Conflict Management - Essay Example

Conflict Management Name Institution Date Introduction Conflict management refers to strategic management processes that are implemented with the goal of minimizing the dysfunctions that arise from organizational disagreements. Strategic conflict management practices are aimed at optimizing organizational effectiveness, efficiency and learning experiences. Organizational conflict refers to the collapse of standard decision-making mechanisms to levels where affected individuals or organizations have difficulty in having consensus on the best options (Smith, 1966). This paper explores the various sources of organizational conflict, and the different methods and approaches that are used in formulating and implementing effective conflict management strategies. Organizational Conflict Various definitions of conflict have been provided by different authors, but the concept of conflict has several underlying elements. First and foremost, conflict refers to disagreements in the interests and opinions of individuals or organizations. Secondly, conflict only occurs when these opposing interests are recognized by all parties in dispute. Thirdly, parties that are in conflict situations must have the conviction that the opposing parties are out to frustrate their interests. Conflict is thus a consequence of opposition or incompatibility in the interaction, activities, or goals of individuals or social entities (Burke, 1987). Levels of conflict Classification of organizational conflict can be based on the level at which it occurs (Kelly, 1974). The following are categories of conflict based on the level of occurrence within and among organizations. Intrapersonal conflict Intrapersonal conflict is sometimes referred to as intraindividual conflict, or intrapsychic conflict. Such conflict may occur when there is a mismatch between the responsibilities or duties given to individuals and their abilities, expertise, skills, interests, goals or values. Interpersonal conflict This class of conflict refers to disagreements that involve members of an organization that is at the same or different levels in the organizational chart. Superior-subordinate conflicts fall under this category. Intragroup conflict Intra-group conflict is sometimes referred to as intradepartmental conflict. It occurs when members of a given group or subgroups disagree in opinion over goals, procedures or talks. Disagreements may also involve members of groups and their leaders. Intergroup conflict This category of conflict involves two or many groups or units in an organization. Such conflict is often referred to as interdepartmental conflict. An example of such conflict is a conflict between various departments such as production and marketing. Classification of conflict Conflict classification is based on the sources of the conflicts and the levels in an organization where they arise. Sources of conflict Conflict in an organization can originate from factors such as goals, tasks and values. Conflict based on sources can be classified into several categories that include: Affective conflict: According to Getzkow & Gyr (1954), affective conflict occurs when social entities in their interaction realize the incompatibility of their emotions and feelings in regard to some aspects that concern them. Affective conflict has been labeled differently by various authors. Ross & Ross (1989) refer to it as psychological conflict, while Kelly (1974) refers to it as relationship conflict. Substantive conflict: Substantive conflict is often labeled in conflict management discourse as task conflict or cognitive conflict. Burke (1987) emphasizes that such conflict may arise from disagreements among group members over performance of certain tasks in an organization (Burke, 1987). Conflict of interest: This category is associated with differences in opinions over allocation of scarce resource. It occurs when members of an organization hold different views on the method of distribution of limited resources or the sharing of responsibilities (Druckman & Zechmeister, 1973). Conflict in values: Conflict based on differences in values is sometimes referred to as ideological conflict. It occurs when individuals or members of an organization possess conflicting values that result in incompatibility in their decisions and actions. Conflict management Conflict management as an organizational process may assume different styles depending on the organizations internal and external environment. The different styles of conflict management include: Integration approach The integrating style is regarded to be most effective when conflict managers have to deal with complex problems. The benefit of this strategy is that skills, expertise and information that individuals or groups in conflict have can be utilized in redefining the problem and formulating more effective resolutions. Integration has the added benefit of harnessing the party’s commitment to amicable resolutions. According to Lawrence and Lorsch (1967), this style can be more effective in fostering faster integration of the differentiated activities of an organization’s subsystems. Obliging approach Parties may feel required to play an active role in conflict resolution if they do not have sufficient information regarding the cause of the conflict, or if they acknowledge the issues in contention are of importance to their opponents. Parties may opt for this option if they reckon that there is a benefit in giving up something as a trade-off for a preconceived assistance from the opponents in future. Parties usually get compelled when they are reacting from a weak position, or when they have to sustain a relationship that they regard to be of importance. Dominating approach This strategy may not be effective when the issues in contention have relative importance to the parties involved, or an unfavorable outcome may have detrimental consequences to the parties. A dominating strategy is best suited for cases where for instance, a supervisor has to perform speedy, routine or unpopular measures. Avoiding approach Parties may choose to avoid direct involvement in crisis resolution if confrontation with opponents has a dysfunctional effect on the party’s performance. This approach is used when the issues at stake are trivial. Compromising approach Parties may reach a compromise if the issues in contention are of mutual importance to both parties. Both parties in such a case should be wielding equal power in a situation where negotiations have hit a snag. The probability of reaching a compromise is thus minimal, and getting a temporary solution for an