Main Aspects of Conflict Resolution - Coursework Example

Introduction Conflict is a common phenomenon that can arise in any healthy relationship because two or more persons or parties cannot always agree on everything. It is therefore vital that people learn how to handle conflicts whenever they occur rather than running away from it. Any mismanaged conflict can easily cause harm to relationships. Conflicts can provide a platform for making relationships stronger and enhancing strong bonding between two or parties. When individuals or parties learn how to deal with various conflicts, one acquires skills for conflict resolution. In addition, such negotiation skills keep professional and personal relationships strong and growing. The moment of creating a conflict resolution, one also gets to reach a solution of many other issues surrounding him or her. However, when the negotiator handles a conflict inefficiently, it can have severely damaging consequences. Conflict or Situation in Question There are various causes of conflict in the society or any work setting. Such causes of conflict include poor communication, differences in what people value, and scarcity of resources, interest differences, personality clashes and poor performances. Conflicts can arise in any situation and environment. For instance, work place conflict has become so common among members of a particular staff. The human resource manager of Apple Inc. recently experienced and resolved a conflict that erupted between one of the junior staffs and the operations manager. In the conflict, a personality clash took place between a manager and a subordinate staff. The employee developed a feeling that an authoritarian manager bullied him and failed to give him the professional guidance he required from his senior. The employee also raised a concern that the manager had set him goals too high to achieve at the work place. The junior staff further complained that the goals were too ambitious, setting him up for a guaranteed failure. Consequently, the employee and the manager headed for inevitable conflict. The conflict grew to a level so dangerous that two scenario arose. The operations manager threatened to fire the subordinate staff due to defiance and failure to achieve the set target. On the other hand, the employee remained defiant to the manager because he felt that the manager gave him too much tasks to handle with little guidance, bullying and authoritarianism (Raines 143). Consequently, the two parties failed to push the work agenda of achieving the workplace objectives and goals. The conflict spread to other members of staff who also threatened to stand in solidarity with the subordinate staff against the manager who they felt showed unfairness to the employee. This conflict scenario created a mismatch that presented a huge challenge to tackle and resolve. The human resource to, therefore, reassess the situation and then find the best approach to solve the conflict before it spilt to other members of staff. The scenario created a challenging environment particularly when the Human Resource Manager had to create understanding between the two perspectives. The Human resource manager was wise to avoid treating this conflict as disciplinary hearing. He avoided following the norm that managers are always right while the employee under the manager under him is always wrong in case of conflict. The Human resource manager knew that if he applied such principles, he would easily loose good employees even in situations where managers offended an employee. Consequently, both parties earned his trust to be the best person to help in finding a resolution to the conflict. The Human Resource Manger also noted with concern that the employee already felt emotionally hurt, disappointed and felt uncomfortable to work under the operations manager. There was already an irreparable rift, break-up and resentment between the two. The operations manager on the other hand remained out of touch with his own feelings and stressed up such that he could only give attention to a limited number of attention. He felt that the rest of the employees could stage a rebellion against him in an attempt to ouster him out of the office. The human resource manager therefore had an additional task of building trust, increasing understanding between the two and strengthening the relationship bonds between them. Conflict Resolution Process In this process, the Human Resource Manager had to choose the most appropriate method to resolve the conflict between the operations manager and the employee. Some of the methods include avoidance in which he could just keep silence hoping that the conflict would just disappear and go. His second method is collaboration in which he could encourage the manager and the employee to collaborate and continue working together towards creating a mutually beneficial situation (Raines 227). Further, the HR manager had the option of applying the competing method in which the two remain in a competitive mood until the strongest win the battle. Finally, accommodation was the last method in which at least one party had to give up his own interests, feelings, wishes and ego to either please or appease the other party. Despite the many conflict resolution options available at the disposure of the negotiator, it is vital to note that some these conflict resolution methods could not apply because they could not provide a resolution. For instance, avoidance method cannot apply in a situation where the conflict keeps escalating in magnitude. In the Apple Inc., the conflict was already taking a different dimension in which the rest of the employees too wanted to join their colleague in rebelling against the manager. It was therefore an impossibility to assume that the conflict would disappear with time. Secondly, application of collaboration could also not yield good result because the two conflicting individuals did nod share anything in common. The manager felt too big to come to the level of the employee for mutual benefit. The best method that the HR manager applied to resolve the conflict was compromise. In this method, the negotiator expected each conflicting side to give up some of its wishes and accommodate certain level of the opponent’s wishes in order to find and reach the middle ground. The negotiation method is mainly significant in ensuring mutual benefit to both parties without one individual giving up too much while the other receive more favors than the other. In the compromise method, both the manager and the employee expressed by articulating some of the issues they felt were the sources of their conflict. During the problem statement, the HR manager who was negotiating the conflict acknowledged that differing perception of the problem would arise. He further made it clear why he wanted the conflict resolved for the efficiency and smooth running of the company. The HR manager made it known that the company could not achieve its goals and objectives if there was no cooperation and collaboration among the junior most staff to the senior most employees, Chief Executive Officer. Further, both parties agreed on the best method they wanted used in solving the conflict through communication. The most efficient methods that both parties suggested were collaboration and compromise. However, due to the weight of the matter and situation, both parties settled for compromise because it remained most suitable. During the process of negotiation, the HR manager also communicated that issues would be addressed on face to face basis without the use of memos, email correspondences, or notes because face to face communication was the most effective way to resolve differences. He further made it understandable that through face-to-face negotiation, parties involved would remain vigilant, honest and sincere with their claims. The negotiator made the process quite effective by maintaining that every party must stick the issue. Every individual had to stick to the issue and avoid name calling or resorting to issues of the past. The issue in question was leader subordinate conflict. If change and solution has to be achieved, then the negotiating team and the parties involved must stick to and address behaviors that are specific to the situations. To avoid rushing into a conclusive resolution, both the negotiator and parties involved must take time out if necessary. Time taking is necessary because it helps in preventing emotions from causing interference when arriving at a productive resolution. The HR manager allowed various timeouts at some intervals to help regulate the emotions that may transpire. He allowed resolution process to continue at other time designated up on realizing that the situation was manageable. Finally, the negotiation ended very fruitfully by both parties agreeing to drop their wishes and demands. However, the manger and employee could not continue working together. That is the employee could no longer work under the operations manager anymore. The negotiator who is the Human Resource Manager recommended that the subordinate staff be re-assigned to a new supervisor for comfort and respect. Conclusion The most effective technique of handling conflict is to avoid involving in it. However, when a conflict erupts between two individuals or parties, it is vital that an amicable solution is reached whether in the work place, at home, in business or any other quarter of the life. Through peaceful resolution of conflicts, people will create a work environment that is more positive and friendly. Failure to give a detailed and comprehensive truth and solution during conflict will only make it fade for some time. However, it would resurface at some point and cause even more threatening conditions. Works Cited Raines, Susan. Conflict Management for Managers: Resolving Workplace, Client, and Policy Disputes. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2013. Print. Read More