Managing Interpersonal Conflictin Organizations - Essay Example

? M2A1: Conflict case studies M2A1: Conflict case studies Introduction The conflict resolution model entails eight (8) critical steps that address the underlying cause of conflict, implement a resolution and ultimately strengthen the group cohesion. The conflict resolution model is applicable in resolving both interpersonal conflicts and group-to-group conflicts. Successful conflict resolution entails understanding the group dynamics, the personality differences, value clashes, differences in individual perceptions and power differences (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). Case study one: interpersonal conflict This interpersonal conflict scenario entails two employees of the same organization. The conflict arises from the struggle of promotion and power between the two employees. The cause of the conflict can be attributed to differences in goals, attitudes and values between the two employees. Rick has the informational power to influence the work of John. John relies on interim production reports from Rick in order to accurately prepare summary reports for the entire week. From their working relationship, the accuracy of Rick’s interim reports will influence the quality of output delivered by John to the inventory and marketing departments. The conflict is harmful to the organization since it has led to errors in the summary reports and may also lead to inefficiency of work since John will be forced to retrieve the interim production reports from the main frame computer that has a two day backlog of retrieval requests. The conflict will lead to poor working relationship and hinder teamwork in the organization. Eventually, the conflict will hinder the attainment of the organizational objectives. The conflict is shallow since it entails only two employees and no excessive harm has occurred to their overall jobs (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). Conflict resolution action plan The personal conflict resolution model is applicable in resolving this nature of conflict in the workplace. The first step will entail identifying the source of the conflict. In this case, the conflict emanates from power struggles for the limited promotion opportunities (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). Both John and Rick are qualified for the prospective position, but their individual differences such as need for power and status, and personality clashes have led to a conflict in their working relationship (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). The second step will entail creating urgency for the need to resolve the conflict through identifying the negative impacts of the conflict towards the attainment of organizational objectives (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). In this regard, the management will identify the errors in the interim production reports, the inaccuracies of the summary reports delivered to the inventory and marketing departments and associated delays in preparation of the summary reports. The third step is creating a favorable conflict resolution environment through enabling John and Rick to cooperate in their working relationship. In this case, Rick must accept blame for the errors in the interim production report and the rude communication to John. Accordingly, John and Rick must openly express their interests on the prospective position and any negative emotions towards each other. The two employees must be prepared to engage in positive dialogue and offer feedback regards the conflict resolution process (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). The fourth step will entail will entail brainstorming for possible conflict resolution alternatives. In this case, the parties will highlight all possible solutions to the conflict. The parties must not avoid the conflict or engage in competition tactics since this will hinder interpersonal relationships and affect the working relationships (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). The brainstorming checklist must aim at enhancing cooperation, aligning the individual values and interests and minimizing struggles power and status between John and Rick. Possible solutions include a transfer of one employee to another department, cooperating in ending the conflict and compromising individual interests in order to the conflict (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). The fifth step will entail evaluating eh alternative solution using an acceptable criteria. The evaluating criteria must aim at restoring cooperating, aligning individual interests and promoting cordial working relationships (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). In addition, the solution must be mutually acceptable by both John and Rick. The best solution in this nature of conflict is cooperation and mutually accepting to end the conflict. The sixth step will entail implementing the accepted conflict resolution alternative. In this case, Rick and John must cooperate in their work and enhance cordial communication (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). In addition, the management can redesign their roles and implement new rules in order to foster collaboration and cooperation. The seventh step entails enhancing group cohesion and norms through aligning their individual goals of John and Rick. In this case, the purpose of this step is to promote cohesion between John and Rick through helping them to accommodate the differing personalities and values (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). The two employees must have shared values, beliefs and norms (Rahim, 2011). The last step entails evaluating the outcome of the conflict resolution solution. In this case, the parties will review the nature of their working relationship, the number of errors in interim production and summary reports, the efficiency in work, and level of cooperation (Rahim, 2011). Case study two: group to group conflict This is a conflict scenario is a group to group conflict