Educational Administration: Conflict Management and Resolution

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Sources of conflicts in an organization
What happens between competing groups?
What happens to the winner?
What happens to the loser?
Preventing Intergroup Conflict
Similarities in leadership and management conflict resolution methods
Conclusion
Reference

Introduction

Conflict management is an art which concentrates on the relationships between men. Every time human beings develop interests over something by nature, a conflict must arise. Therefore, it will take the energy of a strong character to sort out the conflict between people. The conflict solver must not be partisan in order to succeed. Otherwise a partisan person will lead to problems in resolution of conflicts.

Conflicts did not start today. It started at the time of Adam and Eve when Eve developed interest against what God had told them. It has also been noted in history that conflicts existed between the Homo sapiens and the Homo erectus. Therefore, conflict is part of man and there should be proper mechanism of sorting out the conflicts (Keyton J; 2004);.

Conflicts arise in relationships every time people fail to agree on issues. In this case study, am assessing my father’s conflict management styles. To start with, there exist various criteria for conflict management; Collaboration, compromising, competing, avoiding and accommodating.

Avoiding style is supported by the following three examples:

Withdrawal: – Whenever a debate with someone reaches a critical point, he normally reneges (pulls aside) in a diplomatic manner. He lets fate to take its own course and the conflict to resolve by itself.
Postponing: – Whenever there is a crisis, he postpones it until a later date. Not that he intends to resolve the conflict at such a later date but because he wants the issue to settle down naturally. Postponing of a conflict is more or less the same as avoiding it.
Pretence: – My father pretends that there is no conflict at all as a way of settling the conflict. He avoids the other party and pretends that nothing is happening at the moment. This also makes the other person in conflict to perceive the conflict as imaginary and of no consequence. In the end, the conflict dies a natural death (Pfeffer J, 1992)..

Conflict in an organization arises of two parties pursue different goals. From the perspective of human resource management it is when two groups become closely related and create loyalty to each other burying their internal differences which will lead to conflicts. There are many ways conflict resolution can be managed and each way depends on the form of person solving the conflict. There are two types of people in conflict resolution, a leader and a manager. By nature, each of the two will have different ways of solving conflicts (Pfeffer J, 1992)..

To begin with, there is a difference between a leader and a manager. Some of the differences between a leader and a manager include

the manager always acts as administrators while leaders are always innovating ways of solving conflicts
Managers always follow the letter of the law by asking how and why and when while the leaders always are looking for what and why. This creates a great difference in conflict resolution
In school reform and other organizations managers focus on the system that is set while leaders focus on people
Leaders will always do the right things while managers will like accuracy and they like doing things right
Leaders can nature something and develop it into something big while managers maintain status quo
Managers do not have creativity. They keep photocopies of the past while leaders will have originality and creativity
Leaders are always on their own without emulating any character while managers always refer to known characters especially those with classic good behavior. This means that managers are people who emulate others through imitation without originality
Managers always rely on control and management while leaders base their egos on trust
Leaders always like team work and groups while managers like dealing with individuals
Leaders have long run vision unlike managers whose perspective is shorter and how to satisfy specific goals (xi) Leaders always will have their vision on the horizon. (Pfeffer J, 1992).

The differences and distinction that we have emulated above between a leader and manager is very useful in conflict resolution. The differences show how a leader behaves as compared to a manger. From the statement above, we learn that leaders will try to influence characters and behavior of people either in groups or individuals, regardless of the idea or reason. A leader always will find himself leading while a manager will wait for a position to be created for him. Once the position has been created for him, he will be given power to exercise. The leader does not wait for positions to be created for him. He has the power to influence anyone at any time. This clearly shows the approaches they will follow in solving conflicts (Pfeffer J, 1992)..

Assume a conflict between employees of a group or a conflict of goals of an organization. The manager will try to look at the set rules and regulations within the organization while the leader will look at a vision to provide leadership but will eventually direct the position or influence taken. Always visions from leaders appear simple, vibrant, imaginative which are easily acceptable by the group influenced. He understands how to approach human differences among individuals. The leader visionalizes the future state of events, compares with the present before approaching conflicts (Pfeffer J, 1992)..

