Workplace Conflict Resolution and Effective Collaboration - Assignment Example

? Analysis of a Session for Employee Conflict Resolution Introduction Human endeavor produces the best results when all individuals involved are equally tuned into the task at hand and work seamlessly as a single unit (Eunson, 1997). But such situations are rare even in the best of workplaces. Different individuals have different needs and subscribe to different work ethics. Generations tend to experience cohort effects, and it can become difficult for individuals from two different generations to understand each other’s attitudes and beliefs about the work and the workplace. Often, individuals at different levels in the hierarchy have different priorities; and this can lead to a clash of opinions about the importance of any particular task (Bolton, 1996). Although there are times when conflict is a good thing (when it reduces Groupthink and enhances critical analysis that improves quality (Jex, & Britt, 2008); more often than not, the outcome of workplace conflict is negative for both - the individuals involved and the organization. When there are significant differences of opinion between co – workers, there is a chance that there will be a conflict among these individuals (Geldard, 1998). Conflicts in the workplace tend to create a negative atmosphere and raise the stress levels of not only the concerned but also other employees. A large amount of energy gets expended due to such conflicts, and productivity gets affected, as does the quality of products and services (Acland, 1990). At times, the conflict may lead to altercations in the workplace or outside it; and may adversely affect the work environment and even the quality of the final product or service provided by the organisations (Jex, & Britt, 2008). It is thus necessary for any manager to address conflicts as soon as they occur so that they do not grow beyond manageable proportions. When the conflict is between two individuals or within a group of individuals and the cause seems to be personal; it is deemed best that the issue be dealt with to the advantage of all concerned parties in order to restore peace and improve the quality of the workplace relationships shared by employees (Bono, Boles, Judge, and Lauver, 2002). Scenario Overview The present scenario depicts a conflict that has multiple aspects. Two co-workers are in conflict over the way tasks should be done and communication lines that need to be followed. The manager has observed that the age difference between the two men – one is over 20 years senior to the other – is adding to the conflict; and there are increasing numbers of loud arguments happening in the workplace (Bodtker & Jaimeson, 2001). As a result of the conflict between these two workers whose tasks are to some extent interdependent; the quality of the job outputs for both have been affected; and despite warnings, they have been unable to find common ground and bury their differences (Acland, 1990). Thus, the manager has deemed it best that the two workers – Steven and David – be sent for counseling to deal with the conflict at hand and find a solution that helps both parties. The agenda for this session is to identify the root of the problems that Steven and David have been having and to find a solution that helps both of them to do their individual jobs well without having to break up the working relationship. In an attempt to help Steven and David resolve their conflicts, it was decided that they should be called in together for a group session and Mapping for Conflict Management should be used in an attempt to help them find common ground and thus to find solutions to the strife that they were experiencing at work. The therapist asked them each to state their perspective on the issues that they were having, and how this affected them. Upon having understood the perspectives of both Steven and David, they were asked to then be part of the mapping exercise, and their needs and concerns in relation to the conflict were discussed. As the clients spoke, the therapist noted down the gist of their opinions, and then paraphrased the same in order to examine the higher order needs for each client (Weeks, 1994). These were then discussed so that the therapist was sure that the client in question felt the same way about the basic needs and concerns as perceived by the therapist. It became evident from the discussion that both the clients wanted similar outcomes in respect to the conflict, but were unable to get to these said outcomes by themselves. Steven wanted co-operation, communication and harmony, while David also wanted harmony and co-operation along with some understanding. Steven’s concerns were with David’s attitude towards him and the work, and his level of involvement and communication which he felt needed to improve. David also felt concern about Steven’s attitude towards him, his co-operation and communication style and felt a lack of understanding about his problems with customers. From this it became evident that both the employees wanted the same things, but were having problems with communication. Steven did state that he believed that his age gave him a better perspective on the kind of seriousness required for work, while David felt that Steven continually looked down at him for being younger and less experienced. This attitude difference that was a product of the age difference between the two was affecting their communication and causing arguments because both felt that the other was not making an effort to understand his individual problems at work (de Bono, 1991). It is possible that is resentment also affected their ability to work together even more. Effective Techniques The therapist used a number of techniques that helped aid understanding and reduce conflict. She reflected back her understanding of what she