that can be resolved by my interpersonal conflict resolution model. The conflict emanates from the desire by one group to change the housing policy in order to control the noise levels emanating from some homes. The policy can only be changed through a 66 percent in favor vote at the annual meeting. The initial conflict arises between Tenor’s family and Hinton’s family due to desire by Tenor to control the dirt bike noise coming from Hinton’s son dirt bike machine. Mr Tenor informs the HOA president about the matter and all agree the noise is excessive and annoying. However, HOA policy only forbids dirt bikes on community trails, roads and common property and not on private property. Mediation between the two conflicting parties has failed. Tenor decides to sel his house and leave. The Sherrif department laws cannot overrule HOA policy and two conflicting groups emerge. One group wants to own and ride dirt bikes on their private property while the other is opposed to the high noise levels made by riding dirt bikes on individual property. The issue has attracted intense debate and 66 percent of eligible owners fail to vote during the annual meeting thus failing to change the HOA policy on dirt bikes in private property. The rumors of the conflict lead to slow demand of the properties. The conflict is extremely deep since it emanates from interpersonal conflict of two personal owners. The conflict has led to extreme harm since many homeowners have started selling the property and prices have declined. Conflict resolution action plan The above conflict resolution model can effectively end the group to group conflict experienced by Oak Wood development project. The first step is identifying the conflict source. In this case, the conflict emanates from differences in work activities between the groups, prestige among some property owners and introduction of change in the development project. The second step will entail establishing a sense of urgency through highlighting the negative impact of the conflict (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). Some negative impacts include assessing the discomfort created by the noise, highlighting the reason why Mr. Tenor has sold his house and highlighting the high number of homeowners who have offered their houses for sale. Accordingly, the President must highlight the slowdown in property sales due to the rumors of the conflict. The President must enable the homeowners understand the likely future scenario if dirt bike noise is not controlled (Rahim, 2011). This will include decline in the property prices and poor relationship between homeowners. The third step will entail creating a favorable conflict resolution environment through encouraging the homeowners to cooperate and stop engaging in abusive behaviors like witnessed during the monthly meetings (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). All homeowners must openly express their positive and negative emotions towards the dirt bike noises and proposed HOA policy change (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). The fourth step will entail brainstorming for solutions to the conflict. A checklist must be used to generate acceptable solutions. Some solutions include avoidance of the conflict, compromise and cooperation towards the end of the conflict (Deutsch, Coleman & Marcus, 2006). The fifth step will entail evaluating the alternatives using a reference frame that lists the ability of a solution to solve the conflict. In this case, only changing HOA policy will address the conflict problem and both groups must cooperate towards changing the policy through a 66 percent in favor vote at the annual general meeting. The conflict has a negative impact to all groups since property prices may decline thus compromise or avoidance are not feasible solutions to the conflict (Rahim, 2011). The sixth step will be implementing the solution. In this case, both groups will agree on how to change HOA policy at the annual general meeting or convene a special meeting to change the policy. All homeowners will have to vote during the meeting in order to change the policy and adequately deal with the dirt bike noise problem. The seventh step will entail evaluating cohesion and norms between the two groups. This step will aim at fostering shared values and beliefs (Donohue & Kolt, 1994). From personal experience, some shared beliefs that may be fostered in a community development estate include calm and silent living beliefs, friendliness and cordial communication between the homeowners. In addition, the different groups will harmonize their leisure activities in order to concentrate on use of park rather than riding dirt bikes that produce excess noise (Rahim, 2011). The last step will entail evaluating the outcome. Some activities include reviewing the number of happy homeowners, the number of homeowners willing to sell their property and prices of the property in the market (Rahim, 2011). Conclusion The above model is effective in solving both interpersonal and group to group conflicts. The model aims at understanding the source of the conflict, creating urgency for a solution through highlighting the negative impacts of the conflicts and establishing a favorable environment for conflict resolution. The model addresses group dynamics, differences in personalities, perceptions, tasks, interests, goals and values. Accordingly, the model reviews alternative solutions through use of reference checklist and foster cohesion between the conflicting parties after implementation of a mutually acceptable solution. Lastly, the model is useful since it provides the parties to the conflict an opportunity to assess the outcome of the implemented solution. References: Deutsch, M., Coleman, P.T., & Marcus, E.C. (Eds.). (2006). The handbook of conflict resolution: theory and practice. (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Donohue, W.A & Kolt, R. (1994). Managing interpersonal conflict. New York: Sage. Rahim, M.A. (2011). Managing conflict in organizations. New Jersey: Transaction. Read More