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.
Introduction
Conflict is inevitable in every form of human interaction. It arises primarily due to presence of incompatible goals among two or more social entities in the course of their interaction which often results in conflict of interests.
Conflict may also arise as a result of perceived divergence of interest where one party believes that attainment of goals by the other party will hinder them from achieving their own goals. Over the years, the concept of conflict has been a major subject of focus for socialists, psychologists, economists, and political scientists who seek to explain its origins, why it persists in society, and means of resolving it within the social context.
There has been renewed interest on conflict in the organization context in the past decade which can be evidenced by establishment of the International Association for Conflict Management which facilitates in the research and development, teaching and training on management of social and organizational conflict and the publication of international journal of conflict management in the early 90s.
Through extensive literature review, the study focuses on the classical and modern perception of conflict within the organization context , the sources of conflict in an organization and strategies that have been put forth to resolve conflict and minimize incidences of destructive conflict in organizations.
Conflict within Organizations
Organization conflict has been defined as conflict occurring when members within an organization engage in activities that are incompatible with those of their colleagues or other relevant stakeholders (Rahim, 2010). It is often manifested in verbal abuse, yelling, expressing disagreement with an opponent among other means.
Acknowledgement of conflict within organizations provides appropriate guidance in dealing with problems regarding organization efficiency, change and authority since conflict is a symptom, cause or effect of such problems. For this reason, organization conflict has been a major area of interest for both managers and scientists who are concerned with understanding the nature of organization behavior and processes.
Modern organizations are characterized by complex relationships and high degree of task interdependence which is often characterized by frictions. Much of the conflict within organizations is natural and stems from honest disagreements on priorities and utilization of scarce resources. Three factors stand out as major causes of conflict in organizations; interdependence of the conflicting parties, differences in values and perceptions, and interference with the attainment of goals.
Early theorists of conflict distinguished three main sources of conflict in the organization context namely; economic, value and power (Fisher, 2000).
Economic conflict relates to competition over scarce resources. Every member in an organization is seeking to attain the most from the available resources which leads to behavior directed towards maximization of gain.
This often leads to conflict of interests as some members feel that others are a hindrance towards achievement of their own goals in one way or the other. The organization management therefore faces challenges in devising fair mechanisms of allocating limited resources while ensuring satisfaction of all the relevant stakeholders.
Value conflict refers to friction arising due to incompatibility in ideologies, perceptions, attitudes, and other principles that people generally believe in (Fisher, 2000). Employees within an organization interact at professional and personal level. Due to differences in their perception and approach to life and work, conflict often arises when such parties cannot compromise or reach a consensus in the course of their interactions.
Conflict within organization may also arise as a result of power conflict where each party seeks to maximize the amount of influence and control that he possesses within the organization. Power struggles within an organization has an effect of making certain parties stronger while others are made weaker (Fisher, 2000). Consequently conflict arises when the weaker parties fail to obey the powerful or when parties seek to control each other.
Classical View of Organization Conflict
The classical view of organizational conflict did not appreciate the diverse impacts of conflict within an organization. They perceived conflict as negatively affecting the organization’s efficiency and advocated for its total elimination (Rahim, 2010).
The classical organizational theorists advocated for hierarchical organization structures which had bureaucratic rules and procedures that would ensure that members conform to predetermined rules which would in turn reduce the chances of employees engaging in conflict within the organization. This approach to conflict management in organizations was based on the assumptions that only through harmony, cooperation and absence of conflict would an organization achieve high levels of effectiveness.
Fredrick Taylor, an American mechanical engineer argued that principles of scientific management would serve to improve the functioning of an organization. In his views, the conflict between labor and management would be enhanced by application of scientific principles (Rahim, 2010).
However, Taylor’s views faced major criticisms from organized labor who felt that scientific management exploited the workforce by overworking them while still underpaying them. In addition, this form of organizational management did not provide a mechanism for effective management of conflict between individuals and groups.
