Essay About Conflict Management And Basics Of Conflict Management
Essay, Pages 1 (4019 words)
Latest Update: October 4, 2021
Conflict Management in the WorkplaceConflict Management in the WorkplaceConflict Management in the WorkplaceIntroductionConflict management in the workplace is an issue that every leader, manager, or employee has to deal with at one time or another.The basics of conflict management include improving communication, teamwork, and a systematic approach to solving the disagreement. This paper explores various techniques that can be utilized to manage conflict in the workplace.
Workplace Conflict ManagementConflict is defined by Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman as “the process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party” (p. 362). Sometimes conflict that be a positive force within an organization, while at other times it is a negative force.
An example of conflict as a positive force is that the creation and resolution of conflict may lead the company to constructive problem solving. It may also lead people to search for ways of changing how they do things. The conflict resolution process can ultimately be a stimulus for positive change within an organization (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 364).
However, conflict may also have serious negative effects on an organization. For example, conflict may divert efforts from goal attainment or it may deplete resources (particularly time and money) (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 364). Conflict also may negatively affect the psychological well-being of employees and cause stress (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 364). Indeed, conflicting workplace ideas may lead to anger, tension, and anxiety. Deep and lasting conflicts that continue without conflict management may even lead to violence between employees and others (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 365). Therefore, it would be fair to say that conflict may sometimes be advantageous and at other times destructive.
The Conflict Incentives in the Workplace
Many work related problems will involve coherence of organizational goals and obligations, which are likely to be different from those in the workplace. One example would be: When a corporation must have the resources and resources to meet a group agreement required by the employer, and because of the lack of a complete plan of action, when that plan does not provide sufficient coordination and coordination from the first day of business, there may be a significant conflict between employees, coworkers and co-workers. We discuss each of these aspects (see Figure A below) as well as other co-ordination issues and responsibilities here.
Figure A—Coherence of Workplace Goals and Responsibilities—Part One:
Coordination
As discussed in Part 2, a number of organizational goals may have a value to the work force. In practice, in many workplaces, work activities are not a part of the plan of action required to achieve a goal.
Organizational work activities are not fully coordinated. They include:
• Meeting certain objectives
• Coordinating on any necessary tasks
• Conducting common work
• Coordinating on all of the following
• Using any of the following activities independently from those in use in the workplace: Organizing work activities
• Working on or about new technology projects
• Planning or planning to work on all items of need
• Planning to carry out any of the foregoing if necessary:
• Writing, programming, distributing materials, organizing services, and making decisions
• Proving work is useful to another
• Working on or about improvements to existing facilities or methods
• Meeting one or more of these objectives in a meeting with the Director
• Collecting information on new and existing areas of use
• Writing on plans for work for which a manager has provided the Director some feedback
• Managers should also have to consider the implications of coherence of work, such as to minimize risk and ensure a smooth transition of responsibility to the worker. As discussed in Figure B below, coherence affects the potential for conflict. As discussed in Part 2, coherence may be used to minimize or eliminate the risks involved. Coherence has been used in many different types of situations. For example, coherence may have been used in workplaces that have worked together for 10 years in various kinds of jobs. Coherence was used for workers that are co-employed but not in full-time employment, so the risks associated with co-employed workers are reduced. Coherence has also been used for co-owned workplaces that are managed by employees or through their immediate family members using one or more independent firms. It should be noted that by co-managed environments, people share responsibility for the workplace for their shared responsibilities.
• In the workplace, workers should understand the role roles play within the employer and the role of co-operators. • In co-managed workplaces, the responsibility is shared by staff (typically supervisors) and by individual workers who co-operate in the workplace. • In co-managed workplaces, the benefits of co-workmanship are more important than the level of performance when taking a particular approach. The most important points are that co-experiencing means being able to help others of the same skill-set, rather than having to help you and your workplace. • In co-managed workplaces, staff and co-workers should respect each other’s boundaries and trust their boundaries. • The worker should not be expected to be better than other workers at how the work is done, nor should it be expected to be able to maintain some form of common sense. The co-worker should always provide for the other worker and be responsive to each worker’s needs. The co-worker should respect the co-worker and the employee in a way consistent with the work’s common sense. If not, however, co-worker co-working must become more important as well.
• In the workplace, co-working requires different tasks that are performed by different persons. In addition, there are some aspects of co-working that could not have been possible when a worker had co-experimentation.
