Ways Conflicts Can Be Resolved to Ensure Smooth Operations - Case Study Example

            In business management, emphasis is laid on the need to apply modest management strategies to achieve effective resource organization, coordination and optimal utilization. Resources within an organization includes finances, labor and time, which all are limited, yet important factors of production. In the 21st century, organizations have experienced intensive pressure to shift towards more production-oriented strategies to remain relevant and to overcome the numerous forces that are strenuous to business operations. For a smooth business run, organizational managers have to remain innovative and flexible to adapt to the dynamic market trends in their role of business coordination. Employees form part of the most vital resource that managers have to manipulate to tap their skills and knowledge and to direct them towards production. To optimize, it is important to align the employees to the organizational goals and to get them on board in the process of project implementation. Today, this has become the role that organizational managers have to shoulder if they have to succeed in their management duties.

            In the recent past, there has been an increase in work-related issues within many organizations due to conflicts as management face new market forces that require a transition into effective management strategies demanded by the dynamic market. As to the traditional management strategies that were static and rule oriented, new market strategies require flexibility, innovations and regular evaluation of business policies. As organizations experience this transition, they have to face with the challenges that come along with this change. Often, managers have to face ethical issues, management and worker conflicts, and communication issues. The ability of managers to resolve arising organizational conflicts will guarantee its smooth running in the long term. In this essay we shall analyze the conflicts that emerged in a university and the possible ways in which these conflicts can be resolved to ensure smooth operations in this institution.

Analysis of the Situation at Ground

Matters on Ground

            In this case study, the university management experienced a conflict between the human resource manager and the chief Staff manager over the hiring of an employee in a matter of urgency in the organization. After the chief manager completed a selection process of an employee, the Human resource manager required that the employee produce a criminal investigation certificate as was provided by the organizational polices after which the employee would be served with a letter of acceptance. While the chief staff manager feels that in a matter of urgency the organizational policies can be overruled, the human resource manager feels that this would be a threat to these policies and insists on implementing them to the letter. Meeting between the two managers to discuss the issue ended up unsuccessful and as a matter of fact heightened the tension between the two officers. Resultantly, the chief staff officer had to resort to higher management, the director, to resolve the issue at hand. Apart from heightening the tension between the two officers, the conflict between the two managers, had a consequence on the employees directly under them who also divided and supported their respective boss. The hired employee, Senior Academic Program specialist (SAPS) also felt that he was a victim a long and strenuous procedure and this had an impact of their work attitude. In summary, this conflict was extended to the entire organization and consequently had an impact on employee productivity in this organization.

Scenario analysis

            In this case, the human resource manager and the chief staff manager had a conflict that seems to originate from differences in organizational strategy. While the human resource manager feels that the organizational policies to the letter, the chief staff manager feels that there is need to exercise flexibility in time of need for the benefit of the organization. From a critical point of view, this conflict can be attributed to varying opinions on change management, which is caused by the different interests of the managers. The chief staff manager, being new in this organization and having come from an organization that appreciates flexibility, he is opposed to bureaucratic structures that cause organizational retardedness. On the other hand, the human resource manager, who has experience in this organization, feels that organizational procedures are based on the rules and regulations laid down by the organization.  

            In this situation, it is important to apply critical organizational decision making skills to resolve this conflict of interest. As Shapira (2002) points out, it is crucial for managers to apply critical evaluation while making organizational decisions in order to arrive at the benefits or harm that critical decision would have on an organization. Starting with the idea of the human resource manager, he is willing to stand by the rules as they as part of his role to enforce management policies. In this situation, the organization was in a state of urgency and the hiring of senior academic program specialist was a hot issue. While sticking by the rule will be conventional to the organization, the organization is destined to lose as the process of hiring has to delay by at least two more weeks. In this regard, this is a dilemma that can only be solved through the use of effective management decision making tools.