Henry Fayol, a French executive advocated for the application of managerial functions such as planning, command, coordination in the organization to enhance harmony and coordination in the workplace which would in turn suppress and eliminate conflict in the organization (Rahim, 2010). While some of his proposed organizational principles such as division of work and unity of command are still widely used in modern institutions, his assumption that conflict was detrimental to organizational effectiveness is rather shallow.
Max Weber, a German sociologist argued that bureaucratic organization structures would significantly reduce conflict within organizations (Rahim, 2010). His model of a bureaucratic organization structure comprised of a well defined hierarchy of authority, system of rules and procedures, specialization and appointment based on competence.
He claimed that these principles left no room for conflict and deviance and despite the dysfunctions associated with bureaucratic models; Weber argued that such a structure would improve the effectiveness of an organization.
Mary Parker Follet made a rather significant contribution to conflict management in organizations through her behavioral approach to management and acknowledgement of the constructive value of conflict within the organization. According to Mary Parker, conflict provided a means through which the organization could assess its progress (Rahim, 2010).
She strongly advocated for a problem solving approach in the management of organization conflict and further claimed that other methods of handling conflict such as suppression, compromise, avoidance and dominance were ineffective.
Modern View of Organizational Conflict
The modern society has widely recognized tension as a normal component of life. Consequently, the modern organization’s goal is not to achieve harmony; rather, organizations seek to design a system capable of recognizing and solving problems that they encounter in daily operations. Since conflict is an inherent part of the organization, procedures for conflict management should be included in the design for organizations.
Indeed, scholars have observed that healthy organizations are seeking to increase intra organizational conflict and this does not necessarily demonstrate weakness as implied by classical organizational theorists. The modern view (of organizational conflict) in this context accepts conflict as a necessary recipe in management of firms.
Organization conflict is currently considered justifiable as well as a good measure of proper (organization) management (Rahim, 2010). Conflict, when effectively managed may lead to improved productivity of an organization.
It is functional to the extent to which it results in the development of creative solutions to problems facing the organization and effective attainment of organization goals which would have otherwise not been possible in absence of conflict. For that reason, little or no clash in the firm may result in sluggishness and poor decision making, which will obviously reflect (negatively) on the business performance.
The modern view of conflict does not underestimate the negative implications of conflict in an organization especially when such conflict is not effectively controlled. Hence, absence of conflict may result in stagnation which negatively impacts on performance and too much conflict may also result in organizational disintegration. Organizations should therefore embrace a moderate amount of conflict which should be handled effectively in order to attain an optimum level of organizational effectiveness (Rahim, 2010).
Despite the modern attitude towards the functional component of conflict within organizations, most people still emphasize on its negative impacts. This has led to reduction of effectiveness and creativity of top management who in such situations are expected to completely eliminate conflict in their organizations. Overemphasizing on conflict resolution increases the managers’ stress and reduces their productivity since they have to concentrate more on resolving unending organizational conflict.
In modern societies, there exists increasing need for enhancing skills for managing conflict within organizations. Effectiveness of organization significantly depends on the ability to handle conflict constructively which is particularly essential at a time when the frequency of conflict in organization has rapidly increased.
Classification of Organizational Conflict
Conflict can be classified according to the causes that are attributed to it. Substantive conflict occurs as a result of differences in opinion, procedures and other business related issues (Rahim, 2010). Substantive conflict emanates from disagreement among the stakeholders of an organization regarding certain tasks. It is often manifested in terms of intellectual opposition and forms an essential step in problem solving since it involves evaluation of opinions and ideas based on objective evidence which in turn promotes innovative thinking.
Affective (conflict) happens when two individuals, when in the course of communication, become aware of disparities in their sensations and feelings regarding certain matters thus making their ideas unsuited. This form of conflict is often associated with personality clashes and cynicism which in turn results in hostility and conflict between the interacting parties.
