Conflict Management Between The Players And The Leagues - Research Paper Example

Conflict Management Between The Players And The Leagues Introduction: Sports are the essential ingredient of the healthy culture and possess great values for the societies as a whole. However there are certain types of sports which require more power usage then others, and playing certain kinds of sports may also result in causing a serious injury which might result in paralyzing the player or several other disabilities. As various sports such as football, hockey and soccer at times results in collisions of players, as these collisions are so severe because both players are willing to take glory in order to defeat other. Consequences various head injuries and other body injuries. Meanwhile the above mentioned sports are being preferred by masses around the world as mass viewership of such type of sports is common practice carried out around the world. Albeit these sports are amongst the most watched sports around the world their players during match collide with each other as a result serious injuries are always on the cards. As pressure on the players in order to win the match for their country, club or team is often enormous which results in creating more aggression in the game because both the teams are fighting furiously in order to win the match. Therefore intense collisions and injuries are every now and then seen on their playgrounds (Tomlinson, Nicolini, and Vescio, 2011). Various researches have been carried out around the world and their findings revealed that players after having serious injuries showed repercussions for short or long term. However the main reasons for these repercussions are mainly because of the head injuries obtained in the field. As a matter of fact various incidents are reported around the world in which athletes or players that had concussions are having serious mental illness, permanent illness or disabilities, or are even dying (Tomlinson, Nicolini, and Vescio, 2011). There are various important factors that are associated with the repercussions issues, out of which one notable factor is the negligence of sports boards or teams, as sportsmen after having concussions are allowed to return on the field without proper rest or proper medical checkup, however the decision regarding rejoining the game is of athletes which is often derived by variety of important parties that are related or associated with the player. For instance the team he is playing for or the school he is representing or the club or even the country, moreover decision of the coaches, teams, sports associations are other prime factors that influence decision of the player to rejoin the match after following an injury or concussion. Therefore one comes up with the question that who should be held responsible for these actions (Tomlinson, Nicolini, and Vescio, 2011). At present there are varieties of different cases that reflect the above mentioned scenario, for instance the case of Zachary Frith a high school student who was a victim of negligence. As Frith was a football player and his coaches did not intentionally stop him to play on the field for high school team besides knowing that he received a concussion in the past (Carrabis, 2011, p. 384). moreover to further add in to catastrophe none of the school mates or coaches asked for his parents permissions or bring into their attentions that their son was playing football for the high school, instead they deliberately allowed Frith to practice and play the football (complete game) on the same week that he got the concussion. Consequences various behavioral changes were noticed by his family as they observed Frith on the following week that he attained concussion, as a result he was taken to doctor for checkup. Later the doctor passed his verdicts and diagnosed Frith as a victim of post concussion syndrome. This syndrome was caused because of the initial blow that Frith had while playing and later because of negligence and continuously receiving head injuries because of the football game. The doctors passed his verdicts and strictly asked his parents not to let him play football (Carrabis, 2011). Therefore parents bring the whole scenario in the notice of their coaches, but nothing changed as coaches were showing reluctant behavior in terms of restricting Frith to play in the field as a result he played whole week (Shamberg, Johnson & Bergman Chtd., 2009). However the final result came as Frith becomes the victim of permanent brain damage. This as a result brought an action against the school and the coaches as his parents launched complain on their son’s behalf against the high school (Lafayette County School District Missouri). 3 million US dollars Settlement was done by compensating Frith’s family (Tomlinson, Nicolini, and Vescio, 2011). The above mentioned real story of Frith showed that how negligence of serious injury like concussion can result in destroying the life of the athlete and in a broader spectrum destroys the family. No matter what may be the sources of motivation for the players are or how coaches, schools, teams or management manipulates the injured player in order to carry out his game after having injury should be avoided. However there is not always the case that only teams or managers manipulate the decision of the injured player. There are times when players often have fear that they might be replaced because of the injury or they might lose the sponsorships or the contract of team. Therefore it is a complex matter that requires whole new approach and requires proper healthy education for the players, management and families that are in contact with this situation. Background of the conflict between NFL and the injured athletes (former and present): National football league (NFL) of America is considered to be generator of billions of