Conflict in Diversified Organization without Proper Communication Line and Means to Solve Conflicts - Case Study Example

Case Study Report Course Name and Code Institution Name Faculty Name Insert Your Name Insert Your Number Instructor’s Name 14 April 2009 Executive Summary The case study illustrates conflict that occurred in a research facility. The research facility, which was sanctioned by Moscow’s Institute for Biomedical Problems (IBMP) was determined to understand the dynamics that were associated with long-term isolation. The organization collaborated with international researchers including. Three international researchers were included one of them been a woman – Judith Lapierre. In addition, there were four Russian astronauts were in a smaller chamber that was next to the international research chamber. Within the period of the research, a conflict occurred which resulted in one of the international research from Japan been replaced by a Russian researcher. During the time of the research, a conflict occurred during the New Year Eve in which two Russian astronauts fought while another Russian astronaut forcefully kissed Lapierre and the following morning the astronaut tried again to kiss Lapierre by force. The IBMP did not take any measures to bring together and solve the problem. Thus, it resulted in one of the International researcher from Japan been replaced by a Russian researcher and the link between the two chambers was barred. After the completion of the research, the Russian scientists downplayed the scenario. This case study illustrates conflict in an organization that is diversified and where there is no proper communication line and means to solve the problems/ conflicts. The researchers and IBMP should have devised ways and strategies to control conflicts. Introduction Individuals that are present in an organization present different personalities and approaches towards accomplishment of tasks. Thus, the individual differences within an organization contribute a lot to their behaviour. According to theories and models revolving on human behaviour, there are usually fundamental consistencies that underline the behaviour of all individuals that can easily be identified and modified to reflect the individual differences. Understanding the individual consistencies is important because they are usually predictable. Therefore, the individuals within an organization should understand behaviours of people within them and devise ways that ensures that conflict does not occur. Moreover, restraining and respecting other persons personality reduces the chances that conflicts can occur. Conflicts are usually inherent but measures should be in place that reduces the chances of conflicts occurring (Robbins, & Judge, 2007). Individual restrains and difference is evident in the case study resulting in the fight and subsequent forceful kissing. The individuals in the case study come form different cultures and perspectives towards behaviour is also varied. It is important to factor into consideration conflict resolutions in any organization and in the study of organisational behaviour. Each person taking a course in organisational behaviour will have a better hand in the way that they will prevent and solve conflicts in their day-to-day activities. Different people with different personalities usually come together in any organization, thus the large grouping is one factor that may contribute into conflict. Because of this diversification of employs plus having strategies to prevent and solve conflicts will ensure that the organizational team is focused and aim to achieve the goals and vision of the organization. 3. Question 1 Conflict is inevitable because of diverse personalities that are attributed by ego, pride and self-concept (Robbins, & Judge, 2007). Conflicts usually follow a process; the stages are conflict situation, awareness of the situation, realization manifestation of the conflict, suppression of the conflict and after-effects of the conflict situation. These stages were not adequately followed in the case study because there were some lapses in resolving the conflict (McShane & Travaglione, 2004). In the case study, conflict was clearly illustrated by the participants. The relationship between the two Russian astronauts was not friendly resulting into the fistfight. The second conflict was between Lapierre with the Russian astronaut who forcefully kissed her and later in the morning tried again to kiss her. The third episode of conflict was between IBMP and the International crew. Nevertheless, a conflict played silently between the IBMP (Gushi) and the public after the information was made public. Moreover, another conflict between IBMP and Japanese Space research agency, which resulted in the re-call of their researcher who was in the research facility. This illustrates difficulties that the people within the research facilities had to undergo. Question 2 In the case study, the cause of conflicts is diverse. The relationship between the two astronauts was not friendly since the begging. Introduction of the vodka made the two Russian astronauts to realize their differences and animosity resulting in the fist fighting injuring each other. The explosion of this conflict made or contributed to the other Russian astronaut to utilize the chance by forcefully kissing Lapierre (McShane & Travaglione, 2004). Since the conflict was not solved, the same astronaut tried again in the morning to kiss Lapierre. This illustrates that one incident led to another. Most of the animosity and conflicts originated from the Russian astronauts and may be attributed to long isolation because the case study states that the Russian astronauts had completed half of their 240 isolation days. This then made the relationship between the international crew and IBMP to be evident. The international crew wanted this problem to be solved but they were not given a chance by the IBMP. The off hand approach that was taken by IBMP through the assertion of Gushi by stating at the end of the research “If the crew can’t solve problems among themselves, they can’t work together” (McShane & Travaglione, 2004, p. 457). This resulted in IBMP and Japanese Space Agency recalling their member who participated in the research. Nevertheless, IBMP never accepted this shortcoming even after it become public and they referred to the incident as “one fleeting kiss, a clash of cultures, and a female participant who was too emotional” (McShane & Travaglione, 2004, p. 457). Even though the IBMP psychologist’s was