Law: Conflict and Negotiation - Essay Example

Conflict & Negotiation in organization This paper has described three different views of organizational conflict. Traditional view conflict hinders the organization negatively. However, human relation view argues that, conflict is unavoidable and should be accepted; conflict to them is natural. Finally Interactionist view argues that conflict should be encouraged and accepted by the organization. However, some differences and similarities have been discussed. Introduction The paper will extensively deal with various views of conflict in an organization.

The key areas will revolve around traditional view, human relation view and finally Interactionist view. In addition to the above discussion, differences and similarities will be drawn on various conflict views. However different forms of conflict will also be highlighted, giving practical examples of criminal justice agency where they apply. Compare and contrast traditional view, human relation view and Interactionist view According to Maas, (2010) the traditional view of conflict is bad and contributes negatively towards an organization.

He argues that all conflicts are malfunction and counterproductive towards achieving the goals of an organization. Maas, (2010) notes that human relation view conflict as natural and unavoidable scenario in any organization, and it should not be seen as a bad phenomenon rather, conflict should be accepted. It cannot be eliminated. On the other hand, interactionism is one of the recent views about organizational conflict. It argues that conflict in an organization is just not a positive force rather it is a necessary force towards an effective and efficient group performance in an organization.

(Maas, 2010). Rahim, (2010) explains that Interactionist view is characterized by accepting absolutely the importance of conflict in organization, absolute encouragement of different opinions, proper definition of management with emphasis on how to stimulate and how to solve it and, finally, considering conflict management in the organization as a responsibility for all administrators. Similarities and differences of traditional human relation and Interactionist view Both Interactionist traditional and human relation do agree that in an organization there must be conflict either that contributes negatively or positively into the goals of an organization.

However, there are some differences in views towards organizational conflict. Interactionist views conflict in an organization as an avenue of social change, rather than a tool of breaking up social relationship in an organization: A contrary opinion held by traditional views about organizational conflict. Human relation view does not give out various ways how conflict can be generated in organization compared to traditional and Interactionist view which stipulate how conflict is generated in an organization.

Both human relation and interaction view that conflict can lead to effectiveness of an organization while traditional view argues that conflict in an organization leads to negative impacts in an organization and it detrimental. Traditional view argues that conflict should not be embraced and it should not be encouraged in an organization while human relation view argues that an organization should accept conflict, because it is unavoidable and natural. Functional conflict and dysfunctional conflict Functional conflict exists where opposition and disagreement support the achievement of the goals of an organization.

Functional outcomes that arise include; conflict may stimulate innovations, creativity and change, and decision making process (Lussier & Achua 2009). One of the examples according Teubauer & Fradella, (2010), is the American court and the criminal justice system. Though they are different entities, they need to interact. The courts, department of correction, and police department within the criminal justice system interact together in order to bring about justice. The criminal justice system and agencies works collectively and plan together about matter of common concern.

Dysfunctional conflict exists when conflict hinders the achievement of goals of a particular organization. It occurs when action goes beyond what is known as functional conflict. Under this conflict, some of the outcome includes; relationships may be damaged, resistance to change can increase, distrust and suspicion can be developed and communication between individuals can be hindered (Lussier &Achua, 2009). The best example of dysfunctional conflict was in Cambodia. According to Rausch & Albrecht & Klemencic, (2007), Cambodia’s legal system was not working towards achieving a common goal.

Criminal law and procedures, police power , the prison system and the court system were not working hand in hand to bring about sound justice during 1992- 1993. Kosovo is another perfect example. There was a dysfunctional conflict in criminal justice where United Mission in 1999 established numerous regulations to fill the gap that existed in the criminal law. (Rausch & Albrecht & Klemencic, 2007) Conclusion Conflict in an organization is unavoidable. It depends on various views and strategies to solve them.

Various view of conflict entrench different perspectives towards conflict in an organization. Conflict in an organization can take two forms namely; functional and dysfunctional and each has different outcomes. Some of the dysfunctional criminal justice system was in Cambodia and Kosovo. An example of functional conflict criminal system is in America criminal justice system. Reference: Lussier, N. R. & Achua, F. (2009). Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill Development: Australia Southwestern/Cengage Learning, Maas, H. (2010). Reality of Management and Organizational Behavior: GRIN Verlag, Neubauer, D. W. & Fradella, H. D. (2010).

America's Courts and the Criminal Justice System: Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Rahim, M.A. (2010). Managing conflict in organization: New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction Publishers, Rausch, C. & Albrecht, H. & Klemencic, G. (2007). Model codes for post-conflict criminal justice: US Institute of Peace Press,