apparently complex problem is imperative. Complex problems that require a formulation of an effective long-term strategy may not be sufficiently handled with this strategy. Conflict management criteria Learning and effectiveness The design and implementation of conflict management strategies need to be focused on enhancing the long-term learning experiences and effectiveness of an organization. According to Mitroff (1998), effective strategies in conflict management should be aimed at enhancing a critical and innovative approach to finding the correct solutions. Stakeholder needs The ultimate objective of designing and implementing effective conflict resolution strategies is to satisfy the expectations and needs of stakeholders. Effective strategies must, therefore be in consideration of the interests and expectations of the organization’s stakeholders. Ethics Ethical conduct refers to the management’s ability and willingness to embrace new information and change their mind accordingly. Subordinates on the same token must exemplify their ethical jurisdiction to challenge inappropriate decisions made by supervisors in case of serious functional impediments. The process of conflict management Conflict management is a process that entails diagnosis of the problem and strategic intervention to achieve a workable solution to the problem. Problem Diagnosis Conflict management begins with a complete diagnosis of the problem. Problem recognition refers to the managers’ ability to sense a problem and formulate issues of contention in practically achievable parameters. A comprehensive evaluation of the causes of organizational conflict has the benefit of revealing the magnitude of the problem, such as whether the affective and substantive conflicts are fairly moderate or substantial. Inadequate problem recognition and analysis have the disadvantage of the wrong problem being addressed, or the right problem being resolved in the wrong way. To effectively diagnose a conflict problem, managers must commence with an accurate measurement of the problem, followed by an analysis of the sources of the problem. Measurement of the problem entails an analysis of the extent of conflict at all levels, ranging from intrapersonal to intergroup levels. Secondly, the styles used by organizational members in resolving the conflicts at all the levels must be evaluated. The sources of the problems must then be identified followed by an in-depth evaluation of individual and group effectiveness. Data from these findings must then be classified based on the parties involved such as units, departments or divisions. Results from the diagnosis are vital in determining whether intervention is needed and the intervention that would be most effective (Burke, 1987). Problem Intervention An indication of excessive affective and substantive conflict or ineffective conflict handling mechanisms is a sure enough reason to formulate and implement effective resolutions. According to Goldman (1991), conflict intervention can be classified into process intervention and structural intervention. Process intervention refers to sequential events and activities undertaken to achieve the desired outcome. Processes include activities such as training, effective communication and leadership forums. Structural intervention refers to the setting up of a reliable task management structure and establishment of the appropriate technological framework that fosters effective and coherent implementation of strategic initiatives. Process intervention: Process intervention aims at enhancing organizational effectiveness through modification of the styles used by an organization’s members in handling conflict. The process approach aims at equipping members with the essential skills and expertise needed in effectively matching conflict handling styles with actual conflict challenges. It requires a holistic strategic initiative to streamline organizational leadership and culture to better support acquired competences in conflict management. Structural intervention: Structural intervention refers to the process of redesigning structural features of the organization in an effort to enhance the effectiveness of organizational processes. Structural modification involves changes in procedures, hierarchy, reward system and enhancement of differential and integration systems. Structural readjustments either bureaucratic or organic are mostly subject to the organizations internal and external environments. More effective management of organizational conflict is largely dependent on the congruence between the organizational design and the internal and external environment. Conclusion As observed by Pondy (1967), organizational theory that does not recognize the significance of conflict is inadequate in preparing companies to deal effectively with challenges such as organizational inefficiency, instability and change. These challenges are symptoms, causes or effects of conflict within or between organizations. Research undertaken in the 1970s established that a conflict did not just have negative consequences on the organization as earlier believed, but a positive result as well (Pondy, 1967). Conflict management as a role of organizational management focuses on minimizing affective conflict and maintaining moderate levels of substantive conflict. A primary purpose of conflict management is to train members of an organization to better handle conflict situations through behavioral conduct such as integrating, compromising, obliging and avoiding. References Burke, W. W. (1987). Organization development: A normative view. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Deutsch, M. (1977). The resolution of conflict. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Goldman, A. L. (1991). Settling for more: Mastering negotiating strategies and techniques. Washington, DC: Bureau of National Affairs. Kelly, J. (1974). Organizational behavior (rev. ed.). Homewood, IL: Irwin. Pondy, L. R. (1967). Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 296–320. Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Differentiation and integration in complex Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 1–47. Mitroff, I. I. (1998). Smart thinking for crazy times: The art of solving the right problems. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Smith, B. D. & Principato, F. (1983). Effects of conflict and field structure on arousal and motor responses. British Journal of Psychology, 74, 213–222. Ross, R. S., & Ross, J. R. (1989). Small groups in organizational settings. Eglewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Read More