Conflict Resolution Strategies For Better Business: Analysis And Plan

Analysis of the conflict/problem

1. The problem in regards to both parties involves the conduction of business within the store. This mainly illuminates the idea that in regards to Joe the problem is that Kim does not follow store policies when it comes to customer service. This mainly lays emphasis on the fact that Kim in order to make a sale, promises customers a full money return option despite the tools being returned after the 30-day mark. This causes problems for Joe who manages the customer service desk since the company policy suggests that any tools that have been returned beyond the 30-day mark will not receive a full money claim. This 30-day store policy has been causing conflicts between Kim and Joe. The main reason for conflict is that while Kim makes up empty promises so as to make a sale, Joe is the one who has to deal with the repercussions when he denies the customers their full money back which had been guaranteed by Kim.
2. Another very distinct incident that has been going on in this situation is the differences between Kim and Joe. This mainly suggests that both Kim and Joe do not see eye to eye when it comes to conducting business within the store. While Jo believes in sticking to the rules, Kim believes in putting the customer first and taking care of the reputation of the store among its customer base. This also lays emphasis on the fact that Joe is a staunch believer in honouring the store policy and going by the books when it comes to running the store. However, Kim feels that it is in the best interest of the store to cater to the needs of the customer which is why lying about full money-back guarantee is not that big of a deal for Kim since it makes sale an puts the numbers where they need to be (Wagner et al, 2019). This imminent disagreement in terms of running a business ethically has caused conflict between the two. In addition to this, another instance that has taken place in this situation is the fact that Kim’s actions with the customers have created a poor work environment for Joe. This is an evident emphasis on the fact that Kim’s actions have made Joe bear the repercussions. This also brings to light the fact that Joe’s employees have directly confronted Kim when it came to not following the store policy. This has created a tense work environment since Kim’s responses have been dismissive, defensive and extremely gruff. Kim’s lack of remorse when it comes to the poor treatment of those employees due to his own actions has made the work environment extremely toxic for both parties and has caused them to have disagreements quite a lot (Bonache at al, 2019).

• In regards to the underlying interests, while Joe’s interests are strictly following the store policy so that they can run the business ethically, Kim’s interests are more inclined towards customer service. Kim believes that the store’s policy should benefit the customers and hence strives to follow the store service policy. However, Joe on the other hand is the one who actually has to deal with angry customers when their full money-back guarantees are not fulfilled (Bercovitch, 2019). This means that while Kim’s interests lie in making the sale and catering to the needs of the customers, Joe follows a more ethical and honorable line of work and believes in following the store policy even if that costs him a few customers.

1. There are several options that can be used in order to resolve the problem. The first option is a compromise. This mainly suggests that both parties must come to an agreement where they can both amicably solve the problem. This means that both parties have to come to a solution that is agreeable to both (Hamperl & Cimprich, 2016). This means that Kim can attempt to not make empty promises to the clients while Joe can try and accommodate certain customers when it comes to the full money return policy. Another way to solve this problem is through the process of accommodating. This mainly suggests that one of the members has to give in to the other. This means either Kim or Joe must resolve the situation by agreeing with the other one. This illuminates the idea that either Kim has to agree to Joe’s way of running things and resolving this conflict or Joe has to do the same with Kim.
2. The best solution in order to solve this problem is to compromise. This means that both parties do not have to give in to the other. This also justifies the fact that it is a better option for resolution since both parties can sit down and discuss amiably a certain solution that will be satisfactory to both of them. In addition to this, by sitting down and immediately discussing a solution, both Kim, as well as Joe, will have the ability to discuss like adults and hence come to a concrete conclusion to the problem.

1. In accordance with Thomas Kilmann’s 5 modes for handling conflicts model, the most appropriate approach for resolving the conflict is through a compromise. The goal of a compromise is to come up with a mutually acceptable solution. This means that both parties will agree to the common solution that they come up with. This also brings to light the fact that a compromise refers to a middle ground between competing and accommodating (Zhu & Tang, 2018). This is because not only does it address an issue directly but also does not do so with the strive to win. This means that compromising involves finding a middle ground so that a common solution can be agreed upon. It is also imperative to note that compromising refers to finding a solution that allows both parties to move ahead of the conflict. In regards to Kim and Joe, the most acceptable approach is to compromise since both these individuals are strong-headed and would hence never agree to bow down to one another which is why the other resolution approaches have been ruled out. In order to resolve their conflict, compromising is the best option as both of them have the ability to come up with a mutually amicable solution that will help them move ahead from the conflict and also enable their company to succeed which they have been wanting.
2. The key messages that must be discussed and communicated with the other person include the well-being of the store. In addition to this, other matters of discussion should involve the treatment of employees which is an important aspect of the company. Furthermore, another aspect that the meeting should discuss include the store policies regarding returns. It is evident from the case study that both parties want what’s best for the store. While Kim wants to cater to the needs of the customers and enhance the store’s reputation among its customer base, Joe believes in following the rules and conducting business in an ethical manner. This has also pushed Kim into treating the employees poorly which is a sign of a poor work environment within the store. This is why both parties must sit down and discuss amiably how they would like to proceed in terms of running the business as well as treating their workforce (Bärnthaler, 2020). In addition to this, they must come to a conclusion to this conflict since they have other clients to meet so that they can keep up with the enhancement of the business that they work at.