dollars sports. As this industry possess billion (multi) of dollars and often have to deal with various kinds of allegations related to mental illness of players that arise because of the concussions received while playing on the field (Gregory, 2010). Almost all contact sports have one basic rule that is to fight it out and therefore hold potential for injuries, however nature of football game has more chances of collisions therefore repetitive concussions are always in the cards. According to the study the numbers of average concussions reported each season are to be around 170. Keeping in view that there are many players who does not report or are unable to report these concussions because lack of judgment regarding the symptoms related to these diseases (Gerardi, 2011, p. 191). Historically many believe that concussion managements of NFL are always poor or insufficient. As no necessary precautions or necessary actions are taken by the NFL in order to confine or limit the player in opposition to concussions. Moreover serious negligence in this regard is another important allegation that people holds against NFL. Meanwhile NFL always declines the relationship with sports and concussions received by players. Regardless of various scientific studies and researches put forward by different group of people and organizations. They stand rigidly and hold their decisions, reluctant to give up their stance or point of view (Gerardi, 2011, p. 204-205). However finally in 2009 the relationship between concussions and football was accepted by the NFL and later they ensured that strict policies and rules and regulations will be designed in order to deal with concussions issue (Gerardi, 2011, p. 213). Meanwhile various cases have been reported against the NFL by the former players blaming NFL for their concussions and negligence, to be precise the total number of cases as per February 23 was 35 (Tomlinson, Nicolini, and Vescio, 2011). As per the allegations almost all came up with the view that their health conditions were known to the NFL and its employees. Furthermore they blamed that employees and organization knew about the possible risks that are likely to be faced by players in the future because of concussions and repetitive head injuries. Moreover they further added that NFL besides understanding the risk did not worried about the player security and showed reluctant behavior in terms of giving them warning, as a result hide the true picture of the story. Similarly some other key allegations were in the regard of carelessness or failure of league authority gears (Tomlinson, Nicolini, and Vescio, 2011). In response to above mentioned conflict situation NFL stance is very rigid as they highlighted on various occasions that player safety is their prime goal. And all those allegations that NFL intentionally was responsible for players concussions and or NFL deliberately put lives of athletes at risks by misleading them in any way has no solid grounds. It totally goes against the league’s effort or policies or actions that it has taken over the years in order to provide players with better and enhanced protections. Moreover it also goes against the idea of investing too much on the advancement of sciences and also medical considerations of the PFL management and treatment related to concussions (ESPN, 2012). However a recent study conducted by Boston University's Center for the Study of Traumatic Encephalopathy revealed that 34 out of 35 brains of the former professional footballers have CTE (chronic traumatic encephalopathy) as these diseases are likely to be got by players because of traumatic hits on the heads. Keeping in view the study was conducted on 85 brains which were of deceased athletes and soldiers. These all persons had a medical history of concussions related to their walk of life. These revelations have further worsened the scenario for the NFL. As now NFL has to deal with the issue with uttermost care (Gaines, 2012). Nevertheless in order to resolve this conflict various conflict management theories can be applied as the issue is getting worse every day by day. Following are some of the important ways that one can resolve this conflict through application of these main theories. These are: Conflict management styles (theories): It is believed that individuals when facing a conflict opts for different style, which reflects their frame of mind and up to some extent their attitude towards the seriousness of the problem. As every individual one way or other has a predominant conflict management style that he uses in order to cope up or come out from a situation and also with a solution. However upon examining the different conflict management styles and their possible outcomes one can clearly come up with the understanding that different parties opt for different styles. This different of style is mainly related with the position they have or the power they have or how strong the party is in terms of legality or even from rightness and wrongness factors (Littlejohn and Domenici, 2007). Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann are the two well known behavioral scientists who came up with a model of conflict management. This model is also known as Thomas Kilmann model of conflict management style. According to this model there are five ways that one can resolve the conflicts these conflict management styles are (CDR Associates, 2007): 1. Competition 2. Collaboration 3. Compromise 4. Avoidance 5. Accommodation 1. Competing conflict management style (strategy): Usually this style is followed by people or leadership who prefer domination or they are aggressive by nature. They believe in giving dictations rather than having one. The competing conflict management style is adopted in order to gain benefit, advantage, power by pressurizing the other party to let go the possessions or to change their current stance regarding the conflict. This style is adopted by organizations, individuals or leaders especially when they believe they have more power with respect to the position, rank, persuading skills, quality of arguments or even expertise. This conflict management style at times is quick in terms of giving results. However with reference to its practical usage this style is mainly driven if the other party is trying to exploit or manipulate the situation or issue. As this style testifies that one is taking a stand in order to prove his point of view or justified actions. However there are some important disadvantages related to application of this particular style. For instance the first and foremost is that relationships amongst parties face destructions. The main reason behind this is that since competing conflict management style usually works on the principle of “if you are not with me, then you are against me” (Furlong, 2005). Concluding traits of competing conflict management strategy: Value for personal goal/task: extremely high and important. Relationship value: low or negligible. Final goal: i win you lose results. Core foundation: winning a conflict through competition. Overall strategic philosophy: when objectives (goals) are enormously vital, usage of power to win the conflict. 2. Collaboration conflict management style (strategy): The collaborative conflict management style has a prophecy of dealing or taking conflicts as problems which needs to be sort out considering or creating win-win situation for both parties or in simple words through mutual understanding by coming up with a way that is agreeable for both the conflicting parties. Usually a person who is involved in managing conflicts through collaboration does not usually give up their stance completely or at times not even an inch. Self interest is important therefore conflicting parties come up with the identification of core issues or concerns, listens to the point of view of the other party and shares their point of view or stance as well. Usually this sort of conflict management style is adopted where relationships have more importance, and where the importance of relationship has no value amongst the collaborating parties than usually there is no need of wasting time(as collaboration process usually is time consuming) in order to come up with the win-win situation for both the parties. However this style is mainly effective and useful when varieties of views from both parties come in contact in order to find a solution. Nevertheless collaboration cultivates and garners trust, respect and also build strong bonds in the relationship. Furthermore in order to effectively enhance and practice the collaboration conflict management style organizations or parties should directly discuss the core issues and should try to come up with a solution (Goodall, JR., Goodall, and Schiefelbein, 2010). Concluding traits of collaboration conflict management strategy: Value for personal goal/task: extremely high and important. Relationship value: high and important. Final goal: I win, you win Core foundation: by garnering teamwork and through mutual cooperation goals of both parties can be achieved, resulting in building stronger relationships. Overall strategic philosophy: creating a healthy relationship by collaborating and creating win-win situation for both the conflicting parties. 3. Compromise collaborative management style (strategy): The compromising strategy deals with the idea of giving up your stance up to some extent and convincing other party to do the same in order to resolve the issue. For instance you give up a little as a result I will give up a little too. Compromise conflict management strategy is less time consuming then collaboration in most cases, as it also maintains the relationships. Usually a settlement means that issue has been resolved considering the equal bit of letting go of things (or leaving an equal amount of share or ground or stance). It might come up with the understanding of hunting for a middle ground that provides equal share of interest or benefits to both the conflicting parties. It is mainly effective and useful when parties understand that the price of this conflict is higher than leaving or molding a stance. Moreover this compromise is also effective when both the parties have equal power in terms of having strengths. However one important benefit of using this strategy to resolve conflict is that it can give luxury of easy way out for the conflicting parties and in the future it might ease their ways towards collaboration or coming up with extensive new creative ideas. Meanwhile compromising too much can also result in losing identity or self respect of the conflicting parties (Jeong, 2010). Concluding traits of compromise conflict management strategy: Value for personal goal/task: moderate or medium Relationship value: moderate or medium Final goal: you get (win) some, I get (win) some. Core foundation: gaining some part while it’s ok to give or lose some part as well. Overall strategic philosophy: to ensure or come up with something for both the parties. Giving smaller things to gain maximum benefits. 