Introduction
Conflict inevitably arises in the workplace because of the individual uniqueness in perceptions, beliefs, attitudes and behavior of the different members of the organization. These differences may catalyze non-accommodation of other peoples’ beliefs resulting to misunderstandings or even to violence. Differences that lead to conflict may be based on personal or work related differences. Personal conflicts in the workplace can range from personality clashes such as one employee preferring a quiet work environment while another employee works best with music to attitude problems such as an employee spreading rumors against another employee that irritates the person subject of the rumor and even to personal hygiene such as an employee who declines to consider personal cleanliness or neatness in the workplace that irks another employee. Work related conflict can results from competition in promotions with one candidate holding the belief that the person promoted is less qualified then he is or cutting in line in the queue to use the photocopy machine or the differences in opinion on the perceived effective means of accomplishing a group or collaboration project. The negative consequences of these conflict situations then adversely affect the aggregate operations and performance of the business firms so that the decisive action or intervention by the organization to a potential or actual conflict is necessary.
However, not all business firms have the capability or competency to deal with conflict either because of the perception of the conflict as non-significant or the lack of tools or means to address the problem. In some instances, the organization even becomes aware of the conflict when this already arises instead of preventing workplace conflict.
Executive Summary
Conflict is an inevitable occurrence in all organizations and it is the efficiency in the application of conflict resolution methods and processes that determines the degree of optimization that the company derives from conflict resolution.
There are different types of conflict based on the nature of the conflict, parties involved and scope of conflict. Under the nature of the conflict are relational and task conflict. Relational conflict comes from differences in individual values and perspectives of the parties involved such as religious beliefs and work attitude while task conflict pertains to differences in belief over the manner of accomplishing a task or addressing work problems. Generally, relational conflicts diminish organizational performance while task conflict enhances group performance. Relational conflict also influences task conflict. Under the parties involved are personal, intragroup and intergroup conflicts. These conflicts are neither good nor bad per se because it is the result that determines this. Under the scope of the conflict are internal and external conflicts, with the former referring to conflict with the organization while external conflict involves conflict with parties not part of the organization. In Bay Apparel Limited, relational conflict, intragroup conflict and intergroup conflict, and internal and external conflict commonly occur.
Generally, two sources of conflict arise, which are personal cognitive processes—such as discontent and resentment and organizational factors—lack of uniform standards for human resource management and conflict resolution. In Bay Apparel Limited, organizational factors dominate the causes of conflict because the difference in management systems of the US and HK groups catalyze conflict.
Overall, conflict management methods include avoidance, accommodation, competition, compromise, and collaboration. These apply depending upon the context of the conflict situation. In the case of Bay Apparel Limited, the most apparent method used is competition that involves pitting one perspective over another and derivation of a winning perspective. While this works in situations requiring the provision of strong support for competing perceptions. The utilization of this method alone leads to the discontent of members whose opinions always lose out that could affect cooperation or participation in group tasks.
Thus, while the current organizational system of Bay Apparel Limited successfully addresses interpersonal conflict and external conflict, the company needs to improve its methods in meeting intragroup and intergroup conflict to derive optimum results from its working groups. This could be achieved through the context-based utilization or combination of the methods as well as the establishment of a common core management strategy for the company to dispel employee perceptions of management strategy disparity.
Literature Review
Organizational Conflict
Conflict pertains to the perceived or actual difference that may influence outcomes or actions believed to be important (2003). This implies that conflict is based on the manner that differences are perceived and acted upon by individuals in human relations. Overall, conflict involves six elements. First is its inevitability since there will always be disagreements arising from individual unique characters. Second is the nature of conflict as not classifiable under the dichotomy of good or bad because it is the consequence of the conflict that determines the goodness or badness of the conflict. Concurrently, this element involves the determinants danger and opportunity. Danger results to bad results while opportunity to resolve conflict leads to good results. Third is conflict as a process of constantly making choices on the next step of dealing with differences. Fourth is conflict as requiring the exercise of energy whether action is taken or not because of the continuous process of decision-making. Fifth is the existence of feeling and content because conflict involves not only the reason for the conflict but also the emotions that arise in the situation. Sixth is the character of conflict as swaying from proactive to active. More proactive individuals have a lesser propensity to be involved in violence while a reactive person would likely become violent in the situation. (2000)
Types of Conflict
In the case of organizations, a number of conflict classifications arise. (1990) found that organizational conflict has task related and relational aspects. (1997) proposed that organization conflict fall under affective—linked to interpersonal relationships or substantive conflict—related to the group task or project.
