Saturday, December 18, 2010

organizational leadership

Abstract: “As organizations continue to restructure to work teams, the need for training in conflict resolution will grow. Conflict arises from differences. When individuals come together in teams, their differences in terms of power, values, and attitudes contribute to the creation of conflict. To avoid the negative consequences that can result from disagreements, most methods of resolving conflict stress the importance of dealing with disputes quickly and openly. Conflict is not necessarily destructive; however, when managed properly, conflict can result in benefits for a team. (Bowditch & Buono, 1997)
Introduction
            We all are of two minds about conflict. We say that conflict is natural, inevitable, necessary, and normal, and that the problem is not the existence of conflict but how we handle it. But we are also loath to admit that we are in the midst of conflict. Parents assure their children that the ferocious argument the parents are having is not a conflict, just a discussion. Organizations will hire facilitators to guide them in strategic planning, goal setting, quality circles, team building, and all manner of training, but they shy away from asking for help with internal conflicts. Somehow, to say that we are in conflict is to admit a failure and to acknowledge the existence of a situation we consider hopeless.
            This ambivalence about conflict is rooted in the same primary challenge conflict resolvers face-coming to terms with the nature of conflict. As conflict resolvers, we may think of conflict on many different levels. How we view conflict will largely determine our attitude and approach to dealing with it. Conflict may be viewed as a feeling, a disagreement, a real or perceived incompatibility of interests, inconsistent worldviews, or a set of behaviors. If we are to be effective in handling conflict, we must start with an understanding of its nature. We need tools that help us separate out the many complex interactions that make up a conflict, that help us understand the roots of conflict, and that give us a reasonable handle on the forces that motivate the behavior of all participants,
            In this assignment will take a look at some established steps that will assist us, how to effectively deal with work teams in group members having different viewpoints. These simple guidelines will make the difference between failure and success. Some professional scholar concerned with how people handle their different can focus on decision making, negotiation, communicating and, stimulus response, power exchange and so forth to resolve the conflict. (Varney, 1989). However, in order to simplify the task of handling complex conflicts, we need to complicate our thinking about conflict itself. This is an ongoing challenge for everyone concerned with conflict and its resolution.

Definition of conflict
            Conflict is process that results when one person (a group of people) perceive that another person or group is frustrating, or about frustrate, an important concern. Conflict involve incompatible differences between parties that result in interference or opposition. (Vecchio, 2003). Conflict may be also viewed as occurring along cognitive (perception), emotional (feeling), and behavioral (action) dimensions. This three-dimensional perspective can help us understand the complexities of conflict and why a conflict sometimes seems to proceed in contradictory directions.
·         Conflict as Perception
As a set of perceptions, conflict is a belief or understanding that one's own needs, interests, wants, or values are incompatible with someone else's. There are both objective and subjective elements to this cognitive dimension. Conflict can view from subjective and objective. For example subjective view, if you do something for the other people, maybe in your mine it is only joke, but the other people think you make trouble with them. And the objective example, both you and your friend want finish your education, in this situation you want finish your education with positive way looks like study smart, make assignment or something else. But the other way your friend it cheating. But both of you have some objective to finish your study.
·         Conflict as Feeling
Conflict also involves an emotional reaction to a situation or interaction that signals a disagreement of some kind. The emotions felt might be fear, sadness, bitterness, anger, or hopelessness, or some amalgam of these. And in conflicts, it does not take two to tango. Often a conflict exists because one person feels in conflict with another, even though those feelings are not reciprocated by or even known to the other person. The behavioral component may be minimal, but the conflict is still very real to the person experiencing the feelings. For example, If we experience these feelings in regard to another person or situation, we feel that we are in conflict-and therefore we are. As a mediator, I have sometimes seen people behave as if they were in great disagreement over profound issues, yet I have not been able to ascertain exactly what they disagreed about. Nonetheless, they were in conflict because they felt they were.
·         Conflict as action
Conflict also consists of the actions that we take to express our feelings, articulate our perceptions, and get our needs met in a way that has the potential for interfering with someone else's ability to get his or her needs met. This conflict behavior may involve a direct attempt to make something happen at someone else's expense. It may be an exercise of power. It may be violent. It may be destructive. Conversely, this behavior may be conciliatory, constructive, and friendly. But, whatever its tone, the purpose of conflict behavior is either to express the conflict or to get one's needs met. Again, the question of reciprocity exists. For example, if you write letters to the editor, sign petitions, and consult lawyers to stop my shopping center, and I do not even know you exist, are we in conflict? Can you be in conflict with me if I am not in conflict with you? Theory aside, I think the practical answer to both of these questions is yes.