As it is, it shows that effective leaders do not show off or he does not want to be seen as the head through authority. They try to create and sustain competition among groups through attainment of the objectives and vision attained. They view the employees of an organization as people as compared to a manager who sees human beings as resources. When approaching conflicts from this perspective then a problem arises. The manager will like to solve the problem as though he was dealing with machines and emotionless equipments of the company while the leader solve the problems as though he is dealing with human beings who has feelings, families and reasoning. This difference in approach is due to the roles played by the two. The role of the manger is to organize resources to achieve the organization’s objectives. People being resources form the perspective of a manager, he finds them as part of the equipments.

To be successive in conflict management, there is need for a manager to mix leadership and management. (Pfeffer J, 1992).

Sources of conflicts in an organization

Conflicts in an organization arise when there is competition among groups or employees and this may take the following forms:

each group becomes more closely knit and elicits greater loyalty from its members; members close ranks and bury some of their internal differences
Group climate changes from informal, casual, playful to work- and-task-oriented, concern for members’ psychological needs declines while concern for task accomplishment increases
Leadership patterns tend t changed from more democratic toward more autocratic, the group becomes more willing to tolerate autocratic leadership
Each group becomes more highly structured and organized
Each group demand loyalty and conformity from its members in order to be able to present a solid front.

What happens between competing groups?

Each group begins to see the other groups as the enemy, rather than merely a neutral object
Each group begins to experience distortions of perception- it tends to perceive only the best parts of itself, denying its weaknesses, and tends to perceive only the worst parts of the other group, denying its strengths, each group is likely to develop stereotypes of the other (“they don’t play fair liked we do”.)
Hostility toward the other group increases while interaction and communication with the other group decreases, thus it becomes easier to maintain negative stereotypes and more difficult to correct perceptual distortions
If the groups are forced into interaction for example, if they are forced to listen to representatives plead their own and the others’ cause in reference to some task-each group is likely to listen more closely to their own representatives and not to listen to the representative of the other group, except to find fault with his presentation, in other words, group members tend to listen only for that which supports their own position and stereotype.

What happens to the winner?

The winner retains its cohesion and may become even more cohesive
He tends to release tension, lose its fighting spirit, become complacent, casual and playful (the fat and happy state)
The winner tends toward high intergroup co-operation and concern for m embers’ needs, and low concern for work and task accomplishment
The winner tends to be complacent of the enemy team, there is little basis for re-evaluating perceptions, or re-examining team operations in order to learn how to improve them (O’Rourke J.S).

What happens to the loser?

If the situation permits be cause of some ambiguity in the decision (say, if judges have rendered it or if the game was close), there is a strong tendency for the loser to deny or distort the reality of losing, instead, the loser will find psychological esc apes like “the judges were biased,” “ the judges did not really understand our solution,” the rules of the game were not clearly explained to us,, if luck had not been against u at the one key point, we would have won and so on
If loss is accepted, the losing group tends to splinter, unresolved conflicts come to the surface, fights break out, all in the effort to find a cause for the loss
Loser is more tense, ready to work harder, and desperate to find someone or something to blame the leader, itself, the judges who decided against them, the rules of the game (the “lean and hungry” state)
Loser tends toward how intergroup co-operation, low concern for members’ needs, and high concern for recouping by working harder
Loser tends to learn a lo about itself as a group be cause positive stereotype of itself and negative stereotype of the other group are upset by the loss, forcing a re-evaluation of perceptions, as a consequence, loser is likely to reorganize and be came more cohesive and effective, once the loss has been accepted realistically (Robbins S, 2004);.