Transforming conflict evolves during the process of degeneration of substantive conflict to affective conflict (Rahim, 2010). When members of an organization engage in substantive conflict, they begin to attack each other personally at some point. The conflict thus shifts towards an emotional orientation. Masquerading conflict occurs when members of an organization engage in emotional conflict but disguise it as substantive conflict. The conflict therefore appears to be task related while in the real sense it is emotional in nature.
Process conflict relates to friction arising in task execution. It is concerned with performance of tasks, responsibility, delegation and delivery of tasks within set deadlines. It is commonly defined as disagreements regarding logistical and delegation issues within an organization (Rahim, 2010).
On the other hand goal conflict occurs when the objectives of interacting parties are said to be incompatible while conflict of interest occurs when members of an organization engage in activities that are incompatible with the ones they are supposed to be engaging.
Conflict may also be classified as realistic or unrealistic where realistic conflict relates to incompatibilities that are rational and unrealistic conflict refers to conflict arising as parties seek to release tension while expressing ignorance and hostility.
In addition it can be classified as retributive where parties feel the need for drawn out conflict which is aimed at punishing the opponent as well as misattributed conflict which results from incorrect assignment of causes to conflict (Rahim, 2010). Further, conflict may be classified as displaced whereby the conflicting parties direct their frustrations and hostilities to other parties in an organization resulting in conflict.
Conflict Resolution Strategies
Despite the level and degree of conflict, different approaches have been put forth to deal with conflict within organizations. Effective conflict resolution often results in formulation of new and creative solutions which ensure satisfaction of the conflicting parties.
Conflict can result in more equitable distribution of resources or creation of a larger pool of resources which serves to improve business performance (Fisher 2000). Given that conflicting parties (which are interdependent) have some degree of autonomy from which they influence each other, parties may use the win-lose, win-win, and lose-lose approach in a bid to resolve their differences (Fisher 2000).
The win-lose approach to conflict is commonly used in solving conflict arising from innate traits of competition, dominance and aggression. Due the assumption that achievement of goals by one party result in loss for the other party, the win lose strategy aims at forcing one party to compromise in order to reach a solution.
This is often done through socially acceptable mechanisms such as voting, judicial ruling, or direct authorization from senior management. However, in certain situations threats and innuendo may be applied in a bid to resolve the conflict. Despite the approach used to reach consensus, the outcome of the strategy comprise of a victor and a loser. This leads to partial settlement of conflict and the losing party may seek justice in future which results in continuity of conflict within the organization.
Lose-lose approach seeks to resolve a conflict by reaching the simplest possible compromise by both parties (Fisher, 2000). In this strategy, disagreement is viewed as inevitable which calls for the need to split the differences and ensure that each party is partially satisfied through the settlement.
This strategy is especially effective in solving conflicts arising due to limited resources since it can promote equitable distribution of resources. However, this strategy diminishes the ability by the conflicting parties to confront the problem wholly due to the perception that both parties cannot cooperate to reach a permanent solution.
The win-win approach is a systematic process through which attempts to maximize the goals of conflicting parties through collaborative problem solving are pursued. This strategy focuses on needs and constraints of both parties and seeks to identify mechanisms of addressing such needs. Conflict is viewed as a problem which is then clearly defined and analyzed in order to develop solutions that are mutually agreeable (Fisher, 2000).
Since the strategy aims at promoting good long term relationships between the conflicting parties, parties work towards attainment of super ordinate goals and engage in direct and open communication during the negotiation process. In addition to solving the conflict between parties, the win-win approach increases trust and acceptance by parties within an organization since it ensures maximum satisfaction for both parties. However, this approach requires a lot of patience as well as skills in human relations and problem solving.
Methods of Conflict Resolution
Bargaining and Negotiation
Negotiation and bargaining are conflict resolution methods that aim at reaching a consensus through joint decision making process that incorporates all the parties involved in a conflict (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). Stephenson and Morley defined negotiation as verbal or non verbal communication where parties discuss in absence of arbitration or any judicial process the joint action which they might take to manage a dispute among them (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009).
