The Key Issues in Managing Conflict within the Workplace - Essay Example

?The 21st century has seen the coming up of new technologies that have resulted in rapid changes, as well as increased competition both of which put pressure upon the workforce. This causes stress upon the workforce and in turn increases the eventuality of conflicts and workplace incivility in form of deviant behaviour. Management therefore, has to brace itself for such occurrences and adopt proper tools of handling conflicts. There are the five ways of handling conflict as highlighted by the Dutch Test and they include dominating, compromising, avoiding, accommodating and integrating. Either of these will be used depending on the scenario at hand, which is a task befalling HR managers, as they must correctly assess the scenario and identify which conflict management style would be effective. From a broader perspective, HR professionals should look to equipping their workforce with not only technical skills but also intercultural and interpersonal skills to enable them deal with the rising pressure (Trudel and Reio 2011, p.395). Conflicts at the workplace are inevitable and need not be feared as non-existence of them indicates unhealthy work relationships. The focus should be on making the conflicts constructive as constructive conflicts are characterized by increased cooperation, stronger relationships, improved outcome quality, being mostly cognitive and separating the person from the problem. Therefore, managers should look to proper handling of conflicts rather than eliminating them all together so as to reap these benefits. The primary tool of handling conflicts is communication, according to the communication systems approach, where conflicts are seen to be a result of failed or poor communication between the conflicting parties. There are elements within communication systems established in an organization, where the elements are the parties communicating, medium being used and messages being sent and/or received. When these elements are interconnected, the communication systems adopted may trigger the process of conflict. Hence, managers are urged to set up proper communication systems to ensure that where conflicts arise, they are constructive (Collins 2008, p.6). Following the communication systems approach, conflicts are viewed as episodes that occur during the process of communication. These episodes come about when the aforementioned elements interconnect and subsequently all the elements affect the conflict process and its outcomes. In addition, according to this approach, the conflict process arises in two contexts- physical and psychological, where the former refers to the attributes of the actual physical environment such as the size of the room, noise in the surrounding area and how furniture is arranged within the room. The latter refers to culture of an organization that determines how communication will take place; both these contexts affect the way in which the sender constructs the message and the way the recipient interprets it (Collins 2008, p.6). Regardless of the approach to be adopted, HR should understand that failure to properly handle conflicts within the workplace increases the level along with frequency of future conflicts. This goes on to affect productivity, job performance and employee learning. Closely linked to conflict management styles is workplace incivility as it is seen to determine the outcome. Workplace incivility refers to individual responses to certain scenarios that are brought about by negative actions. These responses may be counterproductive and as such should be monitored to avoid further escalation and repeat of workplace conflicts. When dealing with conflicts it is important to look into the instigators together with the targets of deviant behaviour; and also consider that deviant behaviour could be a trigger, cause or outcome of workplace conflicts. Additional exchanges as a result of deviant behaviour create a conflict spiral where a conflict will be seen to escalate and possibly spread to ‘outsiders’ that is, people not involved in the conflict originally (Trudel and Reio 2011, p.395). An in-depth analysis into workplace civility provides a definition that states it is low-intensity behaviour going against respectful workplace norms often meant to create no harm. Any intention to cause harm is easily dismissible and deniable yet the behaviour is centred on acting without consideration or concern for others, where the outright result is offending or distressing the target of the deviant behaviour. This makes it ambiguous and difficult to pinpoint which subsequently implies that it is unclear what course of action should be taken. Where a course of action is imperative as the effects of deviant behaviour easily creep and take root within an organization (Trudel and Reio 2011, p.395). For instance, cases of bullying in hospitals towards student nurses by senior nurses and doctors, more so as they undertake their clinical placements as part of the learning process. Bullying can be cited as a form of deviant behaviour as student nurses find themselves in distressing situations. Once such a habit has taken root within an organization, it becomes difficult to curb as it is often a matter of hearsay and the senior employees are more believable. Other than workplace civility, other causes of conflict include performance, sickness, absenteeism and relationships between colleagues. Performance is cited as the prevalent cause of conflicts in non-profit organizations and private services. Theft and fraud along with sex discrimination and unequal pay are also cited as being causes of disputes at the workplace, in UK, the statutory dispute resolution procedures were affected in October 2004. These were to be enacted in a three-step process, broken into two, which encompassed disciplinary, dismissal and grievance procedures; as the overall procedure was implemented into the 2002 Employment Act. The first three-step procedure included putting down in writing the matter of dispute and inviting the employee to a meeting to discuss it, holding a meeting with the employee and notifying them of the disciplinary action and their consequent right to appeal and lastly if requested, inviting the employee to a meeting to appeal the decision. The second three-step procedure takes care of the grievance part where an employee has to send a statement to the employer putting down in writing the circumstances of their grievance. Then the employer invites the employee for a meeting to further discuss the grievance and deliver a decision along with informing them of their right to appeal. Lastly, the employee gets an opportunity to forward their appeal in opposition to the decision arrived at. A survey done indicates that when