Changing view conflict
1.      Traditional view
             Conflict has changed over the years. The earlier view was to consider conflict as harmful and unnecessary. The existence of conflict was regarded as a sign that something was wrong and required correction. According to this traditional view, conflict serves no useful purpose because it distract manager’s attention and saps energy and resource. Thus, conflict should be avoided. In additional, conflict was seen as the result of poor management and effort of troublemaker. Trough proper management techniques and removal of troublemaker, conflict could be eliminated and optimal performance could be achieve. Consistent with this view, studies report that employees who experience conflict have lower job satisfaction, team cohesion, and information sharing; based perception and decision; and higher levels of organization politic, stress and turnover (Mcshane, 2007). Conflict distracts employees from their work and, in some cases, motivates them to withhold valuable knowledge and other resources. People who experience conflict are less motivated to communicate or try to understand the other party, wich has the perverse effect of further escalating conflict as each side relies increasingly on distorted perceptions, and stereotype.

2.      Moderate view
            In recent year, management scholars have shifted their view of conflict. Today conflict it seen as inevitable and dynamic in very organization and often times necessary to ensure high performance. That conflict can be harmful in some instance is not denied, but emphasis is placed on recognizing that some forms of conflict can be useful in achieving desired goals. According to this perspective, conflict can encourage a search for new tactics and strategies, and help overcome stagnation and satisfied. The other benefit from conflict can improved decision making. Conflict can make energize people to debate issue and evaluate alternative more thoroughly. The debate tests the logics argument and encourage participant to reexamine their basic assumption about the problem and it is possible solution.

 Is conflict good or bad? conflict become good or bad is depend for situation how far the conflict can influence as to make decision in solve the problem.

