Managerial Decision Making For Conflict In The Workplace

Problem Background

Discuss about the Managerial Decision Making for Conflict in the Workplace.

Conflict is present in every firm and this to a certain extent indicates a healthy exchange of ideas and creativity among the employees in the workplace. However, there is a type of conflict which causes reduced productivity, workers dissatisfaction, and provision of poor service to clients, increased employee turnover, workplace stress, and a hostile work environment. It is critical to understand that workplace conflict is inevitable in the organization due to a longtime commitment to the vision and mission coupled with long hours of work and the managerial styles used in the firm (Rahim, 2010).

Conflict may arise due to cultural differences, communication problems, and personal differences. For the managers to control the levels of conflict breaking between employees and management, there is need to be apprehensive in identifying the causes and apply suitable measures to contain the spread of the opposition. To detect a conflict, necessary to look is the level of tension, verbal and non-verbal behaviors in different teams. The report explores the work of the managers in dealing with the day to day conflict between workers in the workplaces and identifies the ways of evaluating the problem and implementing the solution (Katz & Flynn, 2013). 

The focus of the report is conflict in the workplace, and this section defines conflict as applied in the organization context. The term workplace conflict is defined as the forms of conflict that occurs in the workplace. It can be among workers, employees and management and others such as between management. In broad terms, it covers various forms of conflict which are different such as labor-management conflict and employment conflict. Besides, it also involves the workers, managers, customers, owners. On the other hand, it does not include a union, gender, and race oriented discrimination (Slaikeu & Hasson, 2012).

There are various ways which can be used to solve conflict problem as enunciated by wood, 2008. These includes brainstorming, brainwriting, fishbone diagram, De Bono’s six thinking hats and mind mapping. The focus of the paper is how it can be used in solving the conflict in the workplace. Other tools applicable to solving workplace problems will be explored and expanded.

The first process of resolving conflict using the brainwashing tool includes preparing the participant where the team is introduced to the information regarding nature, causes and the parties involved in the conflict in the workplace (Morgan, 2012). The ideas are generated and recorded by an individual participant who is not necessarily the leader of the group. The next step includes presenting the problem by clearly defining the conflict and laying out the criteria to be met to solve the conflict and recording the suggestions by all the members. The next process includes guiding the discussion where the workers participating are told to express the ideas on how to solve the issue. For example, participants are encouraged to comment on how the conflict can be quickly resolved. After these stages, then the management must take action based on the ideas explained (Deuja, Kohn, Paulus, & Korde, 2014).

Problem Definition

The solution to conflict situations in the workplace will be solved through the ideas presented in the workplace where the managers pick the best of ideas and act on it. The management can use the affinity diagram and decision matrix analysis as will be explained later to fix the issues. When well-managed, the process of brainstorming is very beneficial as it helps the managers generate radical solutions to conflict (Ergu, Kou, Shi, & Shi, 2014). It is also a way of encouraging the workers to commit to the solutions because of their input in formulating them. It is also necessary to avoid criticism and to promote high level of creativity. For instance, workers participating in the process will explain why they feel conflict emerges and how the management can solve it (Deuja, Kohn, Paulus, & Korde, 2014).

This is a process which can be used to generate solutions to conflict in the workplace. The method is more effective and can be utilized by the management to make employees or those involved in the conflict come up ideas on the best way to approach and end the issues. Virtually all the brainstorming sessions are best-known for generating creativity (Deuja, Kohn, Paulus, & Korde, 2014). In the case of resolving the current conflict, all the employees are invited to contribute ideas that can work and express them without the fear of victimization and judgment. Then the ideas generated are given consideration and then censored based on their workability (Potts, et al., 2014).

The fishbone diagram is an important component of dealing with the conflict in the group. It is paramount because it identifies the party in the conflict, where the problem lies. For example, the workers have a conflict with the management. The diagram also helps determine the factors present in the problem such as poor communication, external forces, stress, and others (Morgan, 2012). For all the factors identified as causing conflict, such as communication, the management then brainstorms to find the solution to each cause. For example, the causes of poor communication, competition, different values can be tackled individually. When the management analyzes the diagram, it helps in exploring the possible causes and the approaches to the solutions. For example, without using the layout, the management cannot understand the reasons for the conflict and perhaps there would be wrong assumptions used to treat the problem (Wong, Woo, & Woo, 2016).