            On the other hand, the chief staff officer feels the need to adjust the laws to hasten the hiring process especially at moment of urgency like the one the university was experiencing. He feels that the procedure for recruitment is long and bureaucratic and requires to be revised for the benefit of the organization. He provides a temporary strategy to amend the law in this situation, by providing the human resource manager with the idea that the employee be allowed to submit temporary provisions of the criminal investigation certificate and the medical letter before the original documents are provided. He seems to have the idea that hastening the recruitment process will ensure that the employee fills the vacancy quickly and reaps from the work of this expert.

Schmitt and Klose (2010), identify the challenges that a manager face while implementing organizational policies, and provides possible solutions to such dilemmas. According to this organization expert, he feels that as much as the laws must be followed, there is need to consider the main goals of an organization and to allow flexibility where the situation demands. In essence, a manager will be required to analyze each situation and consider the optimal decision that would benefit the organization both in the long and short term. From their point of view, management decisions must conform to the organizational goals and objectives and flexibility in policy can be executed only if such an action would be to the benefit of the organization. In this situation, there seems to be a justification for flexibility of university policies as it appears that the hiring of a senior academic program analyst is an urgent matter for this institution. Going by the words of Schmitt and Klose (2010), in this situation, sticking by the company regulations would be of more harm to the organization than exercising flexibility.

The result of this conflict raised a concern in worker ethics and organizational behavior.  After they failed to agree on the issue, they opted to discuss the matter in a meeting that only ended sourly. The communication language that the managers used in the meeting seems to be below the organizational language standards. The organization behavior standards provide that the managers harmonize their interests and goals through harmonious communication strategy. Therefore, managers should use communication as a channel to harmonize their decisions or even interests to ensure that they conform to the goals of the organization. In fact, communication is regarded as the most superior weapon of conflicts and regular meetings are encouraged within the work environment.

One evidence of unethical behavior is when the human resource manager refuses to continue with the discussion with the chief staff manager. His statement “… am done here” shows that he considers his idea final and is not willing to engage in a discussion to harmonize the two sides of the story. The chief staff officer too uses unethical language to express his point to the human resource manager. For instance, he uses the words “This is a ridiculous waste of time and a killing routine” to express the weakness of the policy that exists within this university. In this situation, it would be recommendable to address the matter with more sensitive and convincing language in order to remain within the ethical standards demanded by the organizational standards. Polite language in this situation would be suitable and the two parties should be willing to engage in a constructive discussion to solve the conflict of ideas they are experiencing. By the way the two managers engage in a violent discussion, one may be tempted to link this kind of behavior with a personal grudge between the two officers.

Another evidence of unethical behavior is when the human resource manager remains adamant to attend a meeting after receiving an invitation from the director. When the chief organizational manager passes his grievances to the higher rank of power within the institution, the director invites the human resource manager for a meeting to which he declines on the ground that he feels that he is on the right in his effort to defend the organizational policies. This kind of behavior is an unhealthy for an organization that intends to remain united with the high spirits of team work (Kozami, 2002). In an organization, the role of a director is to resolve any kind of conflicts that exists between employees that fall directly below him, which is deemed necessary only when two employees cannot resolve conflicts within themselves. By refusing to attend to this meeting, the human resource manager shows his willingness to solve the conflict that exists between him and his colleague, and he can be judged as a problem oriented rather than a solution oriented manager. In this regard, the actions of this manager are antagonistic to the organizational objective to maintain harmony within the work place.

The consequence of the conflict between the two managers has a great impact to the teamwork spirit within the employees of this organization. The disagreement between the two managers led to the splitting of employees into to two groups, with each supporting its boss. Although each group regards the decision of their boss as right, they do so without necessarily considering the problems at hand. This is a sign of negative teamwork within an organization. Although each set of employees supports their leader, it is unreasonable for them to be against any of the managers, especially within the same organization. West (2012) in his definition of teamwork regards all employees within an organization as part of a single entity and should be directed towards the same goal within an institution. In this view, this kind of splitting within an organization is likely to create tension within an organization and hence limit the productivity of the workers. In this regard, extending the conflict between the two managers to the employees is unethical and an unacceptable within an organization. In essence, the managers should solve their conflict in a professional manner to ensure that employees are not affected by the matter.