The emerging view: constructive and relationship conflict
            At some point, the source of conflict leads one or both parties to perceive that conflict exists. Each party also experiences various conflicts laden emotional toward the other. For example, Barbara Toffler experienced tension and anger with the other Andersen consultants who competed again her for fees. The shape was replaced in the 1990s by perspective that there actually two type of conflict with resist consequence.
Constructive conflict
Constructive conflict occurs when people focus their discussion on the issue while maintaining respectfulness for people having other point of view (Mcshane, 2007). This conflict is called constructive because deferent viewpoints are the encourage so that ideas and recommendation can be clarified, redesigned, and tested for logical soundness. By keeping the debate focused on the task and logic, participant can reexamine their assumption and belief about the problem possible solution without triggering the drive to defend and it related negative emotions and ego defend mechanism behavior. Teams and organization that very low levels of constructive conflict are less effectiveness, but there is also likely an upper limit to the level of concentration of constructive conflict. There are four constructive approaches to conflict, and they all work:
1.      Pragmatic: Let's look at the facts and figure this thing out.
Whatever the situation, pragmatists will ask, "What can be done?" They leave out the emotions and don't dwell on the past, saying things like, "Why did you mess this up?"  They want the facts and are willing to let the facts lead where they lead, and they will accept any idea that works, whether it is theirs or their opponent's.
2.      Self-Empowered: Here is what I am doing about it.
Self-empowered people take ownership and responsibility.  They don't cast blame on others; they start by working on things they control.  These people do not see themselves as powerless victims. Rather, they see a crisis as a challenge and an opportunity, and typically, they find solutions that no one thought were even possible.
3.      Relationship Builder: First, let's get to know each other.
Before dealing with the issues leading to conflict, these people want to deal with the person; they want to make a human connection.  On Monday morning when they get to work, they are likely to ask, "How was your weekend?"  For them, this is a genuine question; they really want to know.  They know from past experience that a human connection can get them through the tough times.
4.      Conciliator: I know we can work this out.
The conciliator's number one belief is the old expression "win/win."  Their first move is to figure out how the other person can win: if I can help you get what you want, you will help me with what I want. This is not to be confused with lose/win, where I give in to you to make you happy at my expense. It is critical to the conciliator that both parties walk away from the conflict feeling that their needs were met (http://www.toughteams.com/papers/conflict.htm)
Relationship conflict
Unfortunately, conflict often becomes emotional and personal. Rather than focusing on the issue, each party perceives the other party as the problem this condition, is apparent when differences are viewed as personal attacks rather than attempt to resolve the issue. The discussion become emotionally charged which introduced perceptual biases and distort information processing. Attacking a person credibility or displaying aggressive response toward that person triggers defenses mechanism and competitive orientation. The recipient of that verbal attack become less motivated to communicate and share information, making it more difficult to discover common ground ultimately resolves the conflict. The parties rely more on distorted perception and typecast that, as we noted earlier, tend to further raise the conflict. For example relationship conflict, consensus among group members, individual acceptance of the group decision, and member satisfaction have all been argued as influencing solution implementation. The following sections suggest that the level of cognitive conflict expressed and resolved during the decision making process is an important antecedent to group consensus and individual acceptance of the eventual group decision, and to member satisfaction with the group.                                                                (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4256/is_n4_v21/ai_17586345/pg_3/).
Separating constructive from relationship conflict
The basic idea there are two type of conflict, relationship and constructive. Lead so the logical conclusion that we should encourage constructive conflict for better decision making. And minimize relationship conflict in order to avoid dysfunctional emotional and behavior. This sound good theory, but recent evident suggest that separating these two types of conflict it not easy. Most of us experience some degree of relationship conflict during or after any reconstructive debate. In other word any attempt engage in constructive conflict, no matter how calmly and rationally, may still sow the seeds of relationship conflict. The stronger level of debate or more issue is tied to individual social identity or need fulfillment, greater the change  that the constructive conflict will evolve into relationship conflict. Fortunately, conflict management expert have identified three strategies that might reduce the level relationship conflict during constructive conflict episode.
·         Emotional intelligence
Relationship conflict is less likely to occur, or is less likely to escalate, when team members have high levels of emotional intelligence. Emotionally intelligent employees are better able to regulate their emotions during debate, which reduces the risk of escalating perception of interpersonal hostility. People with high emotional intelligence are also more likely to view a co-worker emotional reaction as valuable information about that person needs and expectations, rather than as personal attack.

·         Cohesive team
Relation conflict is surprised when the conflict occurs within a highly cohesive thing. The longer people work together; get to know each other, and development mutual trust with each other, the more latitude they give to each other to show emotions without being personally offended. Strong cohesion also allow each person to know about an anticipate the behaviors and emotions of their teammates. Another benefit is that cohesion produces a strong social identity with the group, so team members are motivated to avoid escalating relationship conflict during otherwise emotionally unstable discussion.
·         Supportive team norms
Various team norms can hold relationship conflict at bay during constructive debate. When team norms encourage openness, for instance team members learn to appreciate honest dialog without personally reacting to any emotional display during disagreements. Others norms might discourage team members from this playing negative emotion toward co-workers. Team norms also encourage tactics that diffuse relationship conflict when its first appears. For instance, research has found the teams with low relationship conflict use humor to maintain positive group emotions with offsets negative feelings teams’ member make develop toward some co-workers during debate.