In this conflict resolution mechanism, the conflicting parties voluntarily cooperate to resolve the conflict existing between them. This provides the parties with an opportunity to either accept or reject the proposed solutions that emerge from the process of conflict resolution until they come up with a solution that is considered just and fair to both parties.
In bargaining and negotiations, parties are brought together in a social relationship where they have both conflicting and common interests. Therefore, the negotiation process involves attempts to influence each other’s perception of the situation by using a wide variety of non violent strategies in order to manipulate the decision to their favor.
As a result, the process of bargaining and negotiation results in increased cooperation among members of the organization and further maximizes the interests of both parties consequently resulting in satisfaction to both parties.
As a method of conflict resolution, negotiating and bargaining have several advantages which makes it a commonly used mechanisms of conflict resolution within organizations. The process provides a useful and agreed upon outcome for both parties which serve to terminate the conflict. In addition, it is an efficient method of conflict resolution in organizations since the parties enter into the process voluntarily which provides them with an opportunity to explore the possible solutions and accept or reject the outcome of the process.
The process also provide a basis for better interactions between the conflicting parties since the process provides room for exploration of emotional and interpersonal dimensions of the conflict which serves to improve future interactions consequently promoting performance. Further, the processes provide a legitimate standard criterion for evaluating and accepting the proposed options without requiring any party to compromise.
However, this method is not applicable in all forms of conflicts within organizations (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). Organization conflicts of high intensity such as those relating to power disparity and conflict arising over intangible issues such as ethnicity and religion may not be solved through bargaining and negotiation. Consequently, parties involved in such conflicts may be required to seek other means of conflict resolution in order to reach a solution.
Conflict Resolution by Third Party
In certain incidences, the conflicting parties are unable to resolve the disputes through both informal discussions and formal negotiations (Miller, 2008). Accordingly, a third party has to step in to help resolving the inconsistency. In the organizational context the third party may be a friend, a fellow co worker, the management, or mediator external from the organization. In most cases, disputes arising between coworkers stem from different working style, different personalities, work processes and organization procedures.
Therefore, human resource managers seek to resolve conflicts between staff members through rewards and punishment. They further seek to promote organizational change in order to avoid such conflicts in the future. Research has revealed that the managerial third party role is effective in resolving conflicts since their ruling is often perceived as just in settling disputes between staff members.
Third parties external from the organization may also be called upon to settle disputes arising within the organization. They serve the role of arbitrators or mediators in conflict situation and aim at guiding or coercing the conflicting parties in reaching a settlement.
The arbitrator is expected to listen to proposals and arguments from both parties after which he proposes a binding solution while a mediator may incorporate direct tactics where he initiates recommendations and non directive tactics where the mediator regulates the interaction by establishing rapport with the parties involved in order to resolve the conflict (Miller, 2008).
Litigation
Litigation is a traditional method of conflict resolution within organizations which people often resort to following inability to reach a settlement through negotiation and bargaining. It involves a court process where one party becomes the complainant while the other becomes the defendant. It is commonly used to solve civil disputes occurring within an organization. The litigation process sets off with the plaintiff filing a formal written complaint in court which is then followed by a trial after which a court ruling is made.
The plaintiff’s ability to compel the defendant’s participation in litigation is the distinctive feature of litigation as a dispute resolution process (Moffitt et al., 2005).
If the plaintiff prevails in court, the court grants him some form of relief which is often in terms of monetary damages, equitable relief as well as declaratory relief. Most people perceive the litigation process as always producing win-lose outcomes. While it mostly does, in some situations it often results in outcomes that strike a balance between the conflicting parties’ claims and interests.
Litigation process provides a means through which the rights and obligations of the conflicting parties are definitively established. This is primarily due to the prevailing perception amongst disputants that the court is most likely to render a fair and reasonable judgment to the conflict.
