Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
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.
The nature of conflict
The notion of conflict is general to our realization and approval of our switch with reality of personal action. Conflict can be regarded broadly as a theoretical group indicating the clash of authority against power in the striving of all obsessions to become apparent. Conflict also can be regarded just as a discrete sort of social performance as two parties attempting to get something they both cannot have.
The concept of conflict is multidimensional; it encloses a number of shapes. We choose one relying on our logical reasons and sensible problem. As the human concern is to realize conflict as a social field occurrence, I must first believe conflict as a universal grouping. From this most general beginning, I can work towards understanding social argument and its experiential demonstrations.
Reality includes multiform and interrelated potentialities, natures, and authorities. What factor befalls manifest hinges on the dialectical altercation between this reality and our viewpoint that is an influence, an externally directed vector. What we distinguish is the result of the difference between this vector and realisms inner bearing vector of authority.
Conflict is a balancing of vectors of authorities, of potentials to manufacture effects. It is a clash of authorities. But it is not just a balance, equilibrium, of powers. It is not a stable resultant. Conflict is the pushing and pulling, the giving and taking, the process of finding the balance between powers.
Conflict Resolution corresponds to a meeting of denotes (or agreements for the prospect), not unavoidably members interests or viewpoints. Contributors will generally come to maintenance the same agreement or concord for very dissimilar motives. Conflict decision does not inevitably resolve strains among parties. Conflict declaration may just adequately align substances to allow each contributor to make adequate development toward his or her preferred ends to rather stating there to be a state of agreement rather than the vague and demanding state of disagreement.
Introduction
The essence of the paper is to regard the conflict which happened at the managerial level within the Greenlife Company.
Companys culture
As it may be seen in the case study part, the companys culture involves collective management, where no I is encouraged. Jane put all her efforts to create a managing Top Team . Her aim was to create a team of managers who could solve all the matters of the company collectively, but ultimately it occurred that all the decisions were taken by Jane because of her high authority and competency in managerial issues.
Company cultures that promote dialogue and discrepancy over ideas and conclusions at all levels of the firm always overcome the competition. Such cultures enhance leaders who are not afraid of conflict as they trust in the power of productive tension bound for growth. They hearten sanctioning leadership and foster diversity by engaging others in discussions about issues and ideas that, for the good of the company, need to be put on the table and resolved.
In spite of defending the companys interests, Jane succeeded in establishing an almost authoritarian regime.
Group development
Internal conflict can be the most serious and destructive force an organization faces. Decisions can take forever personal agendas override team priorities critical information is not communicated productivity is lost!
Greenlife Company had a steady development through all the history of its existence. Lucy did her best in order to succeed in the market of cosmetics and enhance the companys activity. It happened so, her son Patrick did not inherit Lucys authority, charisma and ability to rule the company, that is why not to break the process of the companys development, Lucy was obliged to hire new workers, and Jane (informal leader) was among them. Here employing became the key moment in the further development of the company, as her authority allowed her to gather all the other managers around her and take all the necessary decisions collectively. Her authority and high competency became the essence and factually the reason for the conflict.
Conflict Solution
- Lucy should try to persuade Patrick that he is not the as talented manager as Jane is. Jane has greater experience; she is more charismatic and authoritative. In spite of the fact that she has been hired aside, she has more power over employees.
- Family relations are inappropriate in business, and most companies had already assured in this fact.
- One of the variants of problem solutions is to arrange either voting (who should leave the company), or create a competitive managing team under Patricks control, in the order it could offer alternative decisions and solutions.
- Lucy should choose any style of conflict management and define for herself what aim she chooses: personal or corporative interests.
Strategies
As it has been stated earlier, first of all, it is necessary to take into account the interrelation between personal interest and a companys position:
The difference between positional cooperation and interest-based cooperation was brought into usage by Roger Fisher and William Ury in their book Getting To Yes (1983). Simply stated, a position is what you want, and interest is why you want it.
Fisher and Ury depict the denotation of location and curiosity by telling of &the proverbial kids who argued over an orange. After they finally consented to divide the orange in half, ate his half, and disposed of off the peel, while the other disposed the fruit and used the peel from the second half to bake a cake. Too many delegates end up with half an orange for each side instead of the whole fruit for one and the whole peel for the other.
This story defines the character of the conflict between Jane and Patrick: Jane just wants to unite the company with the other, while Patrick just wants to save his leading position at the management level. In order not to stay with the halves of an orange , it is necessary to define what aims they both chase. As it may be seen from the case study the only Janes aim is to enlarge the company; thus, in order not to amalgamate with the other company, it would be enough to adjust joint production but still stay separate companies.