Source of conflict in organization
            Conflict has many roots, and there are many theories that try to explain these origins. Conflict is seen as arising from basic human instincts, from the competition for resources and power, from the structure of the societies and institutions people create, from the inevitable struggle between classes. Even though there is something to be said for most of these theories, they are not always helpful to us as we contend with conflict. What we need is a framework that helps us use some of the best insights of different conflict theories in a practical way. Manifest conflict is really the tip of the proverbial iceberg. What we really need to understand are sources of this conflict, which lie under the surface. The six main conditions that cause in organization.
1.      Incompatible goals.
A common source of conflict is goal incompatibility, which occurs when personal or work goals seems to interfere with another persons or departments goals. This source of conflict was apparent in fighting over fees at Arthur Anderson. It also the main source of conflict between the original Canada pilots and the pilots who previously worked at Canadian airlines. The pilots in each group want to receive the highest possible seniority to improve their career and job status. But if the former Canadian airlines pilots get there which to have seniority levels comparable to their previous jobs, then many air Canada pilots able duties. The preference of Canadian pilots is to deny and seniority to the former Canadian airlines pilots. This battle has produced considerable many fast conflict, including fistfight on debuses taking pilots to work the point here is that people with divergent goals are more likely to experience conflict.
2.      Differentiation.
Another source of conflict emerges from unique training, value, belief, and experience. This differentiation tends to produce different perspective and mental image of idea goals. Consequently, heterogeneous teams are more likely then homogeneous team to disagree with each other regarding the best decision and action. Differentiation is apparent in mergers where employees bring differ gent corporate cultures into the new combine organization. Employees fights over the right way to do things because of their unique experience in separate companies. A rapidly growing retail clothing chain experienced another variation of differentiation based conflict when the founder and CEO hired several senior managers from larger organization to strengthen the experience level of its senior management groups. The new managers soon clashed with executives who had been with the company for sometimes. We ended up with an old thing and a new team and they weren’t on the same wavelength, explains the company owner, who eventually faired most of the new manager.
3.      Interdependent.
Conflict tends to increase with the level of task interdependent. Task interdependent exist when team members most sell materials, information, or expertise in order to perform their jobs. In other word, it represents the collective degree of mutual dependence people have wanted is other for resource. Higher interdependent increase the risk of conflict because there is a greater chance that it side will disrupt of interfere which the other side goals. Order than complete interdependent, employee tend to have lowest risk of conflict when working with others in a pooled interdependent relationship. Pooled interdependent occur where individuals operate interdependently accept for reliance on the command resource or authority. The potential for the conflict is higher in sequential interdependent work relationship, such as an assembly line. The highest risk of conflict tend to occur in reciprocal interdependent situation. With reciprocal interdependence, employees are highly dependent on each other hand, consequently, have a higher probability of interfering with each other’s work and personal goals.
4.      Scarce resources
Resource scarcity generates conflict because each person or unit that requires the same resource necessarily undermines others who also need that resource to fullfil their goals. Consider the lively debates among employees at intel, described in the opening vignette, these conflict episode occurs partly because are not enough financial and other resource for everyone to accomplish their goals, so employees need to justify why they should receive the resource. The more resource one project receives, the fewer resource another project will have accomplish it goals
5.      Ambiguous rules
Ambiguous rules or complete lack of rules breed conflict, this occur because uncertainty increase the risk that one party intend to interfere with another party goals. Ambiguity also encourages political tactic  and, in some one cases, employees enter a free for all battle to win decision in their favor. This explain why conflict more common during manager acquisitions. Employees from both companies have conflicting practice and value, and few rules have developed to minimize maneuvering for power and resource. When clear rules exist, on the other hand employees know what expect from each other and have agreed to abide by those rules.
6.      Communication problem
Humans are very imperfect communicators. Sometimes this imperfection generates conflict, whether or not there is a significant incompatibility of interests, and it almost always makes conflict harder to solve. Human communication has inspired a large literature and multiple fields of study, and I will discuss communication as a resolution tool later. The main thing to consider here is how hard it is for individuals to communicate about complex matters, particularly under emotionally difficult circumstances. We should keep reminding ourselves just how easy it is for communication to go awry. Conflict frequently escalates because people act on the assumption that they have communicated accurately when they have not. When they learn that others are acting on the basis of different information and assumptions, they often attribute this to bad faith or deviousness and not to the imperfections of human communication. Many factors may contribute to communication problems. Culture, gender, age, class, and environment significantly affect individuals' ability to communicate effectively. People often rely on inaccurate or incomplete perceptions, tend to form stereotypes, and carry into their communications conclusions drawn from former interactions or experiences. They are also inclined to try to solve problems before they understand them. The greater the duress a person is under, the harder it is for him or her to communicate (and often the more important it is as well). Sometimes communication takes more energy and focus than someone is able or willing to give at a critical point, and it is easy to become discouraged or hopeless about communicating effectively in serious conflicts. Despite all these problems, people can and do muddle through when they communicate, and they can work on improving communication, even in very intense conflicts. Communication is one of the greatest sources of both difficulty and hope in dealing with serious conflicts.
Strategy for reducing conflict
1.      Super ordinate goals.
Providing higher level, or super ordinate, goals to antagonistic parties can help to reduce the level of conflict. when people share common super ordinate goals, they must cooperate to achieve a degree of success or avoid disaster. For example, research indicate that the most effectiveness executive teams frame their decision as super ordinate goals that rise above each executive department or division goals.
2.      Structural approach