The process comes in handy in resolving conflicts between parties that are unwilling to cooperate and negotiate in good faith towards a mutually beneficial resolution of the dispute (Moffitt et al., 2005). Litigation process can also be used to promote an organization’s publicity since the process ensures openness of proceedings and often attracts public’s attention. In addition the process supports legal precedent which legally binds the conflicting parties to fulfill their obligation towards resolving the dispute.
However, the legal process is often expensive and consumes a lot of time which would have otherwise been used to increase the output of the firm. Compared to other forms of conflict resolution, litigation is highly structured and formalized and puts greater emphasis on procedure. This limits the opportunities for achieving a quick resolution and in some cases the elongated process discourages the complainant from seeking justice causing him to abandon the process due to lack of adequate resources to continue with the process.
The long duration of time associated with the process negatively impacts on the future relationship of the conflicting parties since the complainant feels that justice is being denied and attributes his feelings of anger and frustration to the defending party consequently worsening their relationship during the period of trial which unlikely to recover even after justice is delivered.
In addition, judges may not be well conversant with the disputes arising in organizational context which often leads to an unsatisfactory court decision which may stir instability in the entire organization.
Private Judging
One of the greatest concerns in modern business is the corporate image which an organization portrays to the external world. Litigation process may negatively impact on the image of the company due to its publicity nature which may in turn affect consumer and investor perception of the organization. This may negatively impact on company’s performance and profitability. Consequently, firms often opt for private judging as a means of solving internal conflicts which cannot be solved through mediation.
Private judging allows the disputing parties to have their case heard privately by a neutral third party (Moran et al., 1993). This process is often preferred since it enables the conflicting parties to choose their own judge and it speeds up the process of resolution relative to the litigation process. In addition, the judgment may be appealed for errors in law or on grounds that the judgment is against the weight of evidence (Moran et al., 1993).
In United States for instance, most states allow for private judging where a trial court judge has the statutory authority to a privately selected referee who in turn listens to the evidence and makes a ruling that binds the conflicting parties just like in trial case ruling. However, this process is expensive since the referee fees are chargeable to the disputants or the organization which seek the services of a private judge.
Mediation
In mediation, a third party, the mediator facilitates the solution by influencing the conflicting parties to come up with their own proposals for voluntary settlement (Moran et al., 2003).
In mediation, the importance of developing good relations between the conflicting parties is essential and consequently necessitates face to face interactions. The personality of the mediator plays an important role in determining the outcome of the process since the success of the process heavily depends on his charisma and moral influence on the conflicting parties. The mediator should therefore seek to establish a rapport with the conflicting parties.
The mediators strive to create an intimate and informal atmosphere where the disputing parties are obligated to conduct a friendly discussion while avoiding emotional outbursts. The mediator gathers the disputing parties in a single room after which he listens to the grievances from both sides.
He then meets privately with each side in order to strike a common ground. Failure by the parties to agree on a solution requires the mediator to give a non binding opinion on the party which would prevail if the case went into trial. With this in mind, the parties are then given another opportunity to resolve the conflict. Mediation resolves employee’s disputes more quickly and at reduced costs in comparison to other methods of conflict resolution (Moran et al., 1993).
Enforcement of Dispute Resolution Clauses to Minimize Destructive Conflict
Since conflict has proven to be inevitable within organizations, it is essential for the human resource management to take preventive measures in order to prevent the occurrence of destructive dispute in their organizations.
One of the most effective ways of preventing such disputes is to include a dispute resolution clause in employment contracts. Spending time to create a dispute resolution clause demonstrates the acknowledgement that problems may occur within the organization and creates a provision under which problems will be solved in an amicable and orderly manner.
The dispute resolution clause should be specific in order to achieve its objectives. It should state explicitly the method of dispute resolution to be applied upon occurrence of conflict or failure to resolve the conflict through certain methods. The contract should further specify the type of language to be used during the proceedings, the situational factors that will prevail during the process as well as the procedural rules to be followed in determining the solutions (Moran et al., 1993).
