Resolving Issues at the Work Place - Case Study Example

 Resolving Issues at the Work Place Background The work place is normally supposed to be a formal place. Ideally, interpersonal associations are to be carried out in a professional way. However, due to human nature, personal relations always exist which introduce the dimension of informalities at the pace of work. Informal associations are a necessity and if an organization is to thrive, they ought to be encouraged because when they are working well, the output of workers is magnified. If poorly managed as in the break up case at the bakery, it may lead to serious problems. As it has been pointed out, the intimate relationship at the work place was doing the business no harm until the union became under tension (The Breakup at the Bakery, N. d). Conflicts will always exist in intimate relationships, what should be done is to provide a mechanism at the work place which helps workers to amicably solve their issues. Informal relations within the working environment were initially acceptable. Later on it became apparent that such a stance only served to negatively constrain the productivity of workers. Having made the realization, it necessitated that such relationships be allowed. The allowance was however in the belief that it would improve on worker productivity. It should be noted however that not all informal or formal relations achieve what they intend. As it has been highlighted by the bakery break up case, relationships can turn to be sour. Apart from intimate relationships, professional associations like the ones between co-workers can equally brew into conflicts. That is to highlight the fact that the work place is mired with a range of conflicting challenges. For an organization to succeed, it must adequately control conflicts within it. As the bakery case points, the management must have failed in moving swiftly to contain the situation and this was affecting the company. This should not have been the case if the management was prudent. Literature review According to Heathfield (2009), the management of any work place has the responsibility to ensure there is an enabling climate for work to be done. It is the working conditions that determine the success of any worthy operation. Any disagreements, wars, and tendencies that bring disruption may spell doom in terms of goal pursuit in organizational settings. It is agreed that conflicts are an attendant issue at the work place. However, measures need to be provided so as to keep check on their emergences. This calls for the management to hone their mediation skills to settle such matters as soon as they arise. Conflict should not be avoided in the hope that it will go away. Avoiding conflict in the hope that normalcy would be achieved may serve to exacerbate an already fragile situation at the workplace. The best thing is to tackle the problem the soonest time it is suspected to be in the offing. While attempting to solve a conflict, the involved parties should be met together and never separately unless it so demands. Meeting the concerned parties separately may fail to provide a true picture of what constitutes the problem as each party would want to implicate the opponent in bad light. So it is necessary to have the parties together in order to be in a deterministic ground on what the problem cause is and make attempts at the same time to arrest the situation. The conflict may be between two people; however, this does not mean that it is only the two individuals who are affected. As the bakery case study reveals, the whole organization was almost coming to a standstill, and were it not for the soliciting of support from a third party intervention, the worst may have taken place. According to Fredenburg (2006), anytime a group of people is given work to perform, it is highly likely that a collision would occur. People as different as they are physically, they also bring with them different thoughts and habits. Their modes of expression even worsen this situation. Trying to eliminate conflict from the work place is highly desirable, but equally unachievable in practice. The way forward is to establish a clear guide to conduct in the place of work and draw mitigation measures to help out when conflicts arise. The management as a whole should be geared towards conflict suppression rather than promotion. At the same time, measures should be pursued to promote commonality of approach to issues to avoid conflicts in an organizational set up. The management should also harness expression modes in a bid to avoid heated arguments that can blow small disputes out of proportion. If nipped in the bud, disputes that could lead to conflicts would be minimal. If left alone, such disputes can wreck the chances of success for any organization. According to Coan (2004), conflicts at the workplace are quite common. They arise from disagreements on who should do which task, how to execute agreed tasks, and other issues to do with style and personality. The best way to deal with conflicts is to avoid it. If it cannot be avoided, then it is advisable to find a worthy solution to it by giving your insight or seeking help from a third party. In the article by Coan (2004), the way conflicts are handled determines the way the company proceeds. Issues should be cast in the open before they escalate into big conflicts. Triggers to conflicts should be marked and easily identified to reign in on conflicts. To borrow from the terms of About.com: management (2009), conflicts are an underlying feature of any work place. So the focus is on how to resolve the arising issues at the work place in order to foster good relations and in the process achieve organizational goals. While disagreeing, there should be room for compromise. That means you should disagree by convincing the others why it should be so. Peace making is the best possible way in solving disputes on an assumption that the parties to a dispute are persuaded to that line of thinking. If left unattended, minor disputes that arise from what and