4. Avoidance conflict management style (strategy): Avoidance is the deliberate or intentional effort to ignore the conflicts or issues or in other words coming up with the view that whatever will be the default decision that will be acceptable by the conflicting party. It mainly focus or withdrawing from the issue rather than facing the music or fighting for the achievement of specific goal or function. This reflects a careless frame of mind in which one is not caring about his own goal or is not very much concerned about the goals or views of other conflicting party (Deutsch, 2011). However there are times when avoidance is the solution of the conflicts, especially when the conflicting party is not sure about what line of action they should chose in order to respond, similarly if the conflicting party thinks that relationship can be saved by avoiding direct encounters. Likewise if the party develops and understanding that there are few chances of gaining benefits from the situation therefore it is better to avoid the conflict then rather to waste precious time managing and resolving it. Albeit avoidance at times can give the desired results but there are times when avoiding the issue can create trouble, for instance if the other conflicting party come up with the view that you are taking them for granted. One another drawback can be that avoidance can result in garnering animosity as the other party because of not getting any response can come up with more furious intentions in order to gain the attention or hurt your stance (Dana, 2001). Concluding traits of avoidance conflict management strategy: Value for personal goal/task: negligible or extremely minimum. Relationship value: very low (negligible). Final goal: no losers, no winners. Core foundation: not interested in dealing with the issue right now, or not an ideal time or place to resolve issue. Overall strategic philosophy: use avoidance in order to resolve conflict, for instance avoid conflicts, issues by postponing them, or withdrawing from them or even by sidestepping. 5. Accommodation conflict management style (strategy): Usually in this kind of conflict management importance is given to others over personal motives or gains. Or in simple words sacrifice of one’s personal interest or goal, in order to accommodate other because of maintaining or creating a healthy relationship. Usually the accommodation party has idea about the ideal timings regarding when to offer or accommodate the other conflicting party. Meanwhile usually this type of conflict management style offers surrender to others or works on the basis of martyr (Rahim, 2011). Similarly accommodation can be ideal especially if one identifies the mistakes and looks for their compensations. Furthermore in order to apply accommodation conflict management strategy, it is not necessary that one should always be unassertive, but cooperation is necessary trait in accommodation strategy all of the times. Nevertheless accommodation strategy is suitable especially when peace and harmony has more value than to beat the opponent (Thomas, 1992). Concluding traits of accommodation conflict management strategy: Value for personal goal/task: none or very low. Relationship value: extremely high Final goal: you win, I lose. Core foundation: working for a mutual concern is way important than to fight or keep oneself busy in the state of conflict. Confronting each other can result in hampering the relationship. Overall strategic philosophy: sacrificing one’s goal in order to protect or accommodate others, consequences relationship is enhanced and protected. Practical application of the Thomas Kilmann model for conflict resolution amongst NFL and players regarding concussion issue: At present National football league (NFL) of America and the players (mostly former) are caught up in a situation where they are facing serious conflict amongst each other. However playing football can one way or other result in receiving concussions. Same was the case with many football players, who received concussion during different matches and after some time had trouble coping with the repercussions or consequences. As various disabilities including behavioral changes, paralyses, suicide cases were reported amongst the football players who were victims of concussions. However upon receiving these concussions these players or their families blamed NFL and filed various cases against NFL. The main theme behind those cases is that NFL deliberately blind folded players and their families, and did not inform them regarding the consequences of concussions. Moreover serious negligence was adopted by NFL as the players who had concussions were asked to carry their career or were allowed to play. This as a result adds agony to the players conditions as more hits were received because of the nature of the game. This ultimately resulted in creating catastrophic health conditions for the players and sufferings for their families. On the other hand NFL is continuously denying all the allegations and has taken a rigid stance, saying that these are all baseless allegations. Conventionally denied, that football has no relations with concussions but later since various researchers were put forward by different organizations and institutions regarding concussions, especially the latest report which was published by Boston University (centre for the study of traumatic encephalopathy) has resulted in jolting the views of NFL. However since both parties are reluctant in giving up and leaving their spaces therefore this conflict is not getting resolved. Moreover because of the competitive nature and stances, the conflict is gaining more temperature as more furious allegations are coming on the way of NFL. Another important reason because of which the issue is not being resolved up till now is that, since survival of both conflicting parties is dependent upon the outcome of this case. If NFL admits the point of view of the players then chances are that this organization is likely going to face a huge financial crisis because of the compensation. Moreover vital chances of banning the league and game are other possibilities related to it. Meanwhile if players drop their stances, then all the sufferings that they and their families bore will have no meaning to them. Therefore this conflict is in very complex stage, as resolving this conflict will metaphorically mean ending world war. This serious issue can be resolved through application of collaborative conflict management strategy. As