The organization’s human resource management should consult the corporate legal department while formulating the dispute resolution clause in employment contracts. This is primarily due to the dynamic nature of modern institutions which are currently transforming towards multinational corporations.
This presents the management with a major challenge due to differences in legal systems of countries in which a single organization may be operating in. Extensive research and analysis is therefore essential in development of such clauses to ensure that they are applicable and just across nationalities.
Creating Cultural Synergy
Cultural differences have become one of the major causes of conflict within organizations. In response to this, the human resource management should capitalize on the existing cultural differences among the work force and create a cultural synergy that will minimize conflict and promote collaboration among the work force.
The management should enhance cultural awareness among the work force and encourage members of different cultural groups to accommodate and embrace each other in order to promote harmony within the organizations. The work force should also be encouraged to learn each other’s culture which may lead to increased creativity and innovation.
Factors Influencing Conflict Resolution Process
Personal factors that affect the conflict resolution process within an organization include components such as individual characteristics, needs, attitudes, expectations and other enduring dispositions that are relevant to the process of conflict resolutions (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). These factors shape the way individuals perceive the world and determine their personality which heavily influences their decisions and willingness to compromise in conflict situations.
In the conflict resolution process, personality traits such as charisma, cognitive complexity, and persuasiveness are important especially to mediators and arbitrators who use such competencies to influence the conflicting parties to reach an amicable solution. Personal factors therefore constitute an independent variable in the process of conflict resolution which calls for the need to fully understand the personal traits of the relevant actors in a conflict in order to effectively resolve the conflict.
The relationship between the conflicting parties plays an important role in conflict resolution process (Miller, 2008). Members of an organization often prefer using competitive styles while dealing with their subordinates while the same individuals tend to be accommodative when dealing with their superiors. In addition, they tend to use avoidance when dealing with members with whom they occupy the same hierarchical level.
Therefore, the conflict resolution process heavily depends on the hierarchical relationship between the existing parties. Existing relationships influences the interaction through which conflict is managed (Miller, 2008).
Members of organizations often struggle with opposing needs for autonomy and connection. Due to interdependence between members within an organization, members tend to use polite strategies in conflict resolution in order to achieve independence while ensuring that a balance exists between the conflict and solutions proposed.
Cultural factors may influence the way in which conflict is managed within an organization. The alarming increase in religious and ethnic conflicts has become entrenched within social institutions such that organizations constantly find themselves faced with such conflict. Culture plays an important role in conflict resolution process in that the parties involved have to pay attention to cultural symbols and sensitivities while addressing the issue in order to avoid further conflict.
Although it may serve as a means of resolving conflict, culture may also pose a barrier to the conflict resolution process within the organization (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). Conflict between members of an organization from different cultural backgrounds often leads to formation of culturally segregated groups which promote hostility against each other leading to ethnocentrism which is a major obstacle in conflict resolution process.
Situational factors such as social and physical conditions under which the process takes place significantly impact on the process of conflict resolution within organizations (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). The neutrality of the site and physical arrangement during the negotiation process has an impact on the resolution process. A conflict resolved formally in a manager’s office is likely to have a different outcome with conflict resolved informally in the field.
In addition, the number of people involved in the process of resolution is likely to impact on the process of conflict resolution within the organization. For instance, the presence of a third party is likely to speed up the process of resolution. Situational factors have major impacts on the process of conflict resolution hence exert a powerful influence on its nature and quality by influencing the articulation of positions and determining the interests of the parties (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009).
Interaction factors also influence the conflict resolution process and emphasize on the nature of prior relationship between the conflicting parties and the nature of their interdependence (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). This affects the nature of relationship that binds the actors together hence affecting the nature of conflict resolution. In distributive forms of interaction, parties demonstrate competitive behavior and misperceptions which serve to intensify the conflict.