had heard to both the clients. This technique of active listening helped clarify the issues that were being discussed, and brought out the common ground that was unseen by both clients (Burley-Allen, 1993). The therapist also showed empathy for both Steven and David when she expressed her understanding of their problems by saying, “Steven, I understand that you are saying that you own a big semi and you go elsewhere…” And “David, I understand that you are saying that sometimes customers change their orders and … you have to then change is and you get into trouble for that”. Statements like these help the therapist show her understanding of the problems and issues that the client’s are dealing with in their individual tasks. The validation of these concerns helps them understand that their issues are not being discounted; but the therapist nevertheless sees possibility for growth in spite of these problems. A lot of non – verbal communication has been used throughout this session. The therapist has used eye contact and hand gestures to emphasise her attention to each of the two clients. When either has made a point about some concern or issue she has acknowledged the significance of this issue by nodding her head in understanding, and has also shown attention by leaning slightly forward to underline her availability and involvement in the discussion (Cornelius, & Faire, 1989). The therapist used the process of Mapping for Conflict Resolution since the conflict was between two individuals (Conflict Resolution Network, 1993). Another reason that validated the use of mapping was that although there was a lot of conflict occurring, there was not clear indication of what the main issue was. Thus, the clear and systematic process used for mapping was considered as a potential asset in understanding the reasons for the conflict. Retrospective analysis showed that Mapping did help bring out the central issues that were not obvious before, and that the different perceptions of the two clients’ was affecting their ability to communicate and resolve the problems that they had been having. Mapping was carried out by the therapist in a step by step manner, in which first one then the other client was required to respond verbally to the questions about the needs, desires and issues related to the individual as well as the job itself. The therapist probed for these points by asking questions like “If you could just tell me what YOU need to have this situation fixed… what do you require…?”; “What do you want to happen in there?” “What do you think, what are your needs?” The therapist also clarified her understanding of the issues by paraphrasing the answers given by the client’s using statements like “So, you’d want his attitude to change towards you, and for him to co-operate more, and the communication.” “If I say that your needs were harmony in the workforce, and some understanding, and co-operation… would you agree with that?” The process of mapping did bring clarity to the problems; as the therapist identified that the two clients’s both wanted harmony and co-cooperation; but differed on their understanding of communication procedures and of each other’s problems (Tillett, 2006). On reflection about the way in which this technique was used; it may be said that the therapist could have done some things differently. She did not introduce the process adequately; nor did she acquaint the clients with the utility of the process – a step which could have gained her more involvement from the clients in aspects that they may be somewhat defensive. Also; the discussion about the results could have been more elaborate; especially considering that the Mapping did bring out significant similarities and clarified the areas that needed to be addressed. The therapist did emphasise on a win – win approach right from the beginning of the session; and this helped set the tone for both clients as they were assured that there would be no blame associated with any one person (Beale & Holinsworth, 2002). This was depicted in opening statements like ”… to help both of you today.” Also, this perspective was reinforced later in the session with statements like “it does seem like both of you want the same things” and closing statements like “I’m sure it will be a more amicable situation for(both).” These statements also established a common ground for the clients (Tillett, 2006). The experience of having something in common helps people bond and gives them the motivation to overcome conflict. A win – win approach encourages both parties to become involved in the problem resolution process; and also ensures that each does experience some validation and satisfaction from the experiences of problem solving (Conflict Resolution Network, 1993). A win – win situation is the best outcome in a situation which is not caused by particular mistakes or fallacies; but is a product of personality issues (Beale & Holinsworth, 2002). Weaknesses Identified Although the techniques used by the therapist were effective in the process of finding a solution to the conflict between Steven and David; there were some shortcomings that affected the impact of the session. The lack of emphasis on the process of mapping has already been mentioned. Other issues that were observed were that the therapist did not dwell adequately on the resolution of the conflict, and the strategies that could be used for the same. Towards the end of the session; the therapist quickly summed up the results of mapping by saying “I just have to wonder if perhaps you could work towards (co-operation) in the next week, two weeks. Give it a chance and see how it goes. And perhaps you can both be a little bit more tolerant of each other and communicate a bit more….” The actual behaviours that Steven and David could practice have not been discussed in detail; and the choice of how to