A number of options exist for manager to exist for manager to wish to reduce the conflict via structural change. One technique is to transfer conflict prone individual to other unit. Of course, this apparently simple approach cannot always be used, since some employees are nearly indispensable to their unit gives such individual the confidence to engage in battle over what they see as important issue.
3.      Styles of conflict management
Manager differs in their way of dealing with conflict. According ken Thomas there are five major style of conflict management
§  Forcing tries to win the conflict at the other expense. This style which has stronger win lose orientation relies on some of the hard influence tactic. Particularly assertiveness, to get one way.
§  Problem solving problem solving tries to find a mutual benefit solution for both parties. Information sharing is an important feature of this style because both parties collaborate to indentify common ground and potential solution that satisfy both all of them.
§  Avoiding tries to smooth over or avoid conflict situation altogether. It represent a low concern for both self and the other party, in other word, avoider try to suppress thinking about the conflict. For example some employees will rearrange their work area task to minimize interaction with certain co worker
§  Yielding involves giving in completely to the other side wishes or at least cooperating with little or no attention to your interest, this styles involve making unilateral concession and conditional promise as well offering help with expectation of reciprocal help.
§  Compromising involves looking for a position which your losses are offset by equally valued gains. It involve matching the other party concession, making conditional promises threat, and actively searching for a middle ground between the interest of the two parties.
Managing intergroup conflict
            Conflict between group can result from variety of cause. Competition for resource, difference in goals, and interpersonal conflict can serve as the basic for conflict among group department. The management between group or department can be achieved through a variety of strategies, There are:
1.      Rules and procedure a fairly direct approach to managing intergroup conflict establishment of rules and procedures. This approach likely to work best if the rules and procedure has set up before conflict arises. However, as a way of managing difference even after conflict has emerged, it is still potential use full technique. for example, consider two department that need to use specific piece of equipment that can only accommodate one user at the time. to manage the potential conflict in this situation, certain times of the day or of the week can be reserved for each department to have exclusive use equipment. Rules and procedure often help to avert conflict or defuse tense situation by reducing the amount of contact between the group.
2.      Appeal to authority
In circumstance here rules and procedure are not easy established, a higher authority may be relied on to decide how to best manage the need group, for example the supervisor maybe make decision about how each group will have it desire satisfied. With an eye toward satisfied the large needs of the organization rather than just those of the immediate group. This technique can also drawback. For instance, group member may try to be friend the supervisor in an attempt to receive unwarranted, additional consideration in scheduling decision. Also, supervisor may find the continually trying to manage interest of the group in very time consuming and detract from time need to perform other supervisor duties.
3.      Negotiation
Is interactive process wherein two or more group discus allocation of resource. It used technique for managing conflict. Negotiation typical follow into two models, distributive bargaining and integrative bargaining. Distributive bargaining is an adversarial, win-lose approach negotiation that focuses on the pool resource as fixed. Integrative bargaining is a collaborating, problem solving approach that seeks to create win-win outcome parties.
4.      Team
Are collection of employees who are assigned to manage inter group relation. Team may be create to manage long term, continuous inter group relation, or they may be established to examine specific problem on short term basis. The primary purpose of team is to tackle recurring problem resulting from intergroup conflict and develop remedies for managing conflict
Third party conflict resolution
       Third party conflict resolution Is any attempt by relatively neutral person to help the parties resolve their deference. There are generally three type of the third party dispute resolution activities:
Ø  Arbitration has high control over final decision, but lower control over the process. Executive engage in this strategy b following previously agreed rules of due process, listening to argument from the disputing employees, and making a binding decision. Arbitration is applied the final stage of grievance by unionized employees, but coming more in nonunion conflict.
Ø  Inquisition control all discussion about the conflict. Like arbitrator, they have high decision control because choose the from conflict resolution. However they have high process to control because they chose which information to examine and how examine it, and they generally decide how the conflict resolution process will be handle.
Ø  Mediation have high control over intervention process. In fact, their main purpose is to manage the process and context of interaction between the disputing parties, however, the parties make the final decision about how to resolve their deference. Thus mediator have little or no control over the conflict resolution.
Conclusion 
            Conflict is not in itself a bad thing. There are many reasons why it is a necessary part of the growth and development of individuals, families, communities, and societies. Conflict can help build community, define and balance people's needs as individuals with their needs as participants in larger systems, and help them face and address in a clear and conscious way the many difficult choices that life brings to them. Working through a conflict can be an important bonding and growth producing experience. The strength of social systems lies in part in how they prevent serious conflicts and, when conflicts do arise, how they address them so as to maintain system integrity and preserve the wellbeing of their members. By facing major conflicts, addressing them, reorganizing as necessary to deal with them, and moving on, social organizations adapt to changes in their environment. Understanding the dynamics of conflict therefore provides conflict resolvers and related professionals with a basic tool for addressing the essential forces that shape the development of individuals and social entities.
            It is easy enough to say that conflict is inevitable and is not in itself good or bad, yet for many people, accepting this premise is an uphill battle. There may be an important lesson for us in the resistance that people have to acknowledging conflict in their lives. This may be something other than dysfunctional conflict avoidant behavior. Maybe there is an inevitable shift in the way people interact with each other once they acknowledge the presence of conflict, and therefore people have good reason to approach that admission with caution. If this shift in focus, energy, attitude, or behavior is a natural consequence of the emergence of conflict, and if conflict is itself necessary, inevitable, and often healthy, this poses a fundamental dilemma for all of us as individuals existing in groups.