Fisher and Urys first standard is to divide the people from the matters. People are inclined to suit individually included with the issues and with their sides places. And so they will lean to take retorts to those matters and spots as individual harasses. Dividing the people from the matters allows the parties to tackle the issues without breaking their relations. It also assists them in getting a more obvious view of the substantive dilemma.
The authors categorize three primary types of people troubles. First are differences in observation amongst the parties. Since most arguments are grounded in differing understandings of the facts, it is essential for both parties to realize the others point of view. The sides should try to put themselves in the others place. They should not just presume that their worst terrors will become the acts of the opposing party. Nor should one party accuse the other of the difficulty. Each party should try to make offers which would be petitioning to the other side. The more that the sides are included in the process, the more probably they are to be concerned about and to sustain the result.
Emotions are the second reason people difficulties. Negotiation can be a frustrating process. People often retort with terror or irritation when they feel that their interests are intimidated. The first step in contracting with feelings is to recognize them and to try to realize their source. The sides must recognize the fact that some emotions are current, still when they dont see those emotions as sensibledischarging anothers emotions as difficult is likely to provoke an even more forceful arousing retort. The sides need to allow the opponent to express their feelings. They need not react expressively to affecting outbreaks. Representative signals such as apologies or a statement of understanding can help to soothe strong emotions.
Communication is the third main source of people problems. Negotiators may not be speaking to each other but may simply be impressing their individual constituencies. The sides may not be hearing from each other but may instead be planning their own responses.
Even when the opponents are talking to each other and are not listening, confusion may occur. To challenge these problems, the parties should utilize active hearing. The listeners should give the lecturer their full notice, infrequently summarizing the speakers summits to corroborate their sympathetic. It is significant to consider that realizing the others case does not mean approving it. Narrators should move their speech toward the other parties and keep concentrated on what they are trying to converse. Each side should avoid accusing or attacking the other and should speak about themselves.
Usually, the best way to deal with people troubles is to prevent them from arising. People problems are less likely to come up if the parties have a good relationship and think of each other as partners in negotiation rather than as adversaries.
Strategies: Brainstorming
After persons have split their attention, they still need to choose what to do to achieve an equally fulfilling conclusion. The goal of brainstorming is to make as many conclusions as possible to solve a matter. Brainstorming should contain a few rules such as be original, list all thoughts without judging them and advise as many thoughts as possible. This procedure helps opponents to see that there are many probable resolutions for a matter and that working together considerately, they can determine them.
Evaluation of the variants
After opponents have produced some probable resolutions, they need to choose which will be the final agreement. This can be done by requesting the opponents to talk about each option in order to discuss all the merits and demerits of each. The options that the students dislike can be crossed out. Then the parties can be requested to predict the outcomes that might follow after selecting each option.
Conclusion
Situations of conflict, whether they are between health care workers or health care workers and families, command large amounts of time. If a conflict exists within a health care team, everyone is affected, regardless of the source. Both sides in a dispute tend to interpret the other sides intentions through the lens of their own anger, hurt and fear. By evading such problems, there is the risk that the matter will escalate or fester.
Health care teams can begin to experience frustration, tension, caregiver burnout, and intra-team conflict due to muted tension or the polarization of opinion. Even if one side perceives itself to have won, both sides suffer unrecoverable losses of time, emotional depletion, stress, and often professional or personal regard. Patients and families begin to feel intense anxiety, decreased confidence in the health care system and, in the event of the death of a family member, complications in the bereavement process. The resolution of conflict in end-of-life care can create a higher quality of health care, more cohesive, happy and efficient health care teams and a substantial increase in patient and family satisfaction.
References
Boulding, Elise. Peace Culture: The Problem of Managing Human Difference. Cross Currents 1998: 445.
Guttman, Howard M. The Art of Managing Conflict: It Does No Good to Run Away from Disagreement and Discord. Confronting Conflict Head-On Will Make Any Organization Run Smoother. USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education) 132.2704 (2004): 62.
Moore, David B. Managing Social Conflict-The Evolution of a Practical Theory. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare 31.1 (2004): 71.
Peterson, Randall S., and Elizabeth A. Mannix, eds. Leading and Managing People in the Dynamic Organization. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003.
Rahim, M. Afzalur. Managing Conflict in Organizations. Westport, CT: Quorum Books, 2001.
Smith, Kenwyn K. The Movement of Conflict in Organizations: The Joint Dynamics of Splitting and Triangulation. Administrative Science Quarterly 34.1 (1989): 1.
Roger Fisher and William Ury, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In , New York: Penguin Books, (1983).
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
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.