Managing Organizational Conflict

Conflict is present in every organization; the organizations that deal with it correctly are the ones that stand out from the crowd. One definition of conflict is a "breakdown in the standard mechanisms of decision making so that an individual or group experiences difficulty in selecting an action alternative" (Slack and Parent, p. 217). When I think of conflict I normally think of negativity, fighting, and inefficiency within organizations. However, some conflict in the workplace is healthy. Granted, to much conflict in any organization is going to lead to less being accomplished, but no conflict is not going to force any organization to change, which is necessary to not get left behind in today's competitive economy. It is up to management to recognize potential conflict, approach conflict when it is present within their organization, and deal with is appropriately. As stated at the beginning, how a company deals with conflict really defines a company as a whole. There are many different strategies to dealing with conflict but a few that I feel are very essential are authority, increasing resources, separating or merging conflicting units, job rotation, and superordinate goals. With the proper authority just about every situation should be able to be solved. For instance if two players on a team are not getting along well and cannot resolve the issue on their own the coach may need to step in and fix the problem for them. One, or maybe both of the players, may not agree with how the coach handles the situation but due to the fact that he has more power the players will most likely respect his decision and the problem will be solved. Another method of dealing with conflict, increasing resources, is necessary in certain cases I feel. Often times subunits may begin to argue if they do not have their own equipment, or own office space, etc. If it is at all possible, giving separate subunits their own area and supplies will essentially make them feel more important and probably less likely to start arguments with units. This idea ties into separating or merging conflicting units. If subunits are not getting along it is crucial to physically separate them so they cannot argue anymore. On the other hand, sometimes it is best to merge units together to avoid more conflict. An example of this would be when two competing companies merge to avoid the competition and potential loss of business for one company. Sometimes it is easier to merge and work together as a stronger force. When there begins to be issues between employees doubting the work ethic and difficulty of another's job, job rotation is the method to use. By having employees temporarily switch positions they are able to gain an understanding of what the other does and thus appreciate them more and they will be less likely to be so hard on each other. The last conflict resolution strategy I am going to discuss is the use of superordinate goals. Each subunit is usually going to have their individual goals they need to accomplish, however, if there are not higher level goals' that each sub unit is working for it can create conflict. By establishing one more broad, basic goal that all of the subunits are working for it is easier for units to get along because they are all working on the same page. The questions to ask when thinking about each of these conflict management strategies are what strategy would work best for the situation your company is in and is it ideal to switch the strategies up every once in a while or stick with the same conflict management strategies all the time?