There are two views of organizational conflict. Each serves as a lens
through which organizations are viewed. The traditional view is that
conflict within organizations is bad and should be repressed. The
presence of conflict is viewed as being a problem with an
organization's structure. "Common remedies would be to further
elaborate job descriptions, authorities and responsibilities, increase
the use of central power (discipline), separate conflicting members,
etc."
The desire to create order and stability is highly attractive to most
members of an organization. However, this approach strives to
eliminate innovation and change, making it difficult for an
organization to adapt to a new environment. This can be deadly to any
organization that must function in a disorderly environment with
constant change. Not only is a considerable amount of effort required
to eliminate conflict within the organization, but the possibility for
positive outcomes to arise from disagreements is also suppressed.
A more modern view of organizational conflict views conflict as being
a source of benefit to the organization. This view holds that an
organization will be successful only if it is creative, responsive,
and adaptive. Its stability, clarity, and orderliness are much less
important. In fact, conflict is viewed as being an essential
ingredient to obtain diverging views and develop new methods for doing
things. Conflict is also considered to be a useful source of feedback
about how well the organization is performing. Because conflict is
desirable within limits, the goal is to manage it so that it leads to
positive results instead of allowing it to create more problems.
Managing conflict ethically is important for a variety of reasons.
One important reason is that conflict within an organization typically
involves people who will need to deal with each other on an ongoing
basis. A resolution that is viewed as being underhanded or unethical
is much more likely to damage relationships beyond the point of
repair. A just resolution is much more likely to leave relationships
undamaged, even from the perspective of the losing party.
Unethical approaches may also damage the firm in a variety of ways.
Some unethical approaches may be illegal, such as discriminating
against one of the parties, improper termination, and/or punishment of
whistleblowers. Creating fraudulent financial statements may resolve
a conflict between individuals temporarily, but may have enormous
consequences for the firm and those individuals later if it is
discovered (WorldCom being an excellent example).
Other potentially unethical approaches to conflict resolution may
create inefficiency in the operation of the firm. For example, if you
are a manager needing additional administrative assistants, there are
a number of approaches you could use to try to get an additional
assistant. You could:
"a. Document the amount of work that each of your clerks is doing,
and make a complete report to your boss.
b. Give each of your clerks a lot of extra jobs to do now that could
really be deferred for a few months, thus creating a false overload in
their required work.
c. Talk to your boss about the office down the hall (which you think
is overstaffed) and asked to have one of these clerks transferred to
your department.
d. Have your clerk stage an "artificial slowdown" of the work is
delayed, and argue that the only way to get work back to a reasonable
pace is to hire another clerk." (Pages 313-314)
The more arguably unethical approaches, particularly d., actually seek
to resolve the conflict by harming the firm's operations temporarily.
Widespread use of this tactic within a firm, or in particularly
important areas, could be extremely damaging. Therefore, it is highly
desirable for organizations to resolve conflict in an ethical manner.
Many of the "Ugly Strategies" described in the first reference below
could also be viewed as being unethical and certainly hamper the
organization's activities. Widespread resentment can lead to active
sabotage of the organization's efforts at the worst and a lot of
wasted emotional energy at the least. Neither these approaches are
likely to lead to the desired change and are likely to leave the
organization functioning in a less efficient manner.
Sincerely,
Wonko
"Organizational Conflict - The Good, The Bad & The Ugly" Work911
http://www.work911.com/articles/orgconflict.htm
"Negotiation" by Roy J. Lewicki and Joseph A. Litterer, Irwin (1985) |
,
0 Comments
)