From this case study, it is possible to identify a major weakness in leadership style in this university that has helped fuel the conflict between the two managers. Moore (2007) in his evaluation of teamwork styles in organizational effectiveness draws a strong relationship between organizational performance and the kind of leaders that drive this performance. The finding of his research was that the attitude and the choices a leader takes on behalf of the organization determines the output of the organization. From the attitude of the human resource manager of this university, it is possible to regard him as a bureaucratic leader. A bureaucratic leader is one who believes that his opinion on organizational matters is absolutely right and is not willing to receive any correction from the rest of the employees. The human resource manager in this organization is not willing to be corrected or even to listen to the opinion of the chief staff manager and the director.

Moore (2007) states that bureaucratic leaders are likely to attract more resistance from their colleagues and employees and that they are weak in effecting teamwork. On the other hand, flexible leaders are able to listen to the idea of their employees and garner more trust from them. Such leaders will be able to handle conflicts more easily as they exercise flexibility and remain strong in areas that require boldness. The human resource manager’s attitude to be absolutely right in implementing the organizational policies to the letter is unhealthy to organizational development. In addition, flexible leaders will be able to understand their employees, attend to their needs and provide them with support in their duties. In turn, such a leader will reap from employee loyalty and team behavior that are crucial in any organization that is set to achieve its goals. In brief, the attitude of the human resource manager contributed not only to the conflict with the chief staff manager, but also between the subordinate groups.  

Finally, this case shows evidence of resistance to change in organizational management policies within the university. The human resource manager appreciates that the recruitment process applied by this organization is hectic, slow and unhealthy for the organization, but is still willing to implement these policies to the letter. The slow process hinders the recruitment of senior academic program specialist at a time of urgency and the human resource managers is not willing to exercise flexibility to suit the demands of the situation. When the new manager tries to impose changes in this bureaucratic organization structure, he is confronted with a lot of opposition and the change he feels is essential for the organization cannot be granted. In addition, there seems to be no plan to have the rules revised to suit the demands of a dynamic market, or to reduce the inefficiency that results from this kind of structure. This attitude of upholding inefficient organizational policies and fail to amend these laws points out to the organizations’ management resistance to change.

            For an organization to remain relevant to the market environment, it must be dynamic and must embrace the changes that arise within the market (Nickols, 2010). The formulation of organizational policies requires the policy evaluation be conducted regularly and changes be effected to reduce any form of redundancy that may exist within these policies. Re-evaluation of organizational policy allows organizations to point any weaknesses that exist within these policies and to make amendments as necessary. At times, policies may end up being obsolete within a market environment and the organization should either amend it or drop it to achieve efficient management. The long process of employee in this university seems to have a negative impact on the institution and can be regarded as obsolete or ineffective. In fact it imposes the employee to a long and strenuous process that is likely to impact a negative reaction from such an employee. In this organization, the senior academic program specialist was subject to a long interview process that was rather unpleasant and triggered a negative attitude towards the organization. In a nutshell, the fact that the human resource manager in this organization recognizes the weakness in the employee selection strategy and fails to initiate any changes, he fails to meet the demands of a dynamic organization.

            In conclusion, conflict resolution strategy of this university is suppressed by numerous internal forces within the organization. The organization lacks effective communication strategies that are necessary in resolving conflicts within an organization. Through dialogue, leaders are able to harmonize their interests and take up a direction that is healthy and additive to the organization strategies set up to accomplish management goals. As leaders fall out, they have a great impact on organizational structure and are likely to cause division of employees that in worse scenarios can trigger industrial mass actions. While communicating, employees are expected to meet the standards of organizational languages that demand that polite language be used at all times to enhance employee relationships. In this organization, there is evidence of bureaucratic leadership that threatens to reduce the worker cohesion to close the doors to conflict resolution. To overcome the challenges in this organization, there is a need for conflict resolution that will ensure that team work is upheld and organizational goals are implemented effectively.