particularly manifest the new understanding of each other has been left to them to some extent. The concern in this situation is that often, it can be difficult for people to change their behaviours even when they know that they said behaviours are not effective or optimal – simply because they are unsure of how to cope with the situation. The therapist also did not discuss the age dynamics; although openings were provided by both clients at different points during the session. Near the beginning, Steven says “Due to my age, I have a good work ethic…”; A statement whose meaning was neither explored nor challenged. Again, about two thirds of the session later, David says “… Treat me like an equal and not treat me like an inexperienced kid…”. This experience of David’s was also not addressed. The therapist could have included the age dynamic during the summing up as well, but did not. Given that the brief provided by the employer of Steven and David had expressed concern about the effect of the age dynamic; and that both clients did speak about it; the issue should have been dealt with during the session; or should have at least been given some attention. But the issue was skirted completely; and thus its effect on the conflict has not been discussed. Conclusion In conclusion we may state that the therapist did use adequate and effective techniques to help the clients with the conflict that they had been experiencing. The therapist did attend to the issue that were presented, and used active listening and body language to indicate her understanding and involvement with the concerns of both the clients. She emphasized a win – win situation that would be beneficial to both clients; and came to a conclusion about the root of the problem; and suggested some strategies for alleviating the problem that came out of the discussion. The use of mapping for conflict resolution was effective as the clients were able to close in on the issues that were at the heart of the conflict; and thus gained better understanding about the reasons for the stress that they experienced when working together; and the factors that kept them from finding solutions (Tillett, 2006). On the other hand, the therapist did not explain the process of mapping adequately to the clients; and thus did not extract their complete commitment to the process of mapping. The results were also sloppily discussed; and the conclusions drawn were rushed. The therapist could have paid more attention to the conflict resolution strategies; and they did not seem adequately discussed in retrospective analysis. The process of conducting a conflict resolution session can be difficult and stressful for the therapist as well (Geldard, 1998); since the onus of keeping a balance between the aggrieved parties is upon them. There are moments when an inexperienced individual does question the validity of broaching an issue, or pushing further to understand or resolve a situation as it is imperative that the client does not feel blamed or cornered. These concerns lead to the inexperienced therapist erring on the side of caution; and some issues may not be adequately addressed due to their being sensitive; and some decisions are taken too cautiously since the therapist is concerned about not hurting the client. It is thus essential that a counselor or therapist practice conflict resolution strategies and equip themselves with adequate understanding of the procedures so that they are able to carry out an effective session (Weeks, 1994). In a final analysis, it may be said that the therapist who conducts a conflict resolution session often walks a tight rope between being abrasive and ineffective (Geldard, 1998). Although the good intentions of the professional protect them from harming the client too much; an ineffective session has its own consequences for the client (Tillett, 2006). It is thus a responsibility that must be shouldered only after adequate preparation of the intellect as well as ability it order that the clients benefit from the session and find some resolution to the issues that have prompted them to get help. References Acland, A.F. 1990. A Sudden Outbreak of Common Sense-Managing Conflict through Mediation. London: Hutchinson Business. Beale, A.V. and Holinsworth. S.R. 2002. Achieving congruence between employee interests and county jobs: a win-win proposition. Journal of Employment Counselling. 39:1. 22-30. Bodtker, A.M. and Jaimeson, J.K. 2001. Emotion in conflict formation and its transformation: application to organizational conflict management. The International Journal of Conflict Management. 12: 3. 259-275. Bolton. R. 1996. People Styles at Work: Making Bad Relationships Good and Good Relationships Better. Australia: Simon and Schuster. Bono. J.E .. Boles. T.L.. Judge. T.A and Lauver. K,J. 2002. The role of personality in task and relationship conflict. Journal of Personality. 70:3.311-44. Burley-Allen, M. 1993. Listening. the Forgotten Skill. Community Based Projects. Chatswood. Australia: Conflict Resolution Network. Conflict Resolution Network 1993. Conflict Resolution Trainers' Manual - 12 skills. Chatswood. Australia: The Conflict Resolution Network. Cornelius. H. and Faire, S. 1989. Everyone Can Win: How to Resolve Conflict. Australia: Simon and Schuster. de Bono. E. 1991. Conflicts. A Better Way to Resolve Them. London: Penguin Books. Eunson, B. 1997. Dealing with Conflict. Milton, Queensland: John WHey and Sons. Geldard, D. 1998. Basic Personal Counselling (3rd edn.) Sydney: Prentice Hall. Jex, S.M. & Britt, T.W. 2008. Organizational Psychology. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc Tillett, G. 2006. Resolving Conflict, A Practical Approach (3rd edn.) South Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Weeks, D. 1994. The Eight Essential Steps to Conflict Resolution. New York: Penguin Putnum Inc. Read More