Relative to the influence of conflict on the organization, (1992) provides that the members of the group differentiate between relational and work related conflict and the occurrence of one over the other have different effects and there is an adverse relationship between relational conflict and productivity as well as group satisfaction Relational conflicts meddle in the accomplishment of tasks because the members of the group become engrossed with the minimization threats, the maximization of power, and the efforts to develop cohesion instead of targeting the demands of the task.(1999) add that relational conflict diminishes interpersonal understanding and goodwill among the group members that prevents the efficient completion of the task If most of the time is spent on dealing with interpersonal aspects instead of on the informational and technical aspects of decision-making then task completion suffers. Moreover, the conflict also makes members of the group irritable, resentful, negative or uncooperative. In serious relational problems group functioning worsen.
In considering the different types of conflicts based on the parties involved. Conflicts can involve two individuals, members of a group, organizational units, or organizations. Again, the conflict may be relational or work related.
Interpersonal conflict refers to the evident struggle arising between a minimum of two interdependent parties perceiving differing goals, scarcity of resources, and other party interference relative to the opinions of others. The definition means that there are several factors intervening in the conflict. One is the express nature of the clash in perception differences so that there is communication between or among the parties. Another is the intervention of perceptions in the cognitive processes of the parties, which means that based on their perception there are differences in their respective perspectives that may even be conflicting. ( 1991)
Intragroup conflict pertains to the conflict arising within a work group that involves any two or more members. (1995) provide two kinds of intragroup conflict, which are task and relational conflicts. Task conflict refers to the perceptions over the disagreement existing among different individual group members regarding the content of group decisions or actions and encompassing differences in views, ideas and opinions. In the course of group discussions, members of the group may differ in opinion over the manner of allocating resources, procedures to use, and understanding of facts. Relationship conflict in intragroup relations finds expression through animosity and annoyance emanating from differences in personal taste, familial values, and even religious beliefs.
These forms of intragroup conflict have personal and organization consequences. As shown in the study by (2001), relational conflict negatively affects the affective reactions of group members such as trust and satisfaction. (1997) proved that relational conflict affects the work climate or environment and decreases the team effectiveness. Task conflict relates positively to quality in ideas emanating from the members of the group and the innovativeness of the various group members (1996).. (1999) adds that task conflict leads to the prevalence of constructive debate with the group members airing and defending their respective views and ideas that could result to the acceptance of group decisions (1996) as well as the aversion of groupthink (1994)
Thus, intragroup conflict is not detrimental to the organization per se because the negative effect depends upon the type of conflict occurring. If the group experiences relational conflict, this could adversely affect the performance of the entire group but if the group feels the existence of task conflict, this could lead to improved group output.
Intergroup conflict pertains to the infractions among individuals and groups emanating from the dynamics of intergroup interdependence, political determinism and diversity (2003). This indicates that intergroup conflict pertains to the manner that individual members of a group or different groups deal with their interdependence such as the necessity of consulting the other members of group in decision-making, directing the actions of the other members or influencing the movement of the group, and the differences among the individual members and between the groups.
Moreover, intergroup conflict emanates from the spillage effect of both interpersonal and intrapersonal conflict (1991). This means that personal differences can translate into intergroup differences in instances when the interpersonal issues of members of a group or different groups become intertwined with intergroup dynamics.
Sources of Conflict
Generally, there are common sources of conflict among different people. Most of the time conflicts arise when a person feels that his comfort zone has been violated. A comfort zone pertains to the limit of a person over acceptable or safe factors. Conflict arises when the person feels that the comfort zone has been violated or when the person is forced to move outside of the comfort zone limits. The initial emotions or feelings that the person feels upon the violation of or movement away from the comfort zone constitute conflict. (2003) The degree of emotions experienced by the person during this time then determines the extent of conflict expression or response. This means that conflict comes from the manner that a person internally processes deviations in emotional and intellectual state.
