are not within the legal framework and unethical grounds (Matyók, Senehi & Byrne, 2011, p.31). The legal process offers an opportunity to both the parties without favor or prejudice thereby leaving the dispute to be resolved by independent third party which apply all the existing means to ensure that the dispute is resolved by restoring justice. Also available in the legal process is the opportunity provided to the disputing parties to voluntarily resolve conflict. Therefore, the approach can be very helpful especially in the case when the disputing parties are not ready to confront each other (Condliffe, 2008, p.44). Moral philosophy Philosophers have also made much contribution in conflict resolution. Most philosophers of the Roman times argue based on the existence of the natural law that govern people. Philosophers Kant and Bentham have published essays on how peace in the world can be maintained by applying moral norms (Velasquez, 2002, p.25). Communitarianism and liberal universalism are the two main theories that moral philosophers support for having influenced the conflict resolution process in many ways. Tension exists between liberal universalism of human rights especially in regard to freedom from the government interfering for the sake of the interests of other people (Soni, 2004, p.137). Communitarian writers on the other hand maintain that these rights must not be maintained and should be controlled in order to pave way for traditional values including freedom as a value. However, the positions held by people regarding the issues of rights are very controversial with some people believing that they have the right to engage into actions while other people consider such an act as morally wicked (Bell, 2005). Communitarians believe that there are communities that are brought together by language, culture, functions, location and interests. Such communities deserve their rights to be respected based on the shared values that unite the people. According to Kydd (2010), communitarianism can be very helpful in resolving conflicts though it may not work well in some institutionalized religions which cannot break their links for the purpose of liberalism and struggle for human rights. Leaders like Charles Taylor have also supported this call on a united community (Fetherston & Nordstrom, 2005, p.97). However, communitarianism does not deny people from having individual rights as well as small communities with the community or the national unity. Each person should have individual rights and sub-communities should also feel free to operate and live cohesively. What is most important is to protect the right of the community from harmful acts of freedom. Using the example of Quebec and Canada, Taylor stresses on the importance of recognizing distinctiveness of particular group’s culture which should not subject the group to discrimination as a second-class citizenship (Velasquez, 2002, p.27). Therefore, moral philosophies seem to emphasize on the right of freedom based on distinct features. By appreciating this fact, nobody should be discriminated and instead everyone should be respected for the natural circumstances that define such a person. For instance, some natural factors are race, ethnicity and gender (Cederman & Gleditsch, 2009, p.488). Moral philosophers believe that these factors should be put into consideration first while resolving a conflict. By appreciating rights, each individual would feel appreciated in case of a conflict. 2. (a) is conflict inevitable? Conflict can be defined as a situation of disagreement or lack of compatibility between parties based on their respective values, belief, interest and needs which they may attain in defending their position. Fighting altitude cannot be a solution to resolving a conflict. What is necessary is a practical cooperative approach to resolve a conflict in order to actualize the diverse perceptions between the parties in conflict (Heys, 2007, p.432). Conflict can occur between many parties like between individuals, between individuals and organizations, between states and states among others. The issue on whether conflict is inevitable can be viewed from the divergent views of theories. To begin with, when conflict is inherent in nature, it is considered as inevitable while a conflict that occurs contingently is termed as avoidable by many conflict theories. For instance, Freud is of the opinion that internal and intraphysic conflicts are inevitable (Goodwin & Griffith, 2007, p.17). Marxists share a different opinion on this and instead argue that it is the class conflict that is inevitable. Marxists refer to the situation between owners of the means of production and the majority of bulk property verses the low class and the workers. A conflict between these classes of people is inevitable due to the various factors that define the two classes. There exists an objective opposition of interest which the members of the different classes may not consider as conscious conflict (Heys, 2007, p.433). However, a subjective view of the different socio-political classes favors the existence of conscious conflict due to the cordial relations existing between the upper and the low class systems. Therefore, the subjective view of Marxists theory makes it to appear false about the existence of conscious conflicts which are inevitable. Marx also agrees that false consciousness can be created into the low class people through ideology in order for them to love the upper class consciously. Whichever the scenario, there exists divergent beliefs, values and interests between the upper and the lower class thus making them to differ in various ways. Another fact that makes conflict inevitable is the biological-psychological nature of human beings which make different people to have innate aggression. This pessimistic view is evident in nature but for literal purposes, it is treated as incorrect because it can make the conflict resolution process as not desirable and unachievable (Heys, 2007, p.931). It is true that different people have different aggression level but this aggressive behavior may be tamed in order to create room for conflict resolution. b) Arguments for win-win conflict resolution approach This is a collaborative approach to help the parties in conflict work together in order to end up in a win-win solution to the problem; the final solution is the one that addresses the interest of both parties effectively (McGrane, Wilson & Cammock, 2005, p.264). The process starts by identifying the concerns of the parties in order to get alternative solutions solutions that meet the concerns of both parties and end up with mutually beneficial results. This approach has several advantages as listed below: The solution to the actual problem is achieved Both parties are satisfied by the win-win situation Mutual respect and trust is realized It ensures that the parties’ relationship grows towards a better cooperation in future The negotiator earns a good reputation for successfully ending the conflict The process is cooperative implying that the responsibilities are equally shared There are several disadvantages too for this approach: In order to come up with mutually acceptable outcome, the commitment of both parties is necessary; this may not be possible since one of the parties may fail to participate The collaborative process may take a long time making this approach to be ineffective when immediate solutions are needed More time and effort may be required than other methods, this calls for a committed negotiator (Vivar, 2006, p.208). 