• Workers who are co-experienced should be prepared to face other workers who do co-experimentation at all: this may include those who do co-experimentation with their co-workers but are in their late forties or early forties, who have to be experienced at some point in their career. This co-experiencing may allow others to participate in the co-working process. One benefit of having co-experimental participation in workplace co-work is that it provides a better understanding of the worker’s life’s choices, aspirations, and the overall experience. In addition, co-experiencing may allow some workers to learn the ways in which co-experiencing interferes with the worker’s work at work.
• Co-experiencing provides a powerful way to engage in co-work of all kinds. The worker and co-worker will have different experiences and experiences in different workplaces, but they should take the opportunity to try different co-occasions to learn about different work practices. As outlined in Part 1, co-experiencing also facilitates worker participation in job opportunities.
In the workplace work practices, the co-worker must be able to find work when working on a regular basis, while also being able to have the work that makes up the co-work experience at work. On many occasions, co-experiencing has been used to enhance the worker’s own experience and make it more available to others. In the examples presented in this document, the co-worker may use an experience on his or her first day at work to learn how other workers are working, to identify and support the activities of other co-workers and staff, and to make the work of other co-experiencing more accessible to others. If the co-worker is working day and night for different work activities, it could be beneficial for him or her to be part of a co-worker’s job work as well as their own.
• In co-organized workplaces, worker co-experiencing can provide an opportunity to learn about other workers and work at their own pace, without working with them or contributing to their problem problems.
• In workplaces that have co-established workers’ relationships, the workplace co-worker can begin to understand where they are working and what is working at
[Table of Contents]
Externality. Many people do not believe that all creative work carries the same status. They may feel, for example, that they are working for a certain type of group, while at the same time it may not be seen as a good fit so they do not want to leave the group. Some will even find it difficult to leave and even try to return home without ever leaving it.
When working on new projects and to help further develop future work concepts and projects, it is important to remember that the concept has never been explicitly said so. What we often find, for example, is that projects such as the project manager’s vision are often not clear and often do not even involve people working on a project that the client is trying to achieve. But it is the ability to articulate a vision that is often the real, important and central consideration in the project creation process. When you are a co-worker, you must carefully work out the vision and the process behind each of your ideas. Coherence is important because in an uncooperative environment, you may think you can’t get things done with the client very well and that the other employees would be better off. There is no guarantee that you will be able to create meaningful outcomes at the client’s expense and the client is likely to have concerns about your project. In some cases there are a number of benefits to co-worker co-ownership. For example, to ensure fairness and to ensure continuity of ownership, the co-ownership of a piece of real estate or a new project may be a factor. The concept of co-ownership in the creative world can be traced back to Plato’s idea of a workhouse. While the idea seems obvious to all who look at it, many people do not remember that his main goal was to provide the best service for his clients. If you could have created a project that would serve your client, and in exchange would help you meet their needs without having to sacrifice the success, then you would accomplish your goals with a quality project. However, at least in many creative projects co-ownership is involved rather than just the working out of your idea. In other cases an effort to co-invest in the team through co-management is also important, because if the team is already good at sharing that knowledge with your audience, you may discover that it may not be something that you’ve thought of and that you have to create something better.
3. Working with a Contractor
A contractor does not hold to a creative project. Instead, they work with others, or deal with partners, sometimes with a partner in order to share their ideas and ideas rather than as a joint project. It might be possible for a person to collaborate for a project without having to do anyone else’s work and do it for you.
Often a co-owner will agree in writing or on paper that the client can either use it or that you could use it. An example of a co-owner agreement might look like this:
“If you’d like to write about that for a client it seems I’ve agreed…” “We don’t like your idea, but I can help you to get the word out…”
Most co-owners feel that a contract will allow them to share ideas on many things, perhaps from different places within the creative process rather than as a partner. You might be told that if you’re using some product, you can create a logo and a new customer for that product too. If you’re using a website and you don’t have a plan for other clients who are interested in doing this, then you might be able to use ideas shared between clients, just as the people who use your website share recipes for the doughnut with others. If the project is
The Conflict Incentives in the Workplace
Many work related problems will involve coherence of organizational goals and obligations, which are likely to be different from those in the workplace. One example would be: When a corporation must have the resources and resources to meet a group agreement required by the employer, and because of the lack of a complete plan of action, when that plan does not provide sufficient coordination and coordination from the first day of business, there may be a significant conflict between employees, coworkers and co-workers. We discuss each of these aspects (see Figure A below) as well as other co-ordination issues and responsibilities here.
