Conflict, Decision Making, and Organizational Design - Research Paper Example

? Conflict, Decision Making, and Organizational Design Introduction In modern day organizations, professionals recruited have vast knowledge, talent,and experience to handle crucial situations. However, employees working under supervisors at times tend to develop disagreements with their superiors, as a result of which misunderstandings may develop. Thus, a disagreement or misunderstanding that arises in between two people and poses a threat to their requirements, concerns, or interests, is known as a conflict. According to Bruce (2003), proper management of these differences and disagreements can result in effective and creative solutions through interactions. However, due to certain physiological issues, the communication gap between the employees may increase, thus leading to a more complex situation (Bruce, 2003). According to Harris (2001), “decision making is the study of identifying and choosing alternatives based on the values and the preferences of the decision maker.” In other words, the decision maker has the privilege to choose from the numerous alternatives that he/she thinks is suitable according to the situation. As stated by Galbraith, Downey, & Kates (2002), organizational design is referred to as the continuous process of congregating people practices, reward systems, and structure of the organization for developing the capabilities of achieving the strategies required for the business. Thus, it can be recognized. The effective design of an organization is a significant part in ensuring that organizational goals and strategies are met. In this paper, the three key issues, i.e. conflict, decision making, and organizational design will be discussed in context of the Field Support Directorate (FSD) of the United States Army Software Engineer Center. These issues will be identified and negotiation strategies will be applied to addressing the conflicts. Moreover, the process of applying of evidence-based management will be determined. Apart from these, the stages and the methods of decision making will be analyzed and recommended to the employer of FSD to follow. Last but not the least, the environmental and strategic factors that affect the organizational design will be discussed and analyzed. Process of Applying Negotiation Strategies to Address Potential Conflict in FSD As stated by Rahwan, McBurney & Sonenberg (2003), negotiation is the interaction between a group of people, with an aspiration to cooperate with the possible contradictory interests that tend to facilitate in reaching a mutually approved and acceptable division of limited resources. In other words, negotiation regarding solving a conflict often leads to sacrifices done by both parties involved in the conflict (Rahwan, McBurney, & Sonenberg, 2003). According to Cloke & Goldsmith (2005), conflict resolution’s definition is similar to the definition of success which is described by Winston Churchill as “the process from failure to failure with undiminished enthusiasm”. Similarly, conflict resolution always begins and remains at an endpoint until a distinguished reason or a solution and resolution become possible. Thus, the author further suggests that learning references should be followed to gain problem solving knowledge and to explore in-depth reasons for resistance, to understand the process of mediation and to redesign organizational cultures, systems, and structures. Thus, the processes will help to discourage suppression of the conflict and to encourage avoidance and resolution (Cloke & Goldsmith, 2005). The Field Support Directorate (FSD) provides a software support structure to the operations center that is one of the decisive links between the field support personnel, Warfighter, and software maintenance facility. The FSD’s role is to resolve any issue concerning the software labs by providing rapid solution to any unit concerns. The department is divided and mapped with various other departments to work closely with all the units and the CECOM Senior Command Representatives to provide resolutions to any concerning issue which has aroused within the department. Thus, the effective resolution can be provided if the management practices a healthy negotiation approach. Furthermore, the best practices, if managed appropriately, can facilitate the avoidance of future conflicts amongst group members. Few practices that can effectively help avoid conflicts are active listening, finding the hidden meaning, acknowledging the emotions, solving problems creatively, and developing a system that will prevent and resolve conflicts (U.S. Army Software Engineer Center, 2012). According to Barry & Friedman (1998), all negotiations are similar and involve people taking initiatives, offering proposals for resolving the conflict, offering concessions, providing counter-proposals, and coming to agreement. Therefore, the steps to successful negotiations are discussed below. Separating the People from the Problem. It is evident that problems arise due to misinterpretations, considering certain aspects subjectively, and getting angry with each other. However, considering the fact that the other party is also a human with emotional values and different background attached might make the negotiation resolution much easier. Furthermore, the personality differences result in causing the conflicts. Therefore, an organization cannot deal with the problem and uphold good working relationships at the same time. Thus, the parties involved in negotiation must be psychologically ready and committed to treat the problem and relationship separately (Doye, Love, & Hyer, n.d.). Focus on Interests, Not Positions. Shared, conflicting, and compatible interests are associated with the positions in an organizational hierarchy. The common interests are needs, i.e. economic stability, security, recognition, sense of belonging, and control over one’s life. Thus, to avoid conflict, it is necessary to identify the opposite party’s interests and acknowledge them accordingly. Appreciating each other’s interests will help to develop the relationships and share common interests, and this will help avoid creating misunderstandings (Doye, Love, & Hyer, n.d.). Invest Options For Mutual Gain: In order to satisfy each other’s desires, it is important to sacrifice personal options and work together to create a mutual option that will suit the desires of both. Premature judgments and opting for a single answer should be avoided. The suggestive options should be available to all the parties and recommendations should be adhered for creating a better option for both the parties (Doye, Love, & Hyer, n.d.). Using Objective Criteria: Negotiations should be done on the basis of the objective criteria. An objective criterion is independent and neutral to either side. Thus, the criteria should be discussed before the objectives for the recommended options can be decided. A mutual decision in accepting the objective criteria will ensure that team work is prevalent and common objectives will lead to achieve the organizational goals (Doye, Love, & Hyer, n.d.). Process of Applying Evidence-Based Management to the Work Environment of FSD According to Rousseau & McCarthy (2007), evidence-based management (EBM) is referred to as the collaboration of managerial decisions and organizational based practices that are compared with