Another common source of conflict is the feeling dissatisfaction resulting from being dissatisfied or unsatisfied about work place factors. When these feelings results to discomfort, conflict may arise. ( 2003)
All forms of sources of conflict are explained by the natural propensity of people to return to the original state of contentment. This tendency is referred to as homeostasis or the state of balance where individuals derive contentment and satisfaction. The tendency can translate to the resolution of the conflict or resistance to resolution. (2003) There are instances in interrelationships when deviating from the status could result to an improvement in performance and well-being that leads to creation of a different point of equilibrium. These sources of conflict could either improve or diminish the state of the individual and this could also lead to organizational conflict.
Results & Analysis
Organizational Conflict
In the case of Bay Apparel Limited, there are three major two types of conflict encompassing both relational and work related conflict, which are regional conflict arising between the US and HK teams, interdepartmental conflict arising between or among the different working departments, and employee-employer conflict arising between the employees and the top management of the company.
The relational conflict between the US and HK teams arise from the differences cause by a language barrier and cultural variance that affects their management practices that results to conflict when one team asserts its management practice over the other that poses resistance to the imposition. Relational conflict between the US and HK teams arise in decision-making on cost and price. Hong Kong is in charge of production, merchandising and sampling while US team takes charge of marketing, design and customer service. The work-related conflict exists when the HK team prioritizes cost efficiency while the US team highlights design and marketability that may involve higher costs.
In Hong Kong, a bureaucratic mode of management is applied that results to low levels of transparency. Due to this organizational management style, conflicts often arise between the merchandising and servicing departments when the servicing department cannot keep up with the processing of documents by the merchandising department or the merchandising department does not deliver it reports on time for to facilitate speedy processing. The conflict arising between the two departments of Hong Kong Bay Apparel Limited constitutes work-related issues.
The conflict between the employees and top management constitutes work-related differences. Employees hold the perception that their compensation and contributions constitute an amount relative to their US office counterparts. They feel undervalued, unrecognized and unfairly treated. Some of the policies of the HK office are also disliked especially with regard to the performance based solely on sales so that top grossing teams hold more favor with top management but other circumstances are not considered so that the high sales may not even be due to the efforts of the team but due to shifts in the market or decisions made by the US office that influences the performance of the HK team. Top management on the other hand perceives its management style as effective in achieving the goals of the company so that it refuses to recognize the opinion of employees or disregard their perceptions all together. In the long run, employer-employee conflicts relating to human resource management issues would result to a decline in performance or increase in the cost of allaying the discontent of employees or letting go of old and hiring new employees who are mostly inexperienced.
In Bay Apparel Limited, external conflict also arises between the company and its vendors or suppliers covering price, quality, and delivery dates. The conflict arises due to the differences in the valuation of the two parties. The vendors or sellers may value their products with a higher amount relative to the offer of the company or the vendor may require more time to deliver products relative to the schedule of the company in meeting the needs of its consumers. In this instance, if each party sticks to their respective opinions, there is a possibility that they would not be able to reach an agreement resulting to the failure of the vendor to sell it products and the company to purchase products demanded by its US and international market.
Types of Conflict
In the case of Bay Apparel Limited, there is no apparent interpersonal conflict between any two or more interdependent parties within the US and HK offices or between any one or more parties in the two offices. This means that there are no personal issues between and among any of the members of the organization that arise independently or cause other conflicts to arise. This works for the organization because interpersonal conflicts can be damaging to the company and permeate the accomplishment of tasks especially when the parties avoid conflict and fail to discuss their differences and worst blame each other for the work failures that may arise from their interpersonal conflict. The development of competition among parties engaged in interpersonal conflict could lead to violence to the detriment of the organization.
Sources of Conflict
In Bay Apparel Limited, internal sources of conflict commonly affect the dynamics of organizational conflict such as in the area of 1) goal and time incompatibility; 2) overlapping authority; 3) task interdependencies; 4) evaluation and reward system incompatibility; 5) resource scarcity; and 6) inconsistencies in status. Goal and time incompatibility as a source of conflict is linked to the differences in the objectives of the US and HK group because of their different tasks as well as due to the management culture differences of the two groups. The US group applies western management strategies while the HK group applies bureaucratic management systems. Overlapping authority becomes a source of conflict when the managers of the US and HK group are not able to agree on what management direction to pursue, when the differences in opinion emanates from their personal values, beliefs and experiences on what works for the company. Task interdependencies create conflict when the US and HK group are following schedules but the completion of tasks depends upon the input or preliminary task completion because of the differing priorities of the two groups. If the groups are not able to effectively link their schedules, then conflict would probably arise with one group demanding the other to prioritize a task and the other group believing that their schedule works better. Incompatibility in evaluation and reward system becomes a source of conflict when the members of the different working groups compare human relations systems. The HK group feels undervalued and insufficiently rewarded from comparing the performance evaluation and reward system in HK and the US resulting to the preference for the US system. This creates resentment on the part of the HK group towards top management in the HK office and even towards the US group for offering an HRM system that the HK group perceives to be better than their system. Resource scarcity creates conflict when the HK or US group develops the perception that the other group gets a bigger share of resources and this exceeds their resources needs when the other group is struggling with its share. Inconsistencies in status support the development of conflict in instances when there are differences in the perception of one group over the relative status of the other group. In the case of the HK group, it holds the perception that the US group considers the HK group as holding a lower status because their recommendations and reports were not given sufficient consideration.