Figure A—Coherence of Workplace Goals and Responsibilities—Part One:
Coordination
As discussed in Part 2, a number of organizational goals may have a value to the work force. In practice, in many workplaces, work activities are not a part of the plan of action required to achieve a goal.
Organizational work activities are not fully coordinated. They include:
• Meeting certain objectives
• Coordinating on any necessary tasks
• Conducting common work
• Coordinating on all of the following
• Using any of the following activities independently from those in use in the workplace: Organizing work activities
• Working on or about new technology projects
• Planning or planning to work on all items of need
• Planning to carry out any of the foregoing if necessary:
• Writing, programming, distributing materials, organizing services, and making decisions
• Proving work is useful to another
• Working on or about improvements to existing facilities or methods
• Meeting one or more of these objectives in a meeting with the Director
• Collecting information on new and existing areas of use
• Writing on plans for work for which a manager has provided the Director some feedback
• Managers should also have to consider the implications of coherence of work, such as to minimize risk and ensure a smooth transition of responsibility to the worker. As discussed in Figure B below, coherence affects the potential for conflict. As discussed in Part 2, coherence may be used to minimize or eliminate the risks involved. Coherence has been used in many different types of situations. For example, coherence may have been used in workplaces that have worked together for 10 years in various kinds of jobs. Coherence was used for workers that are co-employed but not in full-time employment, so the risks associated with co-employed workers are reduced. Coherence has also been used for co-owned workplaces that are managed by employees or through their immediate family members using one or more independent firms. It should be noted that by co-managed environments, people share responsibility for the workplace for their shared responsibilities.
• In the workplace, workers should understand the role roles play within the employer and the role of co-operators. • In co-managed workplaces, the responsibility is shared by staff (typically supervisors) and by individual workers who co-operate in the workplace. • In co-managed workplaces, the benefits of co-workmanship are more important than the level of performance when taking a particular approach. The most important points are that co-experiencing means being able to help others of the same skill-set, rather than having to help you and your workplace. • In co-managed workplaces, staff and co-workers should respect each other’s boundaries and trust their boundaries. • The worker should not be expected to be better than other workers at how the work is done, nor should it be expected to be able to maintain some form of common sense. The co-worker should always provide for the other worker and be responsive to each worker’s needs. The co-worker should respect the co-worker and the employee in a way consistent with the work’s common sense. If not, however, co-worker co-working must become more important as well.
• In the workplace, co-working requires different tasks that are performed by different persons. In addition, there are some aspects of co-working that could not have been possible when a worker had co-experimentation.
• Workers who are co-experienced should be prepared to face other workers who do co-experimentation at all: this may include those who do co-experimentation with their co-workers but are in their late forties or early forties, who have to be experienced at some point in their career. This co-experiencing may allow others to participate in the co-working process. One benefit of having co-experimental participation in workplace co-work is that it provides a better understanding of the worker’s life’s choices, aspirations, and the overall experience. In addition, co-experiencing may allow some workers to learn the ways in which co-experiencing interferes with the worker’s work at work.
• Co-experiencing provides a powerful way to engage in co-work of all kinds. The worker and co-worker will have different experiences and experiences in different workplaces, but they should take the opportunity to try different co-occasions to learn about different work practices. As outlined in Part 1, co-experiencing also facilitates worker participation in job opportunities.
In the workplace work practices, the co-worker must be able to find work when working on a regular basis, while also being able to have the work that makes up the co-work experience at work. On many occasions, co-experiencing has been used to enhance the worker’s own experience and make it more available to others. In the examples presented in this document, the co-worker may use an experience on his or her first day at work to learn how other workers are working, to identify and support the activities of other co-workers and staff, and to make the work of other co-experiencing more accessible to others. If the co-worker is working day and night for different work activities, it could be beneficial for him or her to be part of a co-worker’s job work as well as their own.
• In co-organized workplaces, worker co-experiencing can provide an opportunity to learn about other workers and work at their own pace, without working with them or contributing to their problem problems.