Preventing Intergroup Conflict

Relatively greater emphasis given to total organizational effectiveness and the role of departments in contributing to it, departments measured and rewarded on the basis of their contribution to the total effort rather their individual effectiveness
High interaction and frequent communication stimulated between groups to work on problems of inter-group co-ordination and help, organization rewards given partly on the basis of help which give to each other
Frequent rotation of members among groups or departments to stimulate high degree of mutual understanding and empathy for one another’s’ problems
Avoidance of any win-lose situation, groups never put into the position of competing for some organizational reward, emphasis always placed on pooling resources to maximize organizational effectiveness, rewards hared equally with all the groups or departments (Pfeffer J, 1992).

Conflict management

After identifying sources of conflicts and how to prevent conflict from occurring, the next stop is to identify means of conflict resolution. There are many ways of conflict resolution followed by leaders and managers. Among them is watching and shying away. This form or method of conflict resolution is mostly used by managers. Leaders cannot follow this method but will take the conflict head on collision but use diplomatic means to cool the tempers (Shim J; 1999);.

Managers at times may also use the approach of ‘watch and see’ in conflict resolution. However leaders will use other techniques if the problem proves to be difficult. He will use techniques such as ‘divide and rule’ which is normally used by dictators in political circles. This method is good especially where there is a potential crisis which can be solved by ‘divide and rule’ (Macan T.H., 1994);.

The other method available for conflict management is co- leadership. This is where the leader comes to a com promise and agrees to share out responsibilities of leadership or leadership structures between two or three groups or entities. This form of leadership was used in earlier days in the Roman Empire where leadership was divided between the pope and the king. Currently we are hearing the same being negotiated in one of the African countries where the former secretary general of the United Nations is trying to solve a conflict using this method. This method cannot succeed in areas of management. You cannot have co-management and therefore it is hard to incorporate co-leadership or co-management in running the management position (Margulles N. and Wallace J, 1973).

Unlike leadership, the management has duties and responsibilities which are accompanied by power which you cannot find in leadership.

Similarities in leadership and management conflict resolution methods

Both the manager and a leader exercise authority in solving the conflicts
Both are symbols of authority in an organization, society or group
They both have some goals to achieve or vision and they must have followers who will assist in the achievement of goals
In the process of conflict of conflict resolution, there must be self sacrifice and passion and there must be correctness of either vision or goals. Their behavior for both should be outstanding to that one of the conflicting parties
They must be able to attract confidence to termination and persistence so that they will be able to solve the conflict without major problems or challenges
They should be a symbol of good image to the people who are conflicting. This is possible through competence, credibility and trustworthy. This will make themselves become role models to be followed by the conflicting parties
Expectations and confidence should be attracted from the part of the conflicting parties
They should be both in a position of authority to convince the conflicting parties to change their stand in the conflict
They should be able also to communicate to the conflicting parties in understandable language that is acceptable
They should be reasonable and able to manage conflicts (Brass B and Riggio R; 2006);.

Conclusion

Conflict resolution in an organization depends on the culture and structure of an organization but when groups conflict, the management should be able to identify group leaders who will be used in the conflict resolution. However, failure to identify leaders of conflicting parties, the management may not be able to identify the problem. Instead, the problem may be complicated leading to high job turn over and in the long run leading to the loss in the company.

Methods identified of conflict resolution apply both to managers and leaders and if followed properly, groups, team, organizations and other get together will work or live in harmony.

Reference

Brass B and Riggio R; (2006); Transformational Leadership; Routledge, Burns. J.M “Leadership,” and “School Leadership and Administration.

Keyton J; (2004); Communication and Organizational Culture; Sage Pub.

Macan T.H., (1994); “Time Management: Test of a process Model.” Journal of Applied psychology.

Margulles N. and Wallace J, (1973); Organizational Change techniques and Applications (Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman O’Rourke J.S, Management Communication- A case analysis approach.

Pfeffer J, (1992) Managing with power: politics and influence in organization Boston: Harvard business School press.

Robbins S, (2004); Organizational Behavior 10th edition, Pearson education.

Shim J; (1999); Operations Management; Barron’s Educational Series.

Snowden P. E. and. Gort R.A ; Important Concepts, Case Studies, & Simulations on.

Click Here To Order Now!