both parties should come up with the understandings that blaming one another would not be beneficial for both the parties. As the issue is very much serious in so many ways, for instance the future of the sports and the future of players both are dependent upon the outcome of this conflict. Moreover since this sport is preferred by masses around the world and it involves loads of money therefore manipulation of players by the board or team is a possibility. Likewise because of the same reason (involvement of high amount of money), there is another possibility that after receiving concussion players do not report symptoms because they were not willing to end their careers. So as a result they continued the sport while carrying the injury. Consequences end up risking their lives. However whatever may be the cause or reason the net result is suffering for players and families. This misery can be ended by collaborating with each other. Through a third party invasion or through a committee which should not be biased by any mean. This committee should try to build and understanding amongst the league and the players. By analyzing every single minute details regarding the allegations put forward by the players. Evaluating each case with succinct details, judging either allegations have some grounds or just for the sake of money or just because some X players were successful winning their cases of concussions. Meanwhile from the player’s perspective this committee should analyze the role of NHL regarding the concussions. Either they deliberately allowed players to play after knowing their serious conditions or it was accident. However if there is a negligence and deliberate effort found in this regard, then league should bear the price and should be accounted with respect to the law of the country. Furthermore Compensations or penalties should be awarded in favor of the sufferers. Another possible way following the same collaboration conflict management strategy is that, NFL in order to create good will should compensate the players as the league has done in the past. One flat rate should be applied and given to all those players who are suffering or who filed case against NFL. However NFL should make it clear that they are not compensating because they are guilty but they are doing it so because they value their players more, it is not about figures and numbers but for them lives are important. Likewise NFL should make changes and serious enhancements should be made regarding the concussion management. Player after receiving concussion should be examined by the board of doctors, they should judge the players health and then pass the verdicts regarding further carrying or stopping the game. Meanwhile psychological analysis of the players should be done on regular basis. As this sport involves massive use of force and power therefore injuries are part of it. Further clear rules and regulations and all necessary outcomes of the game should be discussed and clearly told to players in writing. Risks and consequences of injuries should be properly mentioned and board’s stance should be clear. That if a player receives a concussion or injury in between match or while playing for the league, then league will going to offer these services and are going to compensate or sponsor this much. While players on the other hand should know that playing this sport is equal to fighting a war. One might receive serious injury within instant. If all possible actions are discussed before then confinement of future conflicts can be done up to great extent. Another simple way out is that both parties should come up with the understanding that what is done it is done, future of the sports and players should be safe, new innovations should be brought into sports plus more efforts regarding safety of players should be done. If possible bring some changes in the game, or use of more strong protecting equipment should be used which further guarantees players safety. Likewise this conflict can further be resolved through amalgamation or blending of collaborative conflict management theory or strategy with interest based relational approach. Application of Interest based relational approach for resolving conflicts: According to this approach the first priority for both parties should be of building relationship (Furlong, 2005), by giving it serious importance. NFL and athletes should try to come up with a way that their relationship is not hampered. As both the conflicting parties have given their valuable time and money to each other and has brought enormous value in this game. Therefore both conflicting parties should do as much as they can in order to collaborate and sort out their differences through negotiations. The main reason behind building this relationship is because both the conflicting parties are going through sufferings therefore it is their need to resolve the conflict and maintain a healthy relationship amongst themselves. Moreover NFL and players should work on the policy of separating people from problems (Furlong, 2005), as there are times when small issues are heightened because of personal differences or issues. Therefore NFL should consider this aspect; likewise players should also play their parts in this regard, by sorting out the differences, bringing core issues on the discussion table can help resolving the conflict with ease and within time. Because at times fighting against each other or personal grudges can result in deviating from core issues and further worsening the situation. Similarly both parties should succinctly focus on their interests that are available to them, through collaboration and identifying their interest (Furlong, 2005), options can very much help in resolving the conflict up to great extent. Moreover both conflicting parties are likely to garner evidence regarding the motives