Conflicts Resolution in the Workplace - Literature review Example

Name: Course: Institution: Tutor: Conflicts Resolution in the Workplace: A Case Study Introduction Conflicts are a common occurrence in the work place and are a major cause of underperformance and reduced productivity. Basically, a conflict refers to a situation of sharp disagreements or opposition of interests or ideas and can involve both managers and junior employees. When conflicts occur in the workplace, they can reduce employee morale, lead to high turnover rates and cause high profile confrontations which can in turn lead to serious and violent crimes such as physical assault. In his book, Mayer (2009) has noted that managers spend about two tenths of their time solving conflicts and reconciling parties with divergent views. Obviously, this affects the productivity of managers as well as that of conflicting parties and can have adverse impacts on organizational performance. Considering that conflicts are a major challenge facing today’s managers and employees, this paper, which is based on case study, provides insights into the nature of conflicts in organizations, their cause and the various ways of resolving them. Identifying the Source and Nature of conflict at Personal Investments Weinstein, (2005) has clearly highlighted that there are eight common causes of conflicts in the workplace. These are: conflicting resources; conflicting styles; conflicting perceptions; conflicting goals; conflicting pressures; conflicting roles; conflicting personal values and unpredictable organizational policies. Three of these sources (conflicting styles, conflicting perceptions and conflicting roles) are clearly evident at Personal Investments. Conflicts involving working styles and approaches to management arise from the fact that employees work differently according to their personality and individual orientations in the workplace. As an example, some people like getting things done at the last minute while others like the structure of strict deadlines. However, when working styles clash, conflicts are bound to occur (Mayer, 2009). In the case study, the issue of conflicting styles involves Tabitha on one hand and the rest of managers on the other hand. Tabitha is convinced that emerging technologies and issues presents opportunities for the company to diversify its investment portfolio. However, the other managers are too conservative and belief that the company should only work on obtaining its initial objectives (Kessler et al, 2008). The issue of conflicting perceptions arises because people have different views of what the organizations needs to do in order to achieve its objectives. Where there are differences in the perceptions of events, conflicts can occur (Stewart et al, 2005). This is especially the case when one person knows something that other people do not know. In the case study, Tabitha knows that if the company expands its investments to include emerging technologies, it can dramatically increase its client base and revenues. Although she enjoys wide support from junior employees, her perceptions of the organization’s future are discordant to that of colleagues in the senior management who believe that taking such a move presents increased risks for the company. In addition to causing conflicts, different perceptions are a major cause of office politics, which in turn causes poor organizational performance (Nydegger & Nydegger, 2010). When two or more parties pursue incompatible goals or when the values of employees differ significantly, conflicts can occur. Differences in goals and values can be seen clearly when new employees are hired or when promotions are made. New hires may possess different managerial and working values than existing workers. Although differences in values are not necessarily a cause of conflicts in the workplace, failure to accept the differences can be a major cause of misunderstandings hence conflicts in the workplace (Stewart et al, 2005). When existing employees fail to accept new employees’ approaches, co-workers may start to insult each other’s experiences and characters as can be evidenced by Susan’s frustration with Tabitha. Insults can cause sabotage and deliberate undermining of genuine efforts to drive an organization into new levels of productivity and achievement. Strategies for Effective Conflict Resolution and Management In many cases, conflicts in the workplace are a fact of life. The fact that conflicts exist in the workplace is not necessarily a bad thing since so long as the conflicts are resolved effectively. Nydegger and Nydegger (2010) have asserted that effective conflicts management in the workplace can make the difference between negative and positive outcomes of the conflicts. The good thing is that by resolving conflicts successfully, many problems that are likely to appear at the surface are mitigated. This in turn gives the benefits that might not be foreseen in advance such as avoidance of employee turnover. Research studies have highlighted five major styles of dealing with conflicts that vary in the degree of assertiveness and cooperativeness. These styles are: competitive; collaborative; compromising; accommodating and avoiding. People who use the competitive style take a firm stand and understand what they want. This style usually operates from a position of power and is drawn from things such as rank, position or persuasive ability. The competitive conflict resolution style is useful when there is urgency and a decision needs to be made, no matter how unpopular the decision is (Jorfi & Jorfi, 2012). The collaborative approach involves making efforts to meet the demands and interests of the people involved in a conflict. Although each party might be highly assertive, they cooperate effectively and accept that every party has legitimate interests (Hansen & Kahnweiler, 2007). The collaborative approach tends to be effective when there is need to bring together different viewpoints in order to reach a solution or when the conflict is too complicated for a simple trade-off. People who prefer the compromising style tend to look for a solution that will at least satisfy everyone partially. In this conflict resolution style, everyone tries to give up something or part of a claim (Bigoness & Blakely, 2006). Compromising is effective when the cost of the conflict is more than the cost of losing ground or when equal opponents are at a standstill and a deadline is looming. The collaborative approach is the one that was used to solve the conflict in the case study (Personal Investments). The accommodating style indicates willingness to meet the needs of others at the expense of one’s own needs. Here, the accommodator is often supposed to know when it is right to give in to others although persuasions can be used