Set of Action Plans

            In any organization, there is a need for effective conflict management strategies to cater for the diversity of the opinions that may exist within the employees. The uniqueness of the human population and the influence of different organizational experiences make the interests and the opinions of workers to vary widely. Kozami (2002) points out that the necessity of conflict management is to ensure that the differences between ideologies, opinions and interests within a worker population are harmonized and aligned to the primary objectives of an organization. In this effect, Kozami recognizes that conflicts in an organization are inclined to happen at some time in the business operation and the ability of an organization to mitigate and resolve them will determine its success. In this effect, it is no surprise that a conflict erupted in the university, but a concern can be raised over the inability or the organization to handle.

            Through dialogue and effective communication, this conflict can be resolved and effectively mitigated in the future. For Kozami (2002), communication between parties allows conflicting parties to establish the best path to follow while implementing a business decision. Dialogue is a crucial tool that employees utilize to express their opinions and ideas and to support their reasoning, hence becoming more understandable. In this case study, it is indisputable the two managers had their unique description of organizational efficiency; the human resource manager regards efficiency as the ability to strictly implement the organizational policy framework, while the chief staff manager felt that organizational efficiency depends on its ability to respond to emergency issues of the organization. Going by the word of the word of Kazami (2002), the only two managers can resolve their conflict through effective dialogue techniques.

            To achieve an effective dialogue, the two managers have to attend the meeting with a rather open mind and remain accommodative throughout their discussion. The human resource manager seems to have a bureaucratic attitude and did not have a will to accommodate the opinion of any other person. This is depicted by his unwillingness to continue with the discussion and later refusal to attend a meeting scheduled by the director. He remains rigid and insists on remaining within the institution’s policy framework. This serves to heighten the tension between the managers and consequently between their subordinate staff. For the two managers, the best way would have been to discuss the matter of conflict and come up with a solution to their problem, which best suits the organizational goals. If in the meeting they fail to agree, it would be recommendable to consult from fellow colleague or even to the next level of power above them (Schmitt & Klose, 2008). In addition, it would be necessary to adopt a language that suits organizational culture that suits the consultative meeting. Use of authoritative and impolite language is likely to generate tension among the parties, which in turn hinders conflict resolution. In essence, effective dialogue techniques would play a key role to solve not only this dispute, but also other such situations that are likely to occur in this organization.

            Secondly, the organization would require implementing dynamic policies that match the demands of a changing work environment. While policies with an organization are designed to fit the long term goals of an organization, they are subject to change as the environment and context of their implementation changes in the institution. In addition, it is important to recognize the need for perfection of organization policies through experimentation and observation during the time of their application. In this case, there seems to be a major weakness in the employee selection procedure and both the human resource manager and the chief staff manager recognize the necessity of a change. Notably, the procedure subjects interviewee to a long process that at the end of the day leaves them with a negative attitude towards the organizational procedures. Apart from that, the organization is unable to respond its emergency issues in times when they need to replace their sensitive office positions. The impact that this has is that the organization may lose a lot of its worth as it has to wait for a long time before such a replacement is implemented.

            To take care of this, the organization requires starting a policy evaluation plan as a way of monitoring the policy implementation process. Schmitt and Klose (2008) suggest that the best way to effect policy changes is to conduct regular and through policy evaluation to identify its weakness and strengths. While it may be crucial to strengthen some policies, it might be equally important to amend some that may fall short of the definition of effective policy. Ineffective policies are hindrances to organizational development while effective one will be contribute to organizational growth. This university seems not to recognize the need for policy evaluation and flexibility during implementation that seems to be the source of conflict between the two managers. While the human resource manager identifies the negative impact of the in the recruitment procedure, he remains resistant to change and stick by the rule of the law that seem to be static. On the other hand, the chief staff officer seems to recognize the need for flexibility and change in time of necessity as part of organizational objectivity. The best way to mitigate against this kind of dispute would be to review the law and effect necessary changes that will auger well with the organizational objectives.