According to the De Bono’s six thinking hats tool, each problem has a purpose behind it. The tools will be used to offer a solution to the conflict in the workplace. Edward de Bono’s Six Thinking Hat is essential in taking control of the problem and provide solutions to it. The tool introduces the managers to Blue Managerial hat for the management of the thinking process. The White Neutral hat plays a role of collect the information, facts, and data about the conflict in the workplace and this lays the foundation for the thinking process about the problem (Vernon & Hocking, 2014). On the other hand, there is a Red Intuitive hat where the managers and other involved parties can make use of intuition to explore appropriate solutions to the conflict problems between workers in the organization (Kivunja, 2015). The manager’s knowledge about the issues can help him in coming up with the solutions of the conflict affecting the organization. 

Solution Generation

The fourth hat in the tools is known as Black Pessimistic hat which employs a negative approach solving the conflict between employees in the organization. However, it is one of the essential hats as helps in better understanding the weakness of dealing with the issues in the workplace. This is paramount because it helps in knowing what next because the issues have been addressed. Afterward, lies the different Black hat’s which is the Yellow Optimistic hat where the parties involved in finding the solution are introduced to the logically and definite plans of overcoming the conflict problems by confronting the reality or by tackling the underlying issues (Vernon & Hocking, 2014). For instance, if the problem is bad communication and intercultural issues the management face these matters at hand. Finally, the Green Creative hat is used when the manager wants to bend the rules and expand the possibilities to find unique ways of dealing with the issue.

The managers would also use the relationship diagram to find answers on the causes of conflict between workers in the organization. The tool seeks to respond to the following question namely, is the problem hard to understand, uncertain, overwhelming and disorganized? Further it also attempts to provide more solutions to the problem such as whether there is support needed in the process (Lucero, 2015). In search for a conflict issues solution, the leaders and the participants construct the affinity diagram to help them develop thoughts and ideas needed to come up with the solution to the problem and also reach agreement between members. The tool is made to generate, consolidate and organize the information about the problem in the company, and thus the diagrams help in developing its system to come with a solution to the compound issue. For example, the leadership team may use the tool during the process of understanding the causes of conflict between employees and coming up with a solution (Boutros & Purdie, 2013).

Decision Matrix is used to narrow the options to solve the issues with one method, when several criteria are used to come up with flexible solutions. In our case, it can be used to solve conflict in the workplace only in situations where one opportunity and method can be used to address the issue. To arrive at the process, the team need to brainstorm about the situation and the criteria to be used. Also paramount is the discussion and refinement of the criteria by reducing it to the one which is likely to acquire much support from the people (Ergu, Kou, Shi, & Shi, 2014). Then there is assigning it a relative weight depending on how the management can use it to come up with the solution. In the process, an L-shaped matrix can be drawn where criteria and options are ranked from lowest to the greatest regarding importance to find the best choice.  For example, the leaders can list the probable cause of conflicts such as communication, personality difference, cultural variation and competition between workers and come up with the greatest and lowest to know how they can tackle them (Haimes, 2015).

Brainstorming

Pareto Analysis can also be used to solve the conflict problem in the workplace. The tools calls for focusing on possible changes through identification of the challenge and solving it. The method uses “80/20 Rule” which means that solving 20 percent of causes results to 80 percent desired results. The approach will be used to identify the causes of conflict in the workplace and responding to them immediately through decision making. The method analyses the challenge, list the causes and make a decision on which to solve first depending on their weight (Champoux, 2016). In resolving the conflict the method would analyses the most probable causes, calculate their frequency, exploring the fundamental causes and making a decision on how to overcome them. 

Force field analysis is a tool used by management to bring change and helping the team deal with the forces causing conflict. The tool will be used to solve the conflict issues in the organization by looking at the forces that contribute to the issue such as communication, personal differences, and competition between workers in the organization (Meese & Ortmeier, 2004). Using the tool requires the leaders to bring some members together, propose the challenge to be addressed and come up with the list of driving forces. For instance, they will be divided into the forces supporting, and those against the problem and the possible barriers of dealing with each is identified. These issues are rated on scale 1-5, and the forces that significantly contribute to the problem are treated first (Swanson, 2014).