the statutory discipline procedure came into effect, many organizations embraced resolving disputes as a HR function (Cipd 2007, p.6). When resolving conflicts, a crucial factor taken into consideration is what caused the conflict or how did it come about. There is a theory that identifies a concept known as psychological contract where an employee goes into a particular organization with certain expectations. If these anticipations are not fulfilled, then a conflict arises. However, it is upon the employee to clarify what he/she expects from the employer and the organization overall to avoid conflicts. When the employer is informed of the expectations, it is upon them to ensure they are met and where there are disagreements a mutual understanding is arrived at through open negotiation. Following this theory, conflicts are differentiated into either functional or dysfunctional. The former refers to conflicts that give rise to disagreements and opposition towards the meeting of organizational objectives; whereas, the latter refers to disagreements and opposition that arrive at no specific resolution and organizational objectives are ignored (Lussier 2008, p.290). Functional conflicts can be likened to constructive conflicts as they challenge the status quo and present innovative change that leads to improved performance. In establishing a business model to be upheld, managers should develop sound conflict resolution proficiency. For instance, a manager should be able to recognize employees that use manipulation to stir up emotions thereby creating conflict, in order to cover up for their shortcomings at the workplace. He/she must show intolerance to such deviant behaviour to avoid it simmering into a much worse scenario or proliferating. When resolving conflicts, two factors should be brought into consideration- communication and emotions. Managers should ensure that there is clear, concise and correct communication of information within an organization; as well as avoid taking an emotional approach to arriving at decisions as this clouds judgement. Employees should also be made aware of how to avoid indulging their emotions when a conflicting issue arises. In a wide context, management should define acceptable behaviour, tackle conflict head-on, identify why the intentions of conflicting parties, categorize conflicts according to their importance so as to avoid getting involved in petty situations and lastly view conflicts as a chance to teach and learn (Myatt, 2012). Employee Relations Seemingly associated with employee satisfaction along with commitment, informal climate of involvement as well as consultation are crucial at the workplace. This is because employee attitudes are identified through such involvement and they help determine levels of productivity and contribution to business performance. It then becomes of great significant to HR managers to manage employee relations and more so as a strategy. However, in reality the role of managing employee relations is unrecognized and invisible making the task ambiguous and unappreciated. Employee relations should be given attention and properly managed because they facilitate building of mutually beneficial relationships and development of trust between employees and their employers. This is because when employees feel that they can trust their employers they feel they are being treated fairly and a proper work-life balance is established (Cipd 2005, p.2). Employee relations are related to the whole function of HR where the two are seen as being synonymous but a clear distinction can be identified within their boundaries. This particularly so with smaller organizations that take on employee relations as a unit under the overall HR functions. Organizations agree that representative structures are fundamental in setting up means of consultation between employers and their employees, as these facilitate effective communication. In general, organizations need to be able to deal with employees on an individual as well as representative basis. However, only concerning certain issues that includes pension, retention and recruitment. It has been underscored that employee relations need to be an in-house function where organizations must familiarize themselves with and foresee employment law (Cipd 2005, p.3). In contemporary organizations, securing employee commitment, voice and engagement, cooperation and partnership have been cited as being predominant features of employee relations. This follows the argument that suggests differing interests between management and employees as being the paramount cause of conflicts. Trade unions carry on the task of disputing managerial interests and looking after employee interests in terms of pay and lastly ensuring proper working conditions are in place; this makes it easy for them to mobilize workers (Gilmore and Williams 2012, p.264). Trade unions are described as being organizations that consist of primarily or entirely workers of one or more descriptions and adhere to certain regulations with the principal aim of ensuring harmonious relations between employees and employers Employee voice is distinguished by the ability of employees to have influence on the actions of their employers. This may be either in the form of direct representation undertaken by management or indirect representation undertaken by trade unions. According to Purcell and Georgiadis (2007), the current trend suggests that there has been a marked growth in direct representation where employers are looking to be more involved with their employees. Apart from this, another trend suggests that organizations have been tending towards non-union structures, hybrid arrangements, and a shift in mix of the way the consultative voice is exercised. In the UK, there has been a mix of two out of three types of ideal trade unions- market and class. Where the former is characterized by interest organizations who primarily take up market functions and the latter are organizations involved in the struggle between capital and labour. The third ideal category is social that refers to organizations involved in advancing social justice to its members. Trade unions are viewed as secondary organizations as the members have already been structured by their employees. The structures and policies of trade unions are shaped by the need for union and solidarity versus the tendency towards sectionalism and parochialism. They can generally classified into three craft versus general trade unions- this includes those formed as professional associations, white collar versus manual unions, public sector versus private sector unions and open versus closed unions. Democracy in unions is modelled by active involvement in collective debate and periodic testing of members’ views through secret, individual