Conflict Management

TYPES OF DISPUTES

Any level of an organization, from the individual to the organizational, might experience conflict. There are two basic forms of conflicts that vary in intensity: interpersonal conflicts and intergroup conflicts.

INTERPERSONAL DISPUTES

Conflict at the individual level shows that needs shape people's behavior and control their daily actions. People attempt to match their needs—such as desired benefits or compensation packages—with those of the company before joining. On the other hand, if they notice any unfairness toward their coworkers in the company, it could lead to a personal confrontation. People may get tense, frustrated, or behave badly as a result of such a conflict. For instance, a worker who feels they are compensated less than a col-league tries to load her work on the colleague.

Conflict between two people is known as interpersonal conflict. This kind of dispute usually starts when there are few resources or prizes available. It may also happen because various people have unique viewpoints, dispositions, value systems, and working styles. To put it plainly, interpersonal conflict arises when two people are at odds. Considered a major-level dispute, interpersonal conflict can arise between roommates, spouses, siblings, coworkers, and neighbors. When most individuals see themselves in a confrontation, they envision something like this.

In the context of interpersonal conflicts, the two following ideas are crucial:

Analyzing Transactions: It alludes to a paradigm of individuals and interpersonal relationships created in the 1960s by Dr. Eric Berne. Its foundations are two ideas:

We have three "ego-states" in our personalities, to start. These three states are kid, adult, and parent.

Secondly, these states have conversations or "transactions" with each other.

To put it simply, transactional analysis is a technique used in social psychology to enhance communication. It describes our growth and treatment of ourselves, our relationships with others, and our communication with them. It also addresses the ways in which we make and receive recommendations that support our development. The underlying assumptions of transactional analysis are as follows:

Individuals are malleable

Everybody has the right to exist and be welcomed in this world.

The term "Johari Window" describes a communication paradigm intended to increase mutual understanding. The names of Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham, who created this model in 1955, are the source of the phrase "Johari." The tool is based on the following two concepts: By sharing personal details with others, one can establish trust. With the aid of feedback from others, a person might discover more about themselves. This aids in the person's resolution of personal conflicts. In summary, the Johari window highlights the need of providing constructive feedback and being honest with oneself. This can assist individuals in producing better work more successfully as a team.

The four quadrant grids that make up the Johari window are as follows:-

1. Open Area in Quadrant 1 :- The data in Quadrant 1 shows what we and other people know about each other. As a result, behavior, knowledge, skills, attitudes, and "public" history are all included in this quadrant.

2. Blind Area in Quadrant 2 :- Information that others are aware of about us but that we are unaware of is included in this quadrant. This might include straightforward problems that are unknown to us as well as complicated problems (including emotions of inadequacy, ineptitude, unworthiness, or rejection), which are frequently difficult for people to confront openly but are visible to others.

3. Quadrant 3:- Secret Place This quadrant shows details about ourselves that we are aware of but that others are not about us.

4. Quadrant 4: Unidentified Region Information that neither we nor others are aware of is represented by the last quadrant.

Extending the open area while avoiding the disclosure of too-personal information is the primary objective of the Johari window. According to the paradigm, the Open Area quadrant holds the greatest significance since it is often true that individuals who have a greater understanding of one another become more productive, cooperative, and effective when collaborating. We refer to the process of enlarging the Open Area as "self-disclosure." It is a reciprocal process that happens between the person interacting and the individuals in the interaction. In OB, resolving interpersonal conflicts is a critical issue.

In order to address interpersonal conflicts, a company must invest a significant amount of time and resources conflicts. This is because inter-personal conflict is the most common type of conflict in organisations.

The six general steps for handling interpersonal problems are as follows:

1. Using needs to define the issue

2. Considering numerous options

3. Deciding which option or solutions best satisfy the needs of both sides

4. Determining who will accomplish what by when and where

5. Putting the strategy into action

6. Assessing the procedure and results

INTER-GROUP DISPUTES

Intergroup conflicts are disputes that arise when two or more groups disagree. These are often observed in an organization when there is competition between two departments for limited resources. For instance, a disparity in staffing levels could lead to friction between the marketing and finance departments. Furthermore, there may be disagreements between two different departments about how each contributes to the business. When various departments collaborate to achieve shared organizational objectives, intergroup conflict is reduced. It might benefit a company by fostering more constructive rivalry. The nature of the group is one of the main causes of conflict between groups. Other factors include aim discrepancies, perception gaps, and the growing need for specialists. Work independence is another one.

Furthermore, a group's individual members are also heavily involved in the initiation of an intergroup conflict. Groups may get along well with one another when their paths appear to be parallel and they have common interests. But when organizations' objectives and practices diverge, each group may have a bad opinion of the other. The past interactions between the groups involved in the conflict should be taken into account while attempting to prevent or settle intergroup conflict. If history is allowed to repeat itself, it will. There are several methods for resolving disputes amongst groups.

Among these methods are:

1. Steer clear when at all feasible

2. Solving problems

3. Modifying specific variables

4. Creating a mechanism for resolving disputes

The reason for the disagreement and its severity should be taken into consideration while choosing a conflict resolution strategy. When it comes to problem solving, in-person meetings are a highly efficient means of clearing up misunderstandings and language hurdles.