to surrender positions when situations warrantee (Weinstein, 2005). The accommodation strategy is effective when certain issues matter more than others or when peace and understanding are more valuable than simply winning. The avoiding strategy is used when one wants to avoid the conflict entirely. With this style, controversial decisions can be delegated or default decisions accepted so long as the other party’s feelings are not hurt. The style is appropriate when the conflict is trivial, when victory is impossible or when someone else is better suited to solve the problem. However, this is a weak and highly ineffective approach in many situations (Hoel, Cooper & Faragher, 2008). Not all the above styles can be used to being about desired solution for the conflict in Personal Investments. Ideally, any conflict resolution approach that is to be adopted in this case should be able to resolve the problems, respect every concerned party’s legitimate interest and mend any damaged working relationships. In view of this consideration, the collaborative approach is the most effective strategy for solving the conflict at Personal Investments. As has already been noted, the collaborative approach recognizes that each party to a conflict has genuine and legitimate concerns. Therefore, the approach tends to seek a principles and negotiated resolution of a conflict without the use of adversarial techniques or litigation. The most important thing with this technique is that cooperative workplace practices replace adversarial techniques and hence the disputants can face each other in seeking a common solution to a conflict (Thatcher, 2006). The collaborative approach to conflict resolution can be applied to effectively solve the conflict involving Tabitha and other managers without compromising work relationships and the ability of the company to achieve its stated strategic objectives. Through the collaborative approach, all parties to the conflict (including the company Chief Executive Officer and line managers) can hold the right discussion in order to reach the discussion needed to solve the conflict and expand on each person’s awareness of the situation (Giga, Cooper & Faragher, 2009). A major advantage of taking a collaborative approach in conflict resolution is that it increases group cohesion in the workplace. If resolved effectively, group members can develop stronger ties and improved work relationships, mutual respect and a renewed determination to work together to achieve common objectives. In addition, the strategy increases self-knowledge as it pushes individuals to examine their interests and values in close detail. This way, parties to the conflict gain the capacity to understand things that are most important to them, sharpen their focus and enhance effectiveness (Thatcher, 2006). When engaging the collaborative approach in conflict resolution, it is imperative to distinguish between concerns and positions. Basically, concerns are things or values that people in a conflict care about. For instance, Tabitha wants to ensure that the company remains competitive by diversifying the range of its investment portfolio. On the other hand, the managers who are opposed to this move wants to ensure that the company follows its conservative stance and that it is not subjected to new risk by investing in new and upcoming businesses (Eisenberger, Huntingdon, Hutchinson & Sowa, 2006). Positions are the way that different parties recommend as a way of satisfying their concerns. When looking for the concerns of each party, there are possibilities of finding other innovative solutions, which may in turn satisfy the needs of each party. Generally, the collaborative approach can be effective if all parties to a conflict agree to face each other on an equal level. It is imperative that such discussions do not degenerate into personality conflicts and clashes as these can be highly destructive. Conclusion Conflicts are common in the workplace and involve different parties with different interests and claims. No matter how diverse interests in a conflict are, it is imperative that appropriate mechanisms are employed to resolve the conflict to everybody’s satisfaction. Essentially, the best conflict resolution strategies should be able to promote understanding and cohesiveness in the workplace. If poorly chosen or implemented, conflict resolution strategies can result in costly outcomes such as misunderstanding among employees or implementation of a wrong solution. References Bigoness, W & Blakely, G 2006, “A cross-national study of managerial values”, Journal of International Business Studies, p. 739-753. Eisenberger, R., Huntingdon, R., Hutchinson, S. & Sowa, D 2006, Perceived Organizational Support, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 71, no. 3, p. 500-507. Giga, S. I., Cooper, C & Faragher, B 2009, The Development of a Framework for a Comprehensive Approach to Stress Management Interventions at Work, International Journal of Stress Management. Special Issue: Stress and Its Management in Occupational Settings, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 280-296. Hansen, C & Kahnweiler, W 2007, Executive managers: Cultural expectations through stories about work, Journal of Applied Management Studies, p. 117-139. Hoel, H., Cooper, C & Faragher, B 2008, The experience of bullying in Great Britain: The impact of organizational status, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, vol. 10, p. 443-465. Jorfi, H & Jorfi, M 2012, "Management: A Study of Organizational Culture and the Relationship between Emotional Intelligence and Communication Effectiveness (Case Study in Organizations of Iran)", Journal of Management Research, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1- 14. Kessler, R. C., Greenberg, P and Mickelson, K, et al. 2008, “The effects of chronic medical conditions on work loss and cutback”, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 43, no. 3, p. 218-225. Mayer, B 2009, The Dynamics of Conflict Resolution A Practioner's Guide. Available on the internet at http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/The%20Dynamics%20of%20Conflict%20Resolution. pdf. Nydegger, R & Nydegger, L 2010, "Challenges In Managing Virtual Teams", Journal of Business & Economics Research, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 69-82. Stewart, W, Ricci, J, & Chee E, et al. 2005, Cost of lost productive work time among U.S. workers with depression. JAMA 289(23): 3135-3144. Thatcher, M 2006, "Segmenting the workforce to improve communication", Strategic Communication Management, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 26-29. Weinstein, J 2005, Resources and the information problem in rebel recruitment, Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 49, no. 4, p. 598-624. Read More