• Script

Joe: Good morning, Kim! I would like to talk to you if you have a minute?

Kim: Good morning, Joe. Yes, tell me?

Joe: I think we must discuss the way we are running the store.

Kim: What do you mean?

Joe: Please do not act clueless. Not only have we created a toxic work environment for ourselves and the employees working under us but we have also successfully been disagreeing about the store policy.

Kim: Joe, the stores best interest is in serving its customers and fulfilling their needs.

Joe: But at what cost? I disagree with the way you are running your end of the business. Guaranteeing the customers with full money back options despite missing the 30 day return policy mark is not accurate

Kim: I believe we can make certain changes to suit our customers better. It is all for the business

Joe: I disagree. There is a certain way of running the business. We must focus on the store policy. It has been created for a reason.

Kim: While that is true, business cannot be conducted like this. Sometimes we must improvise on the basis of the situation. I make those promises since it helps me make sale. At least we’re able to sell the tools. While some do come back asking for a refund, most do not.

Joe: This brings me to the other thing. Your behaviour with our employees is unacceptable. You cannot just dismiss them if they ask you a question.

Kim: I can and I will. Your employees did not ask me questions they simply accused me of lying to our customers. I do not need to answer to them.

Joe: Of course, you do! They are the ones who have to deal with angry clients when they come to the customer service desk asking for full money backs since you guaranteed them that. This behaviour has caused a lot of strife on the entire work force. Your rude behaviour and dismissive attitude will only aggravate the situation further. We have to come up with a solution.

Kim: I do not wish to aggravate anybody. I only want what is best for the company. This means that at the moment, the best notion for the company is to make sale which is what I am trying to do. I do not understand why you disagree with my way so much.

Plan to address conflict/problem

Joe: That is because your ways go against the store policy which exist for a reason.

Kim: I believe in serving my customers and that is the policy I choose to follow.

Joe: No, this just will not do. We cannot be arguing anymore. We have to solve this.

Kim: What do you propose?

Joe: While I disagree with your ways, I agree that both our goals are the same, which is the benefit and overall enhancement of the store. So, I am willing to compromise, if you are.

Kim: So, you mean to say that you are willing to come to a common solution so we can put this conflict behind us?

Joe: Yes. I am suggesting precisely that. I understand our goals are similar. Therefore, I propose that we come to a middle ground. I think I can live with your sale techniques. However, I would like to request you to not mention the beyond 30 day policy to the customers. This way they can return the tools within 30 days and be returned the entire amount.

Kim: Well, I believe that is not that bad. I am sure I can make it sound appealing by stating how we provide 30 long days of buffer time for full money returns. However, you will have to speak to your employees. I do not want to be harassed with questions at my place of work.

Joe: Of course. I will speak to them about the confrontation part. I would also like to request that you do not dismiss them like you have been doing. I just believe that respect goes both ways. So, I will speak to them about this very aspect if you also promise to maintain this decorum while engaging with them.

Kim: Alright. I agree with you. Respect must be given in order to receive it. This is why I will work on my treatment of others and hence not treat your employees poorly.

Joe: Alright then. I believe this is good for us since now we can focus on the store and its betterment in the future.

Kim: Yes, I agree.

References

Bärnthaler, R. (2020). Conflict, controversy, compromise, and compression: The pragmatics of transdisciplinary (development) projects. Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 13(2), 193-210. https://doi.org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-0038

Bercovitch, J. (2019). Social conflicts and third parties: Strategies of conflict resolution. Routledge.

Bonache, H., Gonzalez-Mendez, R., & Krahé, B. (2019). Adult attachment styles, destructive conflict resolution, and the experience of intimate partner violence. Journal of interpersonal violence, 34(2), 287-309. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0886260516640776

Hamperl, S., & Cimprich, K. A. (2016). Conflict resolution in the genome: how transcription and replication make it work. Cell, 167(6), 1455-1467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.053 

Wagner, A., Mosmann, C. P., Scheeren, P., & Levandowski, D. C. (2019). Conflict, conflict resolution and marital quality. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto), 29. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-4327e2919

Zhu, J., & Tang, W. (2018). Conflict and compromise in planning decision-making: How does a Chinese local government negotiate its construction land quota with higher-level governments?. Environment and Urbanization, 30(1), 155-174. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0956247817753524