Consequently, any attempts to resolve such conflict is met by distorted communication between the disputants which leads to outcomes based on disassociative policies. Integrative associations on the other hand involve parties with shared interests which favors integrative negotiation. This form of interaction often results in associative outcomes which tend to enlarge the common interests of the conflicting parties within an organization.
Barriers to Effective Conflict Resolution In Organizations
The structure of the conflict resolution method can prove to be a barrier towards resolving conflicts in an organization. Structural barriers comprise of issues arising, interests of conflicting parties among other things which may directly or indirectly affect the resolution process. Structural barriers may take the form of refusal to communicate honestly by parties, failure to deal with core issues in the conflict, and basic lack of trust among the actors.
In presence of these features, the conflict is likely to intensify instead of being resolved. Strategic barriers may also occur in the process of conflict resolution when there is widespread uncertainty regarding intentions rendering the parties vulnerable (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). The actors involved have to therefore develop and maintain trust with each other through out the process in order to reach a solution.
Psychological barriers pose a major challenge to the process of conflict resolution in an organization (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). These include rigid mental models, partisan perceptions, overconfidence, and loss of aversion among the key actors in the conflict. The mental models allow the parties to make sense of their experiences while loss of aversion refers to the observation that people tend to be more sensitive to potential losses than equivalent gains.
These factors result in development of varying attitudes and perceptions which often lead to continued incompatibility of goals among the conflicting parties which renders the process of resolution less fruitful. Overcoming psychological barriers is essential in ensuring achievement of a solution. However, the process is exceptionally difficult and hence poses a major difficulty in the process of conflict resolution.
During the conflict resolution process, internal organizational factors may contribute towards failure to resolve the conflict. Proper planning within the organization, availability of resources necessary to ensure effective conflict resolution, and strategic capabilities of the organization play a major role in ensuring successful conflict resolution.
In absence of these elements, the process is likely to be marred by malpractices which undermine the attainment of the intended goals. Consequently, it is crucial for the organization to ensure that it is well equipped to deal with all forms of conflict arising within the organization in order to enhance performance.
Culture may also be a hindrance to the conflict resolution process. Culture may negatively influence communication and decision making in the resolution process posing a hindrance to conflict resolution within the organization (Bercovitch & Jackson, 2009). Different cultures inhibit distinctive patterns of communication and decision making by influencing symbolization and perceptions of the parties which often results in culture clash. In order to effectively deal with conflict in organizations, the actors should aim at understanding each other’s culture and to be more accommodative of their views in absence of which results in intensification of conflict.
Conclusion
Conflict is inevitable in society. In organizations, conflict occurs as a result of power struggles, competition over scarce resources, and differences in attitudes and perceptions among other issues. When it is properly regulated, conflict may play a constructive role and enhance the performance of organizations. However, excessive and unregulated conflict within organization may be destructive and may negatively impact on performance of the organization.
Therefore, organizations ensure that conflict is managed through conflict resolution methods that aim at solving disputes among the work force. Organizations have also devised mechanism aimed at reducing conflict within the organization such as dispute resolution clauses which regulate conflict in organizations.
Reference List
Bercovitch, J., Jackson, R., 2009. Conflict Resolution in the Twenty First Century: Principles, Methods, and Approaches. Michigan, University of Michigan Press.
Fisher, R., 2000. Sources of Conflict and Methods of Conflict Resolution, [Online] Web.
Miller, K., 2008. Organization Communication: Approaches and Processes. New York, Cengage Learning.
Moffitt, L. M., Bordone, C. R., Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School, 2005. The Handbook of Dispute Resolution. California, John Wiley and Sons.
Moran, T. R., Harris, R.P., Stripp, G. W., 1993. Developing the Global Organization: Strategies for Human Resource Professionals. Texas, Gulf Professional Publishing.
Rahim, A. M., 2010. Managing Conflict in Organizations. New Jersey, Transactions Publishers
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.