of other party, through collaboration and effective bargaining this matter can be resolved. Likewise it is better to argue on the basis of facts and figures rather than presenting assumptions and ideas. In order to resolve any kind of conflict facts are important as they create a legal boundary and shows who is right and who is wrong. Judging and evaluating these facts both parties should change their stances, leaving a bit ground for each other would be an ideal situation. Conflicts are resolved from collaborations. The ideal way to resolve this conflict is to search for new horizons together, what is done it is done no one can change it, but one can change the future by correcting and taking right decisions now. Conclusion: Football is amongst the most watched sports in America, this game has so many diehard fans in America and around the world. Their love for the game makes this game the most popular game in America. In terms of business this game generates enormous amount of revenues both for the league and for the players as well. That is the reason why players and boards at time push extra or beyond their limits to deal with the game. As a result ends up creating trouble for them, this was the case with NFL and athletes, when serious allegations were raised from formers players blaming that NFL is responsible for their concussions because they deliberately blind folded their players regarding their health and consequences of concussions. Whereas NFL stance regarding this matter is total opposite. As a result serious conflict is going on between players and the league. Meanwhile in order to resolve this conflict collaboration strategy is proposed in this paper, as this is the only way out that will ensure not only resolution of the problem but will garner healthy relationship amongst the board and the players. However this issue is of great significance, as thousands of lives around the world directly or indirectly dependent upon the game and the concussion issue. Because of the nature of the game and the possibilities of receiving serious head injuries proper considerations should be given to this matter. The government should intervene in this matter and try to provide better safety measures for the players and restrict the manipulation of the boards or coaches which at times results in creating catastrophe. On the other hand the role of league is also of great importance; they should voluntarily highlight the concussions and provide safer ambiance for players. Moreover specialist doctors should be always presented in the team which should evaluate the condition of the players. These doctors in my view should be neutral, and by any means should not be biased because it is the matter of life and death of the player and their families. Similarly role of the players is also important as they should not hide their mental conditions from doctors. They should ensure their safety first. As often these players are driven by the money involved in the game. In a broader spectrum, people or audience should also keep an eye on this game. They should raise their voices and boycott those teams who are foul playing. Likewise the role of advertisers and marketers should also be intact with social responsibility. Moreover if there is a need of alterations in the game, those alterations should be done on the urgent basis. References Carrabis, A. (2011). Head Hunters: The Rise of Neurological Concussions in American Football and Its Legal Implications. Harvard Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law, 2(2): 371-386 CDR Associates. (2007). Conflict resolution for managers and leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dana, D. (2001). Conflict resolution. New York: McGraw-Hill Deutsch, M. (2011). Constructive conflict management for the world today. Conflict, Independence, and Justice, 11: 289-307 ESPN. (2012). Lawsuit: NFL hid brain injury links. Retrieved December 6, 2012, from http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8020190/former-nfl-players-say-league-hid-brain-injury-links Furlong, G. (2005). The conflict resolution toolbox: models and maps for analyzing diagnosing and resolving conflict. Canada: John Wiley & Sons. Gaines, C. (2012). 97% of NFL players with history of head trauma show signs of brain disease. Business Insider. Retrieved December 7, 2012, from http://www.businessinsider.com/study-97-of-nfl-players-with-history-of-head-trauma-show-signs-of-brain-disease-2012-12 Gerardi, K. (2011). Tackles that Rattle the Brain. 18 Sports Lawyers Journal, 181 Goodall, JR., H., Goodall, S., and Schiefelbein, J. (2010). Business and professional communication in the global workplace. Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Gregory, S. (2010). The Problem with Football: How to make it Safer. Time Magazine. Retrieved December 6, 2012, from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1957459,00.html Jeong, H. (2010). Conflict Management and resolution: an introduction. New York: Routledge. Littlejohn, S., and Domenici, K. (2007). Communication, conflict, and the management of difference. Illinois: Waveland Press Inc. Rahim, M. (2011). Managing conflict on organizations. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers Shamberg, Johnson & Bergman Chtd., (2009). HS football concussion – injury - $3 million settlement. Retrieved December 6, 2012, from http://www.sjblaw.com/CM/Verdicts-Settlements/HS-Football-Concussion-Injury.asp Thomas, K. (1992). Conflict and conflict management: reflections and update. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(3): 265-274 Tomlinson, J., Nicolini, A., and Vescio, S. (2011). Concussions and injuries in Canadian and American contact sports: a legal perspective. Retrieved December 5, 2012, from http://mccagueborlack.com/uploads/articles/102/concussions_contact_sports.pdf?1335533239 Read More