            To effect change in this organization, the first step would be to research on the employees feeling towards the organizational policies and get their opinions on the areas where they would need a change. Having experienced the same recruitment process, they would be the privileged to express their attitude towards the recruitment process, and the amendments that they would regard superior in this organization. Data from the employees can be obtained by serving each of them with a questionnaire designed to obtain data that can be used to measure the effectiveness of the organizational policies. As Schmitt and Klose (2008) point out, organizational policies should be not only to fit the organizational goals, but also the subjects of these rules. Going by these words, obtaining information from these employees would be the best strategy to suit the employee’s preferences. The outcome of such a research would be superior in driving changes in the revision of the policies of this institution, and in turn provide policies that satisfy the employees. The expected outcome of revision of these policies is that the managers would have effective rules that are effective and easy to enforce without much opposition, hence reducing conflict among the management team.  

            Kozami (2002) recognizes the need for flexibility within the organizational policy framework as part of satisfying the short term organizational goals. Since the process of policy changes is time consuming and intensive, there is a need to provide, within the rules, flexibility clauses to allow for situations that demand immediate attention. For instance, given that the recruitment process in this institution is time consuming, a flexibility clause should be included to cater for times when immediate employee replacement in necessary. In this case, within the strict procedure, a flexibility clause would allow omission of certain procedures so as to speed up the process of recruitment in a situation like this one when the organization required hiring a senior academic program specialist as a matter of urgency.           If such a clause was available in the institutional policy, this conflict that led to employee disorientation would have been avoided.

            Thirdly, the organization should consider the necessity of sustaining a cohesive worker relationship between its employees in the organization. Team work within an organization ensures that all the employees are well aligned to the optimal goals of the organization. The employee, being one of the scarce resources of an organization, must be coordinated and their work capabilities optimally utilized for the benefit of an organization. West (2012), based on his organizational research, states that cohesive employees will produce more than divided ones, owing to the benefits of the complementary relationship between employees. If the idea of West is anything to go by, every organization needs to build a strong worker relationship if it intends to achieve its objectives.

            In this case, there are various indicators of a tense relationship among the employees of the subject institution. When the chief staff manager and the human resource managers engage in a meeting, there is evidence that the two don’t get along very well, and this affects their ability to dialogue. When the two disagree, the employees are split up into two and each group supports its own head, without caring the whether they are wrong or right. This is clear evidence that the employees are even split within themselves and that there is tension between the two groups. The conclusion that can be drawn here is that the tension between the two groups between the two groups of employees is a consequence of some form incitation from the managers. Nickols (2010) predicts that disagreement between management teams will cause a disagreement between the workers, and that such an organization should anticipate heavy losses from such a worker reaction.

            To uphold team work within the institution, the management teams should implement worker orientation programs to ensure that each employee is aware of the organization target goals. In such an orientation session, employees should be allowed to interact with one another to allow them make friendship and build a comfortable niche in the workplace. Nickols (2010) and Kozami (2002) converge on the idea that employees who have created a mutual relationship within the organization environment will be hard to separate and will remain united. Also, the employees should be made to see themselves as an entity but not as competing teams within the various departments. This will facilitate inter-departmental relationship which helps various departments to relate and help each other during a time of need. If such a relationship existed in the organization, the tension between the subordinate staff would have been suppressed.