how to do things would derail the developmental agenda of any organization. According to Moneyinstructor.com (2005), the current day business environment does not allow for any distractions that can derail the achievement of organizational goals. Given that competition has become intense, it is intolerable to watch any organization that is embroiled in internal controversies as this would ultimately spell the end. With the problem of globalization to organizations, so has become the issue of conflict resolution in the work place. Work has become more collaborative than it was earlier on. The implication of collaboration is that team work has evolved to be the norm as opposed to an exception. In this article by Moneyinstructor.com (2005), conflict arises when one’s interests are threatened. The response to issues is however the most important aspect that surrounds conflict rise and its route. As a manager, efforts should be made to harmonize the workers interests in pursuit of a common goal that fosters organizational strength. If left to pursue personal interests in a work place set up, the individuals would negatively impact on an organization’s fortunes. The work place is intended to provide ample working ground for organizational staff. However, it offers its challenges especially on interpersonal relations (Masters and Albright, 2002). As workers go about their duties at the work place, due to the fact that their chores are interrelated, they stand a chance to rise against each other on a number of issues. This presents the ultimate obstacle that the management must address in order to move their organizations forward. The quality of interpersonal relations do affect conflict emergence in an organization. Workers need not to be treated casually even if it is by the top management. If poorly treated, workers would begin to resent the management and their orders. This would translate into low productivity. To avoid this, workers should be treated in a manner that reflects their importance to the organization. A satisfied worker would in turn guarantee high levels of performance which of course augurs well for organizational development. Analysis As it has been seen from above, conflict sources are wide varied. First, it emerges from innate personal differences, secondly, the working place setting can be a cause for conflict at work as pointed by Fredenburg (2006), and thirdly, conflict may arise out of informal relations at work as highlighted by the break up at the bakery case, among other causes. It is difficult to eliminate any of these problems but attempts should be made towards minimizing them. Human beings are born naturally different. This difference is even heightened by the fact that the bringing up of people is done in different localities. With this in mind, it becomes very difficult to reconcile the egos that underlie their behaviors. A good manager should be far ahead in the field of management if the organization in question is to thrive. Firstly, such a manager should impart into their staff the basics of work requirements and the guidelines which should be enforced fairly to stem good conduct. As in the bakery case, informalities that occur at the work place can be a major cause of conflict at the place of work. The big issue becomes how to disentangle informalities from formalities. It is given, that workers through their daily activities would strike a common accord that ties them together. This may lead to formation of social groups within an organization, to illustrate this, a look at football clubs, choirs, etc, point to it. As earlier indicated, when these informal groupings are thriving and all inclusive, then an organization stands to make huge gains in terms of productivity from the workers. On the converse, if these informal associations fail, the organization may face a difficult task to remain in business. This can be illustrated by the break up bakery case study. As I have pointed, we cannot divorce informalities with the work place, the best which can be done is to regulate such activities by giving rules and regulations. But a big obstacle lies on the road to constraining intimate relations. As simple as it may look, it is never possible to contain this. If it happens, then the organization may be forced to make do without such talented individuals. If the organization heavily relies on the individuals in question just as was in the bakery break up case study, the organization may be made to undergo huge expenses in acquiring and training new staff. Another conflict cause at the place of work may be the setting of the work place. If the management discriminately assigns duties to employees, the problems may arise from disgruntled members. Issues to do with promotions at the place of work, if done unfairly, then this is also going to be a very sticky matter that may brew dissatisfaction and thus cause conflicts. To address this concern, it is upon the management to know their ambitions. If the goal is to prosper the organization, then it is in their interests that they streamline operations to reflect meritocracy in recruitment and promotions. Trough the support of merit considerations, the organization can also grow as it would attract high level individuals. They should also ensure that fair treatment exists, that is to say, there is same work for the same rank. Fairness is a relative term and what could be fair to one person may be unfair to another. Even if done fairly, the allocation of duties, complaints would always arise. Some people are naturally nagging and this may pose a problem to the organization. It is in the interests of the management to very clearly determine what is reasonably worthy to every individual that serves the organization. Conflict resolution recommendation It is evident from the above literature review that conflict is part of work in any organization. Having realized that, it is the duty of the management of organizations to lay the much needed emphasis on conflict resolution at their work stations. The environmental set