Conflict and resolution
Important strategists such as classical China's Sun Tzu and early modern Europe's Clausewitz stressed that wise leaders must understand conflicts as they unfold. It is not enough to be involved in strife; the chance of a successful resolution is much higher if you can understand what started it, how it proceeded and how it ended-and whether that end is permanent or temporary. In this Assignment, you will consider a conflict you have witnessed and apply what you have learned to see it more clearly.
To complete this Assignment:
Recall a recent conflict within an organization that you have witnessed. Based on your reading and the lecture, consider what kind of conflict it was and identify the types of power at play. Discuss what the groups involved hoped to achieve and how they intended to do so.
Consider the stages of the conflict that you observed.
Analyze the stages through which it passed. In particular, describe which of the five principal forms of resolution described in the Lecture Notes below was achieved at its conclusion-or temporary cessation.
Your document should have 600+ words
Lecture Notes :
Conflicts and negotiations
The word ‘conflict' has a negative connotation-and early managerial theories used it exactly insuch a manner. Conflicts have been seen as something that disrupts the workplace and working conditions. This is a correct view if we take the extreme forms of conflicts as violence,destruction and irrational behaviour of staff. Luckily, most conflicts are not of that kind (McNamara, n.d.). Modern theories suggest that the presence of a moderate level of conflict may not be a bad thing, because softer forms of conflict may awaken people from a lethargic state and non-responsive behaviour. If there is no conflict, people usually stop interacting and thinking about progress and change. As our life is not static, static organisations quickly get left behind.
They should aim for changes and improvements. For that reason, functional (constructive) forms of conflict are desirable-see Figure 21.1 of Huczynski and Buchanan (2013, p.730). They question the content of work (Is what we do meaningful?), the process of its completion (Do we do it in a reasonable manner?) or the personal relationships at the workplace (What is the benefit of having the X department?)
Every conflict evolves in several stages: from the discovery of a problem or discrepancy (disclosing the problem's existence), through its cognition and personalisation (who is disturbed by it, how he/she sees it and whether he/she is ready to be involved in its resolution) and forming intentions (building proposed solutions and looking for potential partners) to expressing the decision to solve it by activity and behaviour. Only the fourth stage is the one in which the conflict can be observed from the outside. The involved parties act towards an outcome. In the end, resolution usually occurs through one of the five principal forms:
• Collaborating: This is the most positive outcome. The parties involved join their interests to the mutual benefit of all involved.
• Competing: This is the least acceptable outcome. The parties fight until the final victory goes to one of them. The result can be rather negative for the organisation regardless of which side wins.
• Compromise is a mutually acceptable solution based on concessions from both partners from their original positions. Compromises are common in various business negotiations (e.g. discussing salary increments with trade union
leaders).
• Accommodating means that an agreement has been achieved by placing the interest of one partner above the interests of the other one. The problem is that the submissive partner may not be convinced about the necessity of his/her concession and may bide his/her time until he/she is able to gain the upper hand.
• Avoiding is the worst approach. The parties stop discussing the situation and pretend that the problem does not exist. Naturally, ignoring the problem does not solve it. Given time, unsolved problems can transform into disasters.