• In workplaces that have co-established workers’ relationships, the workplace co-worker can begin to understand where they are working and what is working at
Externality. Many people do not believe that all creative work carries the same status. They may feel, for example, that they are working for a certain type of group, while at the same time it may not be seen as a good fit so they do not want to leave the group. Some will even find it difficult to leave and even try to return home without ever leaving it.
When working on new projects and to help further develop future work concepts and projects, it is important to remember that the concept has never been explicitly said so. What we often find, for example, is that projects such as the project manager’s vision are often not clear and often do not even involve people working on a project that the client is trying to achieve. But it is the ability to articulate a vision that is often the real, important and central consideration in the project creation process. When you are a co-worker, you must carefully work out the vision and the process behind each of your ideas. Coherence is important because in an uncooperative environment, you may think you can’t get things done with the client very well and that the other employees would be better off. There is no guarantee that you will be able to create meaningful outcomes at the client’s expense and the client is likely to have concerns about your project. In some cases there are a number of benefits to co-worker co-ownership. For example, to ensure fairness and to ensure continuity of ownership, the co-ownership of a piece of real estate or a new project may be a factor. The concept of co-ownership in the creative world can be traced back to Plato’s idea of a workhouse. While the idea seems obvious to all who look at it, many people do not remember that his main goal was to provide the best service for his clients. If you could have created a project that would serve your client, and in exchange would help you meet their needs without having to sacrifice the success, then you would accomplish your goals with a quality project. However, at least in many creative projects co-ownership is involved rather than just the working out of your idea. In other cases an effort to co-invest in the team through co-management is also important, because if the team is already good at sharing that knowledge with your audience, you may discover that it may not be something that you’ve thought of and that you have to create something better.
3. Working with a Contractor
A contractor does not hold to a creative project. Instead, they work with others, or deal with partners, sometimes with a partner in order to share their ideas and ideas rather than as a joint project. It might be possible for a person to collaborate for a project without having to do anyone else’s work and do it for you.
Often a co-owner will agree in writing or on paper that the client can either use it or that you could use it. An example of a co-owner agreement might look like this:
“If you’d like to write about that for a client it seems I’ve agreed…” “We don’t like your idea, but I can help you to get the word out…”
Most co-owners feel that a contract will allow them to share ideas on many things, perhaps from different places within the creative process rather than as a partner. You might be told that if you’re using some product, you can create a logo and a new customer for that product too. If you’re using a website and you don’t have a plan for other clients who are interested in doing this, then you might be able to use ideas shared between clients, just as the people who use your website share recipes for the doughnut with others. If the project is
Workplace managers must be sensitive to the consequences of conflict. These consequences range from negative outcomes (such as loss of skilled employees, sabotage, low quality of work, stress and even violence) to positive outcomes (such as creative alternatives, increased motivation and commitment, high quality of work, and personal satisfaction) (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 365).
Conflicts (whether they are negative or positive) will arise in organizations whenever interests collide — and when these differences affect the relationship between interdependent people, they must be constructively managed (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 365). According to Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, some ways to manage conflict include: the “forcing style”, the “accommodating style”, the “compromising style”, and the “collaborating style”.
The forcing style refers to “assertive and uncooperative behaviors and reflects a win-lose approach to interpersonal conflict” (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 374). This forcing style relies on coercive power and dominance to resolve the conflict. In the forcing style, the person who is trying to resolve the conflict feels that one side must win and that one side must lose (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 374).
The accommodating style, according to Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, refers to “cooperative and unassertive behaviors” (p. 376). The accommodation style manifests itself as a long-term strategy to encourage cooperation by others, or as a submission to the wishes of others. The accommodator tries to reduce tensions and stresses by reassurance and support (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 376). This style shows concern about the emotional aspects of conflict, but does not deal with substantive issues — this style simply results in covering up or glossing over the issue (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman p. 376).
According to Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, the compromising style refers to “behaviors at an intermediate level of cooperation and assertiveness” (p. 377). This style is based on give and take, which usually involves a series of concessions. This technique is commonly used and widely accepted as a means of resolving conflict.
A collaborating style refers to “strong cooperative and assertive behaviors. It is the win-win approach to interpersonal conflict handling” (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 376). In this stylistic approach to workplace conflict management, it is sharing, examining and assessing the reasons for the conflict that leads to the development of an alternative that is fully acceptable to everyone involved. This effectively resolves the conflict (Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman, p. 377).
Studies on the use of these different interpersonal conflict handling styles indicate that collaboration is the best approach to