            In this case, the director would have to intervene in reinstating the situation and enhancing worker relationship after this fall out. To start with, the director should start by creating harmony between the two managers by engaging them in a consultative meeting. In this case, the manager would require taking a firm presumed stand on the case and a reasonable argument for his choice of the way forward in this matter. Considering the hard stand that the two managers have, it would be important to have a considerable reason to convince the managers of his stand. According to management psychology, the convincing power of a manager depends on his ability to remain neutral yet objective oriented while passing out his management decision (Sonnentag, 2003). At this point, the director would present his opinion on the matter and the necessity of putting the organizational goals fast before any other thing. Any attempt to sideline with any manage or impose disciplinary measure on the manager might trigger a riot from the workers in this organization.

            Next, it would be crucial to rebuild teamwork among the employees, and reestablish a healthy work environment within the organization. At this juncture, it would be important for the director to declare his awareness for the situation and disclose his stand on the matter and the reason for this stand. Communication with employees will ensure that the tension in the atmosphere is clear and that given that the employees are free to contribute at this juncture, it would importantly be possible to rebuild trust within the employees. After this, it would recommendable to reshuffle the employees to change their department of work as a long term measure to future instances. This will ensure the two groups of employees that were formed during the conflict do not continue to exist and that if in case such a conflict exists at any other time, the two groups would not come up again.  Sonnentag (2003) regards employee reshuffle as a superior means of blending employees in the place of work. Using a psychological approach, the director will solve this conflict and mitigate the emergence of such cases in the future.

            Another problem that the director needs to address here is the kind of leadership that the two managers exhibited in this conflict. While the two human resource manager seem to be a bureaucratic leader who works within the policies, the new chief staff officer seems to have a background of flexible leadership who is ready to bend the laws in situations of emergency for the benefit of the organization. At this point, the director would consider reflecting on his own management strategy and the modern school of strategic management. This will help him to rate himself as either a static or a dynamic leader and also to weigh himself against the standard leadership trends within modern organizations. Korotov and Manfred (2010) suggest that the best way to impart leadership in an institution is by leading by example and actions within an organization. In their research, they found out that bureaucratic leaders can only nurture such as them, and the same applies for dynamic leaders.  This means that director would require to adopt leadership skills that are relevant to the modern organizational structure and generate develop this leadership culture within the organization.

            An alternative path would be to facilitate leadership training for all managers in the institution and if possible for the subordinate leaders. Korotov and Manfred (2010) established that leadership training is vital for an organization in that it help the leaders to keep abreast with new management technologies, and especially in the modern time when behavioral approach is used in improving business approach. By allowing these leaders to participate in the same meetings, the two managers are likely to acquire the same leadership style and hence have lower chances of disagreeing in management decisions. In addition, these trainings would improve their communication strategies and hence impart a healthy organizational culture within this institution. In essence, the director should be able to harmonize the two leadership styles to ensure that the two managers or even others, are less likely to disagree, and if they do, they stand a better chance to resolve their issues.

Conclusion

            Conflict resolution within an organization is a complex and sensitive, but necessary element of strategic management. At one instance or the other, conflicts are bound to occur within an organization and the management team must be prepared to face this as one of the numerous business challenges. To facilitate conflict resolution, the managers have to use a psychological approach and team building skills to resolve work related tensions and to repair organizational injuries that come along with such conflicts. Conflict in management amongst managers is likely to cause division among junior workers and the cumulative effect of such a business crisis is likely to have a great impact on the organizational goals. To mitigate conflicts, the management needs to harmonize leadership styles within their institution and to foster communication strategies, which are critical in the dialogue aspect of conflict resolution. While resolving conflicts, the top level management should involve all the managers and sub-ordinate staffs to ensure that they express their opinions and that they understand the necessity of specific business paths. Policy formulation and evaluation is vital in an organization to allow the organizational rules to match not only with business goals but also with the demands of the modern business markets. In this view, conflict resolution is a multi-dimensional skill that is essential in any organization to ensure its smooth running and optimal human labor utilization.