REFERENCE
Kolb, D. M. & Bartunek, J. M.,(1992), Hidden conflict in organizations: Uncovering behind-the-   scenes disputes, Sage Publications, London .

McShane, S. L. & Von Glinow, M. A., (2003), 2 nd edn, Organizational Behavior: Emerging       realities for the workplace revolution, McGraw-Hill, Boston.

Sherif, M., (1970), Group conflict and co-operation: Their social psychology, Routledge &            Kegan Paul Ltd, London .

Kenneth, T., (1992), ‘Overview of conflict and conflict management’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 263-264.

Antonioni, D., (1998), ‘Relationship between the big five personality factors and conflict management    styles’, International Journal of Conflict Management, vol. 9, no. 4, pp.       336-355.

Carroll, S. J. & Tosi, H. L., (1977), Organizational Behavior, St. Clair Press, Chicago.
            Miner, J. B., (2002), Organizational Behavior: Foundations, Theories, and Analyses,         Oxford University             Press, New York .

Tjosvold, D., Hui C., Ding, D. Z. & Hu, J., (2003), ‘Conflict values and team relationships:           Conflict’s             contribution to team effectiveness and citizenship in China ’, Journal of      Organizational Behavior,        vol. 24, no. 1, p. 69.

Jhing, Z., (2005), conflict and positive factor workplace, Retried 29 march 2009, from :             http://searchwarp.com/swa5590.htm

__, Structured conflict and consensus outcomes in group decision making, retried 29 march          2009, from: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4256/is_n4_v21/ai_17586345/pg_3/

0 comments:

Post a Comment