ballots. There are also initiatives undertaken to improve representation of groups that have been previously under-represented such as young workers and women. On the whole, there are national and international trade union bodies governing the local unions such as the Trade Union Congress and the European Trade Union Confederation. There are non-union employee representations sponsored by the state- these are in the form of long-established national systems for company level employees, civil societies. They are aimed at providing advocacy and labour market services as well as campaigning for change to the employment law or employers- these are in the form of staff associations that are essentially non-consultative forums (“Trade Unions- Memberships and Organization Policies). Where employees do not have a voice, a strike action impends as employees will feel that they are not being consulted about pertinent issues such as pension, pay and medical cover or where they feel their jobs are threatened, that is, redundancy. This creates a scenario of tension between management and the workforce, which in turn affects productivity where for example a strike action may be preceded by a go-slow. Where employees are ascribed to a union, an unresolved dispute or conflict may lead to industrial action. Therefore, employee relations need to be looked at from three perspectives employees among themselves, employees and management and employees and their respective union. Some of the reasons behind conflict between management and unions, in the UK, include failure of the union to fully understand the business, lack of trust and policies created at the national-level that get in the way of local representatives’ ability to build effective working relationships with management. Organizations also highlighted that their recognition of unions has resulted in great influence upon them where for instance if a strike was carried out they were affected but on a lesser scale compared to the previous years. In the same way, employees feel that the influence of unions has reduced over time. Although, it has been acknowledged that unions played a constructive role in the proposal and enactment of major changes (Cipd 2011, p.3). Industrial Action Industrial action may be in the form of strikes or indirect actions such as a ban on carrying on with overtime or a stoppage to usual duties; so long as the aim of having the workers’ voice highlighted is achieved. This is what makes strikes or other indirect actions a measure of industrial conflict because they can be quantified and pinpointed to a specific objective (Gilmore and Williams 2012, p.265). In recent times, industrial action has been on the decline and this can be explained using the fact that it is tolerated and not encouraged. Ideally, it should be recourse of last resort or a means to further bargaining interests. In reality, strikes are outlawed and employers perceive them as an instrumental privilege rather than a democratic right, purely for collective bargaining. Strikes cannot be used to highlight grievances of a political or religious nature in a bid to enforce democratic rights. Prior to holding a strike, employees must obtain permission through a secret ballot where a majority of those under the umbrella of the union must vote and approve of any action. Just as well, employers must be given further notice where any benefits accrued to unionised staff are equally accruable by non-unionised staff. Another significant fact is that employees are not entitled to any pay whilst a strike is ongoing; this makes it detrimental to those holding lower positions (Orr, 2011). This has been the main reason behind a fall in industrial action. There has been speculation that a new form of industrial relations, characterized by a partnership between trade unions and management, is set to take over. This is in a bid to replace the previously existing adversarial relationships and creating a new culture of cooperation. Notwithstanding, they have been met with doubt as some view them as threatening as they will strip trade unions of their ultimate power that is calling for industrial action through strikes. There is the other aspect of frustrations and challenges that have met creators of these partnership agreements because some of the companies have overseas ownership (Edwards 2003, p.533). Nonetheless, it is advantageous for employers to allow their employees to belong to trade unions. This should be as an addition to an in-house structure within the workplace, carried out by HR, to monitor employee relations where it should be taken on as a strategy contributing to the overall achievement of the organization’s objectives. An in-house structure is fundamental to employees in the private sector as they are unlikely to participate in a union. Either way, all employees regardless of whether they work in the public or private sectors need to feel like they have a voice constantly. References Cipd. 2005. “Change Agenda. What is employee relations” Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. [Online] Available from http://www.academia-research.com/filecache/instr/c/i/869742_cipd_-_what_is_employee_relations.pdf [Accessed on July 14, 2013]. Cipd. 2007.Survey Report February 2007. [Online] Available from http://www.academia-research.com/filecache/instr/c/i/869742_cipd_2007_-_managing_conflict_at_work.pdf [Accessed on July 14, 2013]. Cipd. 2011. Survey Report. [Online] Available from http://www.academia-research.com/filecache/instr/c/i/869742_cipd_survey_2011_-_employee_relations.pdf [Accessed on July 14, 2013]. Collins, .S.and O'Rourke, J.S. 2008. “Module 3: Managing Conflict and Workplace Relationships” Stamford, Connecticut: Cengage Learning Edwards, C. 2003. “Industrial Relations and Human Resource Management in an era of accommodation: selected papers from the British Academy Management Annual Conference 2002” Employee Relation, Vol 25 Iss: 6, pp. 531-535. Gilmore, S. and Williams, S. 2012. Human Resource Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press Lussier, R. 2008. “Management Fundamentals: Concept, Applications, Skills Development”. Stamford, Connecticut: Cengage Learning. Myatt, M. 2012. “5 Keys of Dealing with Workplace Conflict” Forbes. . [Online] Available from http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikemyatt/2012/02/22/5-keys-to-dealing-with-workplace-conflict/ [Accessed on July 14, 2013]. Orr, G. 2011. “Whatever you might have heard, industrial action is in decline” ABC. [Online] Available from http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3720658.html Trudel, J. and Reio J.T. 2011. “Managing Workplace Incivility: The Role of Conflict Management Styles- Antecedent or Antidote”. Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 4. Read More