Regardless of whether the perceptions of the US and HK group or the individual members are based on facts and actual events, the relative differences in perception still creates conflict. Based on the information provided by the HK group, the six organizational factors are deemed as the sources of conflict for the company.
Conflict Management Strategies
(1974) introduced a relationship dynamics that also constitute methods for organizational conflict resolution. The first method is avoidance, which involves dodging or denial of the conflict. This applies best in instances that involve insignificant issues, incorrect timing or parties who are emotionally charged. The resolution is delayed but when this reoccurs as a significant and timely issue with the parties capable of rational thought, then other modes of conflict management applies.
The second method is accommodation, which involve one party disregarding personal issue to satisfy the concerns of the other party. This method downplays differences to give way to harmony so that this applies best in instances when relationship preservation constitutes the priority. However, if this method is overused, parties may experience repressed anger or resentment from sacrificing their perceptions for another’s welfare.
The third method is competition, which pertains to the advancement of one party’s concerns relative to the issues of the other party. This method works best in crisis situations where a decision needs to be made immediately. However, if used regularly the method would lead to dissatisfaction on the part of the other group members or groups because their perceptions are undervalued or ignored.
The fourth method is compromise that works in situations when the parties find leeway for giving up aspects of their position without entirely giving up their position in the conflict. This works in situations when finding a middle ground that is amenable to all parties is achievable.
The fifth method is collaboration, which involves the respect for the values, competencies and expertise of other parties in the conflict so that the parties cooperate towards the development of a resolution to the satisfaction of all the parties. This method promises effective results but applying this involves adequate time.
Based on the characteristics of the conflict experienced by Bay Apparel Limited and the conflict management strategies discussed above, the common conflict management method arising between the US and HK groups is competition. This is expressed through the perception of the HK group that their reports and recommendations communicated to the US group are not being considered. If this is true, a difference in the report and recommendations of the US and HK groups results to the prioritization of the former of its reports and recommendations.
However, this may not necessarily be the intention of perception of the US group. It should be considered that the US group controls the decision over the designs to be manufactured or ordered by the Hong Kong office because it is in charge of marketing and sales to end consumers. It is then based on the design decision of the US group that the HK group identifies the best supplier and production deals to meet the design demands. This best supply deal may not necessarily be lead to optimum cost efficiency because of the consideration of the design demands. If the US group insists on designs different from the cost effective designs recommended by the HK group, this does not necessarily indicate that the US group ignores the reports of the HK group because it is just playing its role of determining marketable designs.
Since the insistence of the US group of its design decisions results to a negative perception on the part of the HK group that handles production cost decisions, there is need to consider other conflict resolution methods that addresses the concerns of the HK and US group to dispel any perceptions of unfair treatment or deviations in status.
Perhaps the best method for Bay Apparel Limited is collaboration that involves the cooperation and participation of the US and HK groups since the conflict require the clarification of the perceptions of the various groups. This is timely since the US group may be unaware of the perceptions of the HK group and the HK group may not know about the intentions of the US group. Moreover, effective communications is also necessary to facilitate the conflict resolution process and clear up the issues arising between or among the parties.
In the case of intragroup and interpersonal conflict, collaboration still proves to be a fitting resolution method since there is need for conflicting parties to meet and discuss the issues. The top management of the HK office may not be aware of the sentiments of the employees over their unfair treatment and undervaluation when comparing the HRM systems in the US and in HK. Without knowledge of the sentiments, top management may misinterpret the conflict as a renege on the part of the employees and suppress their communication efforts instead of addressing HRM concerns.