On the other hand, the managers will use The How-How Diagram to come up with a solution to the issues of conflict in the organization. The leaders will use the tool to seek an answer for the questions and use a particular structure to where the possible reward and risks for each option is enumerated. Once the management discovers the causes of the problem, then a permanent solution is implemented right away (de Haan & de Heer, 2015). For instance, after a thorough review, we have noticed that competition between workers is the cause of conflict and we are going to change the way we reward our employee performance for dealing with the problem. If communication is said to contribute to the problem, the management will implement employee training programs on how to communicate better with the colleagues and clients to reduce the issues (Meese & Ortmeier, 2004). 

Brainwriting

What-If Analysis is a useful tool for the managers to identify hazards and other precarious situation which produces undesirable sequences in the organization. In the case of conflict in the group, the managers will use the tool to discover the issues that are building conflict in the organization. The tools also help to identify the existing safeguards concerning the problem and then suggests the possible alternatives for reducing the risks associated (Lucero, 2015). The first step will include identifying the “what if” question in regard to conflict issues in the organization. An example includes maybe there is poor communication; the management is not providing the right leadership and others. Then the team will then search for answers such as “we do not have the right platform of communication” as the reason for conflict in the workplace. Further, the leaders will assess the level of risk to the causes identified (Potts, et al., 2014). For example, communication has no severe risk, and competition among workers has serious risks involved and therefore requires. Then after the process is through, the feedback is provided and recommendations to the appropriate departments. In our case, the communication problem will be handled by corporate of public relations department to ensure the solutions are addressed.

References

Boutros, T., & Purdie, T. (2013). The Process Improvement Handbook: A Blueprint for Managing Change and Increasing Organizational Performance. New York City: McGraw Hill Professional.

Champoux, J. E. (2016). Organizational behavior: Integrating individuals, groups, and organizations. Routledge: New York.

de Haan, A., & de Heer, P. (2015). Solving Complex Problems: Professional Group Decision-making Support in Highly Complex Situations. The Hague: Eleven international publishing.

Deuja, A., Kohn, N. W., Paulus, P. B., & Korde, R. M. (2014). Taking a broad perspective before brainstorming. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 18(3), 222-229.

Ergu, D., Kou, G., Shi, Y., & Shi, Y. (2014). Analytic network process in risk assessment and decision analysis. omputers & Operations Research, 42(4), 58-74.

Haimes, Y. Y. (2015). Risk modeling, assessment, and management. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Katz, N. H., & Flynn, L. T. (2013). Understanding conflict management systems and strategies in the workplace: A pilot study. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 30(4), 393-410.

Kivunja, C. (2015). Using de bono’s six thinking hats model to teach critical thinking and problem solving skills essential for success in the 21st century economy. Creative Education, 60(3), 380.

Lucero, A. (2015). Using affinity diagrams to evaluate interactive prototypes. In Human-Computer Interaction. New York: Springer International Publishing.

Meese, E., & Ortmeier, P. J. (2004). Leadership, ethics, and policing: Challenges for the 21st century. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Morgan, J. (2012). The collaborative organization: A strategic guide to solving your internal business challenges using emerging social and collaborative tools. New York City: McGraw Hill Professional.

Potts, H. W., Anderson, J. E., Colligan, L., Leach, P., Davis, S., & Berman, J. (2014). Assessing the validity of prospective hazard analysis methods: a comparison of two techniques. BMC health services research, 14(1), 41.

Rahim, M. A. (2010). Managing conflict in organizations. Transaction Publishers: Transaction Publishers.

Slaikeu, K. A., & Hasson, R. H. (2012). Controlling the costs of conflict: How to design a system for your organization. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Swanson, D. J. (2014). Sharpening the focus of force field analysis. Journal of change management, 28-47.

Vernon, D., & Hocking, I. (2014). Thinking hats and good men: Structured techniques in a problem construction task. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46(8), 41-50.

Wong, K. C., Woo, K. Z., & Woo, K. H. (2016). Ishikawa Diagram. In Quality Improvement in Behavioral Health. New York City: Springer International Publishing.