Conflict Resolution in the Work Place - Term Paper Example

? Conflict Resolution in the Work Place Insert Insert Grade Insert Insert This paper aims at stating the definition of conflict and the description of conflict from personal experience and what happens in other places of work. It will also strive to compare other scholarly work in relation to conflict resolution and management while highlighting on some of the possible techniques used in conflict resolution at work places. Introduction Conflict resolution can be defined as the process through which disputes between individuals are solved. Where people stay, conflicts are bound to take place. As human beings, it is vital to find ways of solving conflicts so as to live in harmony. The art and ability to accommodate one another is equally important therefore it is wise to take it as a burden to resolve conflict in an amicable way without resorting to war. From past experience and historical perspective, diplomacy reigns where war has always failed. It is therefore important to analyze conflict from a personal experience with regard to what takes place in the work place. It is also very important to figure out what would be the dangers of letting anger take control of people in the work or social places and the repercussions it might have on their career (Hodgson, 2000). Conflicts in work places are as common as they are in other social places. Having that background knowledge it is therefore important to find ways of handling situations of conflict that may arise in our surrounding. It is also important to realize that many a times conflicts normally arise as a result of conflicting concerns of individuals, who may want to suit their own interest at the expense of others. Conflicts in work places arise because of a number of reasons. If such issues are not addressed in time, they cause a threat to the organization. An example of what might cause conflict is the feeling that some workers are given special treatment than others. Yet some workers may also engage in conflict because they are sidelined. This occurs when a single worker or a group of workers find it difficult to associate with fellow workers because of their background, their weakness or even their manner of handling situations. For example in my case, I have experienced a scenario at work place when fellow workers ganged up against me. Reason being, I had a weakness in the manner in which I handled lazy people. Instead of being rational, I acted ruthlessly towards them. As a result, I was sidelined by my workmates. The situation got worse. I was hated by everyone in the organization. My sight could not be condoned by anyone; this deteriorated my performance. I was almost giving up my job when finally the manager came to our intervention. The situation has improved since I now get along with everyone. My situation may not be different from what might be going on in other places of work. Appreciating others is vital since no achievement in the work place can be realized when workers are not united. We must learn to work with others and accept others, putting it in mind that we cannot have the same qualities. Since conflicts are mandatory in places of work, it is important to look at ways of coming up with solutions to solve such occurrences whenever they happen. There are as many solutions to as many social problems as possible. The only challenge that has always been is that there is no strategy that is near perfect for solving conflicts (Palagi et al., 2004). There are five strategies that can be used in conflict resolution in case of conflict in any working places or anywhere else. The strategies include accommodating, compromising, avoiding, and problem solving. All these strategies are important tools that those who are holding managerial positions in the work places should try to adopt when faced with the challenge of trying to solve disputes in places of work. Conflicts in places of work should be viewed as natural occurrences that arise out of discontentment and frustrations and thus before using any strategy to solve a dispute one should get the root cause of the problem. It is very wrong in such situations to condemn without investigating. It is the investigations that will guide you on what to adjust or instill to avoid witnessing a replica of such conflicts (Bannon, 2003). In case of a conflict in the work place, there should be that urgent need to put things in order. The first thing to do as a manager in case of dispute occurring in the work place is to summon the conflicting parties. This is when you will realize that there are so many people involved in that conflict than the two parties. This may be so because you might realize that there are people behind the scene who might have played some roles in instigating such wars. You might as well realize that such conflicts might have arisen because of you. That it is important to examine the root cause of the problem. At the end of it you might find yourself solving something which might have entirely ruined your company (Hynes, 2004). The first strategy is accommodating. This technique can be used by the one who is involved in conflict in order to restore peace. One party therefore tries to do what the other party may want in order to restore peace. In this case, one of the parties tries to stoop low in order to create peace. The one who stoops low takes it upon himself to pretend as if no conflict is there while in actual sense there is conflict. In this case, it is a win –lose situation where the one who refuse to acknowledge the existence of a dispute does not benefit out of the situation. The other method of conflict resolution is compromising. In trying to create peace, the parties may try to agree on given stand which does not benefit a single party but the two parties. These parties try to give up part of what they wanted almost equally so as to resolve conflict. In this scenario, it is a win – win situation since both parties are demanding that what they are fighting for must be given to them. If that is the case then this method may serve as a way of resolving dispute since no party will complain of demands not met. Unlike in accommodation where one of the parties may willingly try to lie low in order for the party to win, in avoidance case both parties refuse to acknowledge the existence of war; thus, both agree to lose instead of one party losing at the expense of the other. The only problem with this method is that when it is kept for a long time can result into a terrible occurrence. The fourth method in conflict resolution is forcing also known as competition. Under this method, both parties acknowledge that there is conflict but none is willing to let the other win the case. The parties under this situation insist that either one party wins as the other loses, but none is also ready to lose. This is very dangerous to an organization and in most occasions employees of this type usually find themselves losing their jobs as no employer is willing to entertain such workers (Hynes, 2004). Finally, the last stage of conflict resolution is collaboration. This method of conflict resolution is seen as the best since at the end of the day the conflicting parties will always find themselves working together in harmony, without harboring grudges against the other parties. It is the best method to be adopted by those who are trying to resolve disputes mostly in places of work. Under collaboration as a method of conflict resolution, both parties agree to work together so as to reach a common goal. They decide to resolve their conflict by trying to find a solution that will serve to benefit both of them. The parties become assertive and willing to state where the problem is arising without criticizing (Sternberg, 1987). Conclusion It is important for parties involved in conflict to find a neutral person who may be willing to help them resolve their differences instead of letting it escalate simply because you do not want to speak it out. Communication is very important during such moments and that is why it is important for the employer or those who are in authority to know what may be going on. Unresolved conflicts normally result in actions that are shameful to individuals and organizations which may find it even difficult to relate to such parties. Once you communicate to the right people you make them aware that such things exist; therefore, they become psychologically prepared on how to help solve the situation. Resorting to violence only serves to worsen the situation. By informing those in authority, you will make them be able to gauge the nature of that particular conflict and whether it is resulting from too much work or pressure from the organization or whether it is resulting from anxiety and tension caused another party. References Bannon, I. & Collier, P. (2003). Natural resources and violent conflict: Options and actions. Washington, D.C: The World Bank. Hodgson, J. (2000). How to solve conflict in the work place. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23, (5/6), p.352. Hynes, G.E. (2004). Managerial Communication: Strategies and Applications. New York: McGraw-Hill. Palagi, E. et al. 2004. Reconciliation and consolation in captive bonobos (Pan Paniscus). American Journal of Primatology, 62, (1), p.15-30. Sternberg, R. J., & Dobson, D. M. (1987). Resolving interpersonal conflicts: An analysis of stylistic consistency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, (1), p.794-81. Read More