With regard to the conflict arising between the HK group and vendors/suppliers, the conflict resolution method applicable is competition because of the nature of the market. The clothing manufacturing industry in China including Hong Kong is highly competitive because of the number of production firms. This means that the HK group can utilize competition to gain a supply agreement that involves the least possible cost to the company for the same quality. However, in the case of conflicts on the quantity and delivery dates, compromise may be the best mode of settling differences because of the common goal of the parties to meet the quota and schedule. The supplier seeks to meet quantity demands within a particular period to fulfill the contract while the HK group also seeks to meet the quota and schedule to meet market demand. This common goal could constitute the middle ground from which to facilitate the resolution of the conflict.
Negotiation
In conflict resolution, the process of negotiation applies because of the need to communicate concerns and determine the ways of resolving the conflict. Negotiation pertains to the process involving the efforts of conflicting parties to resolve issues, agree on courses of action, bargain with the other party either for individual or group advantage, and develop solutions amenable to all parties involved. Negotiation implies two things: which are 1) the parties hold a common purpose and 2) there arises differences between or among the parties. The purpose of engaging in negotiation is to arrive at a mutually satisfying compromise. ( 1993) This benefits organizations experiencing imminent or actual conflicts.
In the case of Bay Apparel Limited, there is yet no indication that negotiations are underway to settle the causes of organizational conflict. This implies a number of things based on the opinions of the HK group members. First is that the organization is not completely aware of the conflict together with the issues, causes, and parties involved so that resolution is impossible to commence. Second is the lack of mechanisms for conflict resolution based on best practices. This is expressed by the inability of the organization to identify potential conflict areas and arrest these causes before a full blown conflict arises. Third is the lack of a common organizational management system that applies to the US and HK group. This finds expression in the different management styles of the two groups coupled with the perception of the HK group that the US group experiences a more employee friendly HRM system relative to the system in Hong Kong. This makes it more difficult to resolve conflicts since there is no established common ground for the issues raised by the parties.
Conclusion & Recommendations to Management
A consideration of the theoretical and empirical data on organizational conflict and conflict management together with the experiences of Bay Apparel Limited shows that the company needs to improve its conflict resolution management systems to prevent and appropriately address the conflict experienced by the company and prevent any potential conflicts that may arise.
Based on the consideration of examples of conflict experienced by Bay Apparel Limited, these show that there is little interpersonal conflict arising within the organization. This implies two positive things for the company, one is the minimal contribution of personal differences to organizational conflict and the other is the conflict are mostly qualified as task related. Minimal interpersonal problems mean that the members of the US or HK groups are able to optimize working relations that results to better communication and participation. Minimal personal conflicts mean that the problems experienced by Bay Apparel Limited are task related, which is good since studies have shown that task conflicts result to exchange of ideas and innovation.
The nature of the task conflict involving the US and HK group and the HK group with vendors/suppliers indicates that the need for the determination of context-based conflict resolution methods applied depending upon the situation. In the conflict between the US and HK group collaboration best applies because of the need for the participation of the US and HK groups and their cooperation in clarifying the issues. Moreover, the global operations of the company require the establishment of a mode of communications able to support the clarification of issues. In addition, the organization also needs to establish a corporate culture that commonly applies to the entire organization to dispel any perceptions of bias or unfair treatment when the core management system of US and HK group differs. Although, the management of the groups should comply with the business setting where these operate, the essence of a global company is to adopt a common core management system but flexibly applied in various business environments. Thus, for Bay Apparel Limited to become a successful international retail company, it should be able to establish its core management system and develop a standard for conflict resolution based on best practices derived from its own experiences and the experiences of other companies in the same industry.
Appendix
Interview Questions
Relational or Task Conflict
1. Do you experience conflict in the workplace?
2. How often do you experience conflict in the workplace?
3. Who are the parties involved in the conflict?
4. What are the reasons for the conflict?
5. Describe the working relationships that cause conflict?
Job Satisfaction
5. How satisfied are you with your task assignments? Explain.
6. How satisfied are you with management systems? Explain.
7. How satisfied are you with group participation? Explain.
8. How satisfied are you with your current working environment? Explain.
Propensity for Leaving the Company
9. What organizational or management changes would you recommend? Why?
10. Do you think that change is possible in the present management of the company? Why?
0 comments:
Post a Comment