claiming that, it was just a fleeting kiss but it was in its entity a conflict. Question 3 The aim of conflict management styles and strategies is to reduce the influence of conflict and to support different viewpoints and ideas so that it enables the prevention of conflicts. Various views can be utilized in managing conflicts when they occur (Robbins, & Judge, 2007). In the case study, one of the Russian astronaut kissed Lapierre, the only woman in the group forcefully. Lapierre fought and was left by the astronaut and in the morning, the astronaut repeated the same thing again. In this case, Lapierre used force to solve temporary the conflict at the Eve time and the following morning (McShane & Travaglione, 2004). The Internal crew on the other hand took a different perspective. They complained through writing to the IBMP. This was an appropriate strategy but IBMP did not take any initiative and left the problem like that. Japanese Space agency another International participant withdrew their member from the research facility. This was aimed at preventing the researcher from been injured or faced with conflict within the research facility. On the other hand, Gushi the IBMP psychologist said that the researchers themselves should resolve their problems in a mature way. IBMP took a step further by closing the entrance that formed the linkage between the International crew and the Russian astronauts. Moreover, the public or other institutions did not prop the problem to understand clearly the backbone of all the conflicts and measures that are in place to prevent it from re-occurring. Question 4 The different people within the case study applied different interventions in controlling their conflicts. Lapierre did not solve the problem rather she forced her way out of the conflict, a factor that contributed to the call back of the Russian astronaut the following morning. Moreover, through the letter to the IBMP, they (International Crew) were requesting assistance to solve the conflict. Rather than for the IBMP accepting to mediate the conflict, they put it aside leaving the researchers to solve their problems (McShane & Travaglione, 2004). On the other hand, the Japanese called back their member while the Russian astronauts’ connection with the International chamber was sealed off. Conversely, the two Russians fought rather than solving their differences amicably. All the strategies that were employed to some extent worked while others like that one of Lapierre worked temporarily (Wilson, 1999). At night, Lapierre forced her way out of the conflict with the Russian astronaut but it was not the appropriate strategy since the same astronaut came back in the morning and tried to repeat the same incidents. Nevertheless, after sealing off the two chambers and recalling of the Japanese research prevented any further conflict. This worked according to this research. The strategies that were employed were for a short period and appropriate measures were not put in place to determine future complications or conflicts (Wilson, 1999). For example in the case of Lapierre and the Russian astronaut, she – Lapierre was right by forcing herself out of the astronaut. However, she should have tried solving this problem by taking with the astronaut and reasoning it out. Moreover, they could have a third party to help them solve the difference. This could have prevented the same incident re-occurring in the morning. The two Russian astronauts who fought illustrate lack of ways to solve differences. This is because the two astronauts had their difference for a while and each person within the research facility knew (Wilson, 1999). Luckily, one of the researchers reduced the risk of the conflict getting out of hand through removal and hiding of the knives in the kitchen, while the other men stopped the two astronauts who were fight. This was a nice intervention but there did not help in resolving the problem. They should have mediated and solve the problem in its eternity. Moreover, they would ban the use of substances such as alcohol e.g. Vodka that may contribute to explosion of minimal conflict (McShane & Travaglione, 2004). The international community and IBMP should have helped to solve the difference between the researchers and astronauts. Rather than removing their participants from the research, the IBMP should have placed into consideration strategies that could have prevented re-occurrence of the same incident. Generally, all players should improve the way that they solved and intervened in methods of ensuring individual behaviour is under check. Conclusion Conflict management is an important topic in organizational behaviour because it makes the team to achieve their goals without distractions. The case study illustrates a conflict that occurred in a research facility in Russian where International crew and astronauts different in terms of behaviour. Two Russian astronauts fought while one of the Russian astronauts aggressively kissed Lapierre, the only woman in the research facility. In the research facility, there were three international participants and four Russian astronauts. The main conflicts episode were the fighting of the astronauts, one astronaut aggressively kissing Lapierre, IBMP especially Gushi ignoring the request of the international crew and IBMP downplays in incident when it was evident in the public. The source of the conflict may be attributed to the difference that the two Russian astronauts had with each other. Their difference was rekindled by the presence of vodka resulting in the fistfight. Another Russian astronaut took advantage of the incident and forcefully kissed Lapierre. This situation also affected the IBMP and the international crew requesting to be assisted in the matter. However, their requested was not forthcoming. The interventions that were used in resolving the conflict included forcefully fighting by Lapierre, ignoring the situation an approach taken by IBMP and re-call of their researcher approach taken by Japanese space agency. Bibliography McShane, S. & Travaglione, T., 2004, Organizational Behaviour on the Pacific Rim, North Ryde: McGraw Hill, p. 456 -457. Robbins, S. & Judge, T., 2007, Organizational Behaviour, New York: Pearson/ Prentice Hall Publishers. Wilson, F., 2003, Organizational Behaviour and Gender, 2nd Ed. London: Ashgate Publishers. Wilson, F., 1999, Organizational Behaviour: A Critical Introduction, London: Oxford University. Wilson, F., 1999, Organizational Behaviour: A Critical Introduction, London: Oxford University Press. Read More