3 (a) additional negotiation process This process entails various procedures when trying to resolve a conflict. One of the important things to consider during the additional process is how to handle the emotions. The various emotions that should be handled include: hurt, anger, resentment and regret (Brandon & Robertson, 2007, p.42). Anger which is a form of energy that is not appropriately used or when it misdirected, the final result of this is destructive to the conflict resolution process. Meanwhile, if anger is appropriately used and well mobilized, it can have positive contribution to ending conflict. On the other hand, hurt comes as a result of individual’s feeling about unfairness in the process (Brandon & Robertson, 2007, p.43). Regret appears after one party experiences anger and resentment making him or her to have sorrow and pain. Another important process entails building of personal relationships. There should be a co-operative relationship between the conflicting parties by having some empathy in a conflict situation (Fetherston & Nordstrom, 2005, p.96). This can be nurtured in several ways like growing concerns on each others interests, developing trust for each other and repairing the relationship that has not been working well. Another important step is the one that aim to remove blocks that hinder co-operative negotiating. This is particularly useful when negotiating a win-win approach to conflict resolution. Finally, the negotiator should have an alternative in the case of negotiations collapsing (Brandon & Robertson, 2007, p.44). (b) Values of third party negotiations to conflict resolution A third party is a good conjunction in the case where a win-win situation fails to work out. This approach provides an alternative way to avoid any walk out when a win-win approach fails to work out. It is the role of the third party to introduce the addition negotiation process by most importantly removing the barriers to negotiation. This process can take various approaches like mediation, where the third party helps to come up with some resolution (Wertheim, et al, 2006, p.41). It can also be through adjudication where the third party is a judge or a jury where makes decision guided by an existing legal framework. Alternatively, the third party can use conciliation where the third party is entitled to investigate and propose a number of solutions. The solutions are subject to be accepted or rejected by the parties. However, the third party may be a hindrance to resolving conflict since the best approach is co-operative in nature. The third party’s role cannot be overruled especially in the case of addition negotiation process by being a neutral party (Shaw & Barry, 2009, p.89). References Bell, D. (2005). Communitarianism. In The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta. Brandon, M., & Robertson, L., (2007). Conflict and dispute resolution: A guide for practice. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Brown, M., Giampetro-Meyer, A. & Williamson, C. (2004). Practical business ethics for the busy manager. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Cannarella, C., & Piccioni, V. (2005). Public organizations and local rural development: An empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics and Organizational Studies, 10(2), 16-23. Cederman, L. & Gleditsch, K. (2009). Introduction to Special Issue on “Disaggregating Civil War”. Journal of Conflict Resolution 53(4): 487-495. Condliffe, P. (2008). Conflict management: a practical guide.  3rd ed. LexisNexis Butterworths: Chatswood, N.S.W.  Fetherston, A. & Nordstrom, C. (2005). Overcoming habitus in conflict management: UN Peacekeeping and War Zone Ethnography. Peace & Change, 20, (1): 94–119. Fritzsche, D. (2005). Business ethics: A global and managerial perspective. New York: McGraw Hill. Goodwin, C. & Griffith, D. (2007). The conflict survival kit: Tools for resolving conflict at work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Heys, A. (2007). Australian master human resource guide. Sydney: CCH Australia, pp 930-937. Kiddler, D. (2007). Restorative justice: Not ‘rights’ but the right way to heal relationships at work. International Journal of Conflict Management, 8(2): 4-22. Kydd, A. (2010). Rationalist Approaches to Conflict Prevention and Resolution. Annual Review of Political Science, 7(13): 101-121. Matyók, T., Senehi, J. & Byrne, S. (2011). Critical Issues in Peace and Conflict Studies: Theory, Practice, and Pedagogy. New York: Lexington Books. McGrane, F., Wilson, J., & Cammock, T., (2005). Leading employees in one-to-one dispute resolution. Leadership and Organizational development Journal, 26(4): 263-279. Nabatchi, T., Bingham, L. & Good, D. (2007). Organisational justice and Workplace mediation: A six-factor model. International Journal of Conflict Management, 18(2): 148: 174. Shaw, W., & Barry, V. (2009). Moral issues in business. (First Asia-Pacific ed.). Australia: Cengage Learning. Soni, V. (2004). Watching, dreaming, waiting: Non-violence, social change, and the re-imaging of religion. The Online Journal of Peace and Conflict Resolution, 1(6), 136-151. Wertheim, E., Love, A., Wittlefield, L., & Peck, C. (2006). Skills for resolving conflict. (2nd ed.). Melbourne: Erudition Press. Velasquez, M. (2002). Business ethics: Concepts and cases (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Vivar, C. (2006). Putting conflicting management into practice: A nursing case study. Journal of nursing management, 14(3): 206-211. Wertheim, E., Love, A., Wittlefield, L., & Peck, C. (2006). Skills for resolving conflicts (2nd Ed). Melbourne: Erudition Press. Read More