INTRA-INDIVIDUAL DISPUTE

Intrapsychic conflict is another term for this kind of conflict. Arguments regarding issues arise within an individual when they are arguing with themselves. For instance, a person desires to get new shoes but is aware that it is not wise to spend money on them. As a result, when a person's cognitive components are inconsistent, intra-individual conflict arises. It is possible for thoughts, ideas, values, emotions, and predispositions to clash in this way.

Internal conflicts inside an individual consist of:

Frustration :- When goal-directed behavior is obstructed, frustration results. For instance, when a person's professional advancement is impeded for a variety of factors.

Goal-conflict :- Approach-approach, approach-avoidance, and avoidance-avoidance scenarios can give rise to goal conflict. When someone must decide between two options that are equally appealing, approach-approach conflict arises. For instance, a manager could have to choose between hiring one of two equally qualified applicants. Avoidance-approach When an alternative has both advantages and disadvantages, conflict arises. For instance, a person may wish to work for a multinational corporation (MNC) where job security is compromised yet pay is tempting. When a person must choose between two options that are mutually exclusive and have unfavorable effects, they are faced with an avoidance-avoidance scenario. As an illustration, choosing between little pay and low job security.

RESOLVING AND MANAGING DISPUTES

Conflict can be both productive and detrimental, depending on how it affects workers' performance. If a quarrel leads to better performance, it must be encouraged. Nonetheless, a dispute must be managed and resolved if it interferes with performance. Particularly when it reaches its peak, a disagreement needs to be handled.

The methods of conflict resolution are explained by the following points:

Solving Issues: This is a straightforward method of conflict resolution where the dispute's origin is eliminated. Using this method, the issue is resolved by identifying and eliminating its primary source. For example, there could be a dispute about pay between the management and the staff. The management settles the dispute by raising the compensation.

Super-ordinate Goals: Conflict is less likely to arise when different parties collaborate to achieve the same objectives. In order to avoid conflicts, management should establish superordinate goals. Delivering a particular collection of project deliverables within a specified time frame is one example of a super-ordinate goal in a project. This could lessen disagreements within a team over individual objectives.

Increasing Resources: Conflicts can occasionally arise from a lack of resources. In these situations, expanding the pool of resources can aid in resolving disputes. For instance, allocating less resources than necessary can lead to disagreement in a project. By allocating additional resources, conflict in these situations can be averted.

Prevention: This is a roundabout method of settling disputes. This strategy avoids the source of the conflict. For instance, to prevent confrontations, it might be necessary to assign two people who are mutually incompatible to different groups.

Settlement: This strategy calls on both disputing parties to set aside their individual goals and engage in cooperative problem-solving.

Authoritative Command: This suggests that managers can settle disputes by utilizing their official power. For instance, a manager may threaten to take action against two team members who are at odds with one another if they do not find a solution to their interpersonal issues.

Changing the Human Factor: It uses a variety of strategies, like training to alter people's attitudes or behaviors to deal with conflict in a better manner. However, in order to help resolve the issue, the parties involved may be moved to a different location. A team member who disapproves of a management, for instance, might be moved to the team of a different manager.

PUSHING FOR FUNCTIONAL CONFLICT IN ORGANIZATIONAL EFFICACY

We have already covered the benefits of functional conflicts for an organization. These kinds of disputes might benefit the company by raising employee performance. Therefore, in order to foster healthy competition and greater creativity, an organization needs to encourage these kinds of confrontations.

The dispute resolution strategies are explained by the following points: Introducing in Visitors: This refers to a manager's ability to incite controversy by appointing a worker whose temperament, working style, and mode of thought diverge from those of the current workforce.

Remodeling the Group: This is the process of switching members between two or more groups. All of the relevant groups would include a mix of new and old members in such a scenario. Along with them will be fresh, original, and practical ideas from the new members. There could be disagreements between them and the more experienced group members, which could lead to conflict.

Choosing the Devil's Advocate: This is the process of designating a manager who has the authority to start debates and challenge preconceived notions in order to sow discord inside the company. Someone like that assists in drawing other members' attention to certain grounds of contention that can subsequently be settled.

Dan Goldin NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory NASA Ames Research Center NASA Marshall Space Flight Center NASA Technology Transfer Program NASA Careers NASA Careers ISRO ISRO - Indian Space Research Organization ISRO - Indian Space Research Organisation COVERING ISRO DRDO, Centre for Airborne Systems DRDO, Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India Defence Research and Development Laboratory (DRDL) - DRDO LinkedIn LinkedIn Guide to Creating LinkedIn Guide to Networking Google Apple Amazon Microsoft

#business? #innovation #management #digitalmarketing #technology #creativity?#futurism #startups #marketing #socialmedia #socialnetworking #management #motivation #personaldevelopment #jobinterviews #sustainability #selfhelp #leadership #personalbranding #education #productivity #travel #sales #socialentrepreneurship #fundraising #law #strategy #culture #fashion #business #networking #hiring #health #inspiration #er_hr_muskanchaudhary #training #hr #recruitment #engineer #linkedin #linkedinposts #linkedinconnection #linkedinjobs #instagram #facebook