up at the work place should not in any way be in support of conflict. To achieve a set up that minimizes the conflicting occurrences, a clear guide on roles, stations, and other important work aspects need to be clearly defined. If for example, an organization has a given number of employees, they should be divided into sub-groups and be ranked according to their responsibilities. The hierarchy should be clearly visible. Each and everyone’s responsibility should also be adequately indicated. Having provided for this, there is also a need to inform the workers about the best channel to air their grievances. Failure to provide channels through which workers air their differences would negatively impact on productivity. On the other hand, the defining and outlining of each and every ones’ duties will eliminate or rather reduce the room for conflict. If it is not clearly done, this can be cause for panic in organizations as workers would collide on this very basis. As in the case of the break up at the bakery highlights, some cases that are quite private may be difficult to launch interventions. Matters to do with emotions are not easy to understand, and even if they could easily be understood, the disputing parties may not be willing to divulge personal information. This notwithstanding, an organization has goals to achieve, and if anything, including private or personal issues are impeding this goal, then it requires every effort to control the situation. In the bakery case, there appears to have been so much restraint on the part of the management in as far as taking action is concerned. The management allowed the emotional issue to spill over to the rest of the workforce. An intelligent manager should have acted on the first sight of the wrangling between the friends. Maybe a faster approach could have quelled the tension between the friends and possibly got them back to talking terms. Though, the case was eventually dealt with, more ought to have been done a bit earlier to contain the situation before it got out of hand. I have used this case to emphasize the essence of time in dealing with disputes that relate to the working place. If conflicts are not handled in time, they have the potential of undermining progression of activities at the work place. For example, if the bakery in the case study had intervened earlier, then chances are that the organization could have never faced a going under threat. A manager should strike a working balance in his organization and closely monitor what is going on so as to be in a position to change the course of action when it so demands. It is not however only the managers who should be held to account on conflicts in organizations. Workers, who could be a source of conflict, should also spearhead friendly relations and foster dialogue to promote cohesiveness towards the success of organizational goals. For the case of the bakery break up case, I would have suggested that in the event that similar cases arise, they be dealt with at their onset. Secondly, I would promote intertwining of duties such that anybody in the organization can be in a position to serve in any department at any time. This then would lead to getting away with disruptive members from the organization. However, this must be done in a manner that does not reflect the organization in an inhumane way. Reflection The work place as presented by this paper is a challenging avenue. There are different kinds of people and yet pursuing same organizational goals. Though the goals of an organization would be similar as put to the employees by the management, the workers’ ambitions and ways to achieve these goals may never be the same. It should also be noted that the different environments in which people have developed have in turn nurtured us in a different way. As a result people behave differently to different situations. Coupled by other factors not captured in this paper, the management of organizations find themselves in an awkward position in attempting to reconcile these concerns. However, any organization has objectives to meet. For these objectives to be met there should be no illusion. The manager must strike a winning formula. That formula involves being in control and making sure the organization is not entangled in wrangles. Any arising issues should be dealt with in an appropriate way. It is worthy noting that however hard the management tries to mitigate these issues, they are bound to arise. Hence the idea should be to minimize the occurrence of conflicts in the work place while at the same time providing for convenient mechanisms to handle them whenever necessary. It should be stressed that not a single management can completely eradicate conflicts in their stations of work. That position is highly desirable though. What ought to be done is to reduce the incidence of conflicts. After providing for that, a well documented procedural guideline should be availed to all organizational employees. This would serve to deter conflicts from eating so much into an organization. And finally, all measures to rid the organization of a nagging causer of conflicts should be explored. References About.com management. (2009). Manage conflict and workplace violence. About.com online. http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:WcXapuot9WUJ:management. Coan, G. (2004). Managing workplace conflicts. Robert Bacal production. Ontario, Canada. http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:4jEzzsGhcD0J:conflict Fredenburg, A. (2006). Managing conflict at the work place. buzzle.com http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:JvYv5fxAuGEJ:www.buzzle.com Heathfield, S. (2009). Managing your human resources. About.com Guide. http://humanresources.about.com/od/managementtips/a/conflict_solu Masters, M. & Albright, R. (2002). The complete guide to conflict resolution in the workplace. USA. Marick F. masters. Moneyinstructor.com. (2005). Workplace Conflict Resolution: People Management Tips. The break up at the bakery. (N. d). A case study. In press. Read More