the best scientific support available. Furthermore, they suggested that the process of EBM may include learning specialized behavioral principles where the evidence of science is clear and develop methodological knowledge based on the feedback, practices, and reflection. The penultimate goal of evidence based learning is that the learners’ memory and retrieval of principles are attained to enable their professional practices, thereby achieving desired results. Thus, it can be stated that the principles need to be mastered and deeply comprehended so that the professional practitioners can solve any issue they might face in their careers (Rousseau & McCarthy, 2007). In context of management, evidence-based principles of cause-and-effect are established with the principles of goal setting. Thus, in FSD, web-based tools such as Global Support Center (GSC) and Single Interface to the Field (SIF) are used to monitor and to track personnel, equipment, and provide training. Therefore, it is necessary for the management of FSD to train the employees to handle the processes common for the FSD department. Effective training will enable clear communication to all the employees, thereby reducing the chances of arising conflicts. The personal options will be avoided and mutual options will be agreed upon. Therefore, the evidences of the causes and the effects of conflicts will be shown to the employees, and this will provide the resolutions to counter any such issue in the future (U.S. Army Software Engineer Center, 2012). Analysis of the Blocks, Stages and Methods of Creative Decision Making in FSD According to Assakaaf (2003), creativity can be defined as the ability to generate and implement new ideas in various sectors. However, creativity in decision making is the process of looking for alternatives that will help to achieve fundamental objectives and is the process that has not been seen or used previously. The blocks that disrupt the decision making process are discussed below: Framing and Perceptual Block: One of the common issues regarding discouraging creativeness is the stereotyping or preconceived ideas associated with the thinking of the managers that suppress an evolvement of a good judgment (Assakaaf, 2003). Value-based Blocks: In certain cases, objectives and values of a decision maker may disrupt the abilities to identify true creativeness and alternatives while taking decisions (Assakaaf, 2003). Cultural and Environmental Blocks: These blocks may deter the identification and production of creative alternatives that are required in decision making situations (Assakaaf, 2003). Taking an effective decision is not a simple task for a manager. Strategic scheduling and systematic approach are among the best approaches that are required for taking an effective decision by the employer of FSD. Therefore, the approach consists of five stages that, if followed effectively, can result in taking successful decision. At the initial stage, the leader is responsible for creating a decision. It is the leadership skills that are measured in the process of decision making. The second stage involves reviewing the opinions of the stakeholders. This strategy helps the leader to build a team effort in making the decisions that are well supported by the team efforts. The third stage is the business occasion when the leader expresses his/her views regarding the decisions and has the urge to consider stakeholders’ recommendations for adopting a successful decision. The fourth stage is the delegation of the rightful decisions to the others members of the team. Furthermore, the liabilities and the authorities accompanied by the decision are also distributed among the team members by the leader in this stage. The fifth stage implies that the leaders provide information regarding the advantages and the disadvantages of the decision that has been finalized by the team members and the stakeholders (SlideShare Inc., 2012). Environmental and Strategic Factors That Affect the Organizational Design The roles of the FSD are very significant to the U.S. Army Software Engineer Center. In other words, it is evident that the FSD provides continuous technical support to the Warfighters who are dealing with the security of the US. Therefore, it can be stated that the FSD has to maintain a dynamic environment to change their organizational decisions accordingly. Furthermore, the FSD has to be strategically advanced, as they need to be updated with the technical modifications. Thus, the FSD’s dynamic and adapting nature allows the US Army to effectively work to ensure the security of the nation. Conclusion In the context of FSD, it has been noted that organizational barriers do exist in the security department of the US Army. As it is a large organization, it has many employees, and this, in turn, leads to more conflicts. Therefore, precautionary measures to avoid conflicts have been discussed. Furthermore, solutions such as evidence-based management have been provided for solving conflicts in the future. Decision making is an important aspect in any organization, and hence the best person must be chosen for this responsibility. With regard to FSD, the barriers for creative decision making have been discussed, as well as the different stages and methods for making a creative decision, including the successful ones. Lastly, the environmental and strategic factors that might affect the FSD are identified. It has also been noticed that FSD is a sensitive department within the US Army Software Engineer Center. Due to the significance of this department, recommendations have been made for it to remain upgraded and to prevent any security breach to the nation. References Assakaaf, I. (2003). Creativity and decision making. Retrieved from http://www.assakkaf.com/Courses/ENCE%20627/Lectures/CHAPTER6.pdf Bruce, R. (2003). Conflict management skills. Retrieved from http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7labor/13.pdf Barry, B., & Friedman, R. A. (1998). Bargainer characteristics in distributive and integrative negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74(2), pp. 345-359. Cloke, K., & Goldsmith, J. (2005). Resolving conflicts at work: eight strategies for everyone on the job. United States: John Wiley & Sons. Doye, D. G., Love, R. O., & Hyer, T. R. (n.d.). Negotiation strategies. Retrieved from http://pods.dasnr.okstate.edu/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-1676/F-198web.pdf Galbraith, J. R., Downey, D., & Kates, A. (2002). Designing dynamic organizations: a hands-on guide for leaders at all levels. United States: AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn. Harris, H. (2001). Content analysis of secondary data: a study of courage in managerial decision making. Journal of Business Ethics 34(3-4), pp. 191-208. Rahwan, I., McBurney, P., & Sonenberg, L. (2003). Towards a theory of negotiation strategy: (a preliminary report). University of Melbourne, pp. 1-15 Rousseau, D. M., & McCarthy, S. (2007). Educating managers from an evidence-based perspective. Academy of Management Learning & Education 6(1), pp. 84–101. SlideShare Inc. (2012). Five stages of decision making. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/siddharth4mba/five-stages-of-decision-making U.S. Army Software Engineer Center. (2012). Field Support Directorate (FSD). Retrieved from http://www.sec.army.mil/secweb/about_sec/fsd.php Read More