Assignment Hasihntha

8/11/2019 Assignment Hasihntha

1/14

Employee Relations and Conflict Management

1

Hasintha Manujaya CB004375

Introduction


2/14


2


Section 01

1.1Traditional and New Virtual Organizations

Study Mode (2010) and Reference for Business (2014), traditional organizations are form,common, and pyramid structured organizations, were they is delegated authority, in a pyramid

structure where individuals at the top is in charge of all functions with subordinates handling all

the sub sections.

Hemingway and Bren (2003), traditional organizations, do face ongoing pressures to become

more flexible and responsive to more change, looking increasingly to virtualization in order to

reduce organizational slack, facilitate continuous learning and capitalize on core competencies.

Any new organizational form characterized by a temporary or a permanent collection of

geographically dispersed individuals, groups or organizational departments that are more

dependent on electronic communication for carrying out any work are known as the

organizations which have adopted virtualization (Marcin and Wojciech, 2005). The very essence

of virtual organization is outsourcingfinishing necessary work out of the company boundaries.

Further analyzed by Tomic (2014), virtual organizations are nothing more than traditional

organizations, but different ways it operates such as more use of electronic communication.

1.2Traditional versus Virtual Organizations

Factors Traditional Organization Virtual Organization

Absence of Preverbal

/ Non-verbal Cues

There is face to face

communication in traditional

organizations.

There is electronic

communication System in

virtual organizations so there

is absence of preverbal cues

Limited Social Contacts

As traditional org. works

manually, Easy accessibility

of Social Contacts

Communication is done

through internet so there are

limited social contacts

Ability to overcome time&

space constraints

Lack of proper utilization of

technologyHighly technological in nature


3/14


3


TechnologyWorks manually so less

technological

It works through electronic

media so its highly

technological in nature

No scope for technically

unskilled workers

In traditional organizations

skilled & unskilled workers

are accommodated

Organizations are highly

computerized so only

technically skilled workers are

required.

Effective for bigger

organizations

Small organization with

limited area, work manually,

work is contented with the

available manpower, no need of

huge technology & capital

Need high technology&

higher investment &skilled

persons.

Table 1: Different Factors of Traditional and Virtual Organizations

Source: Dulange (2012

1.3 Case Review

The case study of How Do You Manage an Off-Site Team by Maruca(1998), is considering a

conflict that has occurred by the organization being virtualization adopted. The conflict has

occurred between two off-site team members, Allison Scher and Penelope Ryan (Penny). The

conflict is about a personality clash between the two team members. The poor management by

Craig Bedell, head of business-to-business division, also the manager in charge of the off-site

time, made the conflict between the two expand overtime.

As mentioned by Tomic (2005), virtual organizations main essence is outsourcing, which has

various negative and positive sides. Therefore organizations adopting virtualization have to

develop and change its management styles and rules. Miles (1998), states that Craig has had no

much attention on the management style and rules for the off-site team, Miles (1998) also

implements some rule and styles that Craig would have used such as, meet the group ones or

twice a week and allocate specific time that off-site members are to work and be reached each

and every day. Instead of implying the following management styles, such as only meeting the

team ones in a two weeks time, lacked meeting the members face -to-face ultimately the conflict

between the two grew (paragraph B3).


4/14


4


Another most important fact that affects the virtualized organization is the process of

communication. Having a good process of communication is the key element for the conduction

of good employee relations at work place. The conflict occurred between Allison and Penny

wasnt consulted face-to-face by Craig, all the issues that was faced were reported through e-

mail and as stated by Richardson and Burk (2001), remote communication particularly e-mail,

while increasing prevalent, is not a good channel to deal with conflict and more electronic

interactions will escalate conflict. Also further analyzed by Richardson and Burk (2001), non-

verbal communication such as, gestures, facial expressions, tone of voice and etc are very

important in human communication process, especially in conflict situations. When using

electronic communication there are specific breakdowns such as not seen the inbox of e-mails

(paragraph C5). Therefore communicating electronically is not and never will be effective as

speaking to someone in person and observing the facial expressions and body language (Egan,

1998).

Appointing leaders for off-site work teams is a crucial aspect. The given case study the off-site

team wasnt appointed with a leader, but Craig use to discuss team issues and performance with

Penny making her an informal leader (paragraph A1). Instead Craig was supposed to meet with

all the team members for any issue or a performance discussion.

Therefore considering the above stated facts it is supposed that virtual organizations has to go

into more depth in thoughtful planning and more attentive management, mainly because of

outsourcing.

Section 02

2.1 Not all Working Groups are a Team Katzenbach and Smith (1993)

Karzenbach and Smith (1993), the label team has been used so loosely; people or organizationstend to call any group of people working together a team. The term team used for a group of

people is different in various ways than working group of people in an organization.

According to Karzenbach and Smith (1993), team is a small number of people with

complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, set of performance goals, and


5/14


5


approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable.The basic difference explained

by Karzenbach and Smith (1993), between teams and working group is that, working groups rely

primarily on the individual contribution of its members whereas teams rely on both individual

and group (mutual) accountability. It is also stated that teams do perform better than working

groups, mutual accountability. Refer Figure 1, team performance curve. Refer Table 2, the major

differences between teams and working groups.

Teams Working Groups

Shared leadership Strong, clearly focused leader

Individual and mutual accountability Individual accountability

Collective work products Individual wok products

Encourages open-ended discussion and active

problem-solving meetingsRuns efficient meetings

Measures performance directly by assessing Measures its effectiveness indirectly by its

Figure 1:Team Performance Curve

Source: Karzenbach and Smith (1993)


6/14


6


collective work products influence on others (such as financial

performance of the business)

Source: Karzenbach and Smith (1993)

2.2 Case Review

The case study has been using term team for the Pnobscott project employees, including Allison

and Penny. Considering the Karzenbach and Smith (1993) theories and definitions the Pnobscott

project team is a working group. According to the HBR case (1998), the Pnobscott project team

is known as a virtual team. Many organizations have been taking advantage of globalization,

outsourcing, and communication technology advances to enter new markets and compete

wherever and whenever possible, due to this more virtual teams are created in organizations

(Copeland, 2006 cited by Saafein and Shaykhian, 2013). It is important for virtual teams to be an

actual team in order to be successful.

In the HBR virtual team case (1998), the Pnobscott team doesnt have a proper leadership, team

spirit, team synergy or a common objective.

Even though the team is considered to be a working group, they dont have a focused neither a

shared leadership, this is also being a major fact for the creation of conflict since Craig always

contact with Penny to discuss most of the issues making Penny an informal leader to the team,

paragraph A1and B4, where Craig is more biased to Penny.

The competition among the team members is extensive, especially between Allison and Penny

(paragraph A2 where Penny even had an unknown schedule) this also shows that the team

members are also not having a common purpose. The team doesnt have an open-ended

discussion and active problem-solving meetings, causing this the conflict have been rising. The

project team also tend to report any of the issues to one manager (Craig Bedell) and as stated by

Hertel et al (2005), virtual groups tend to report to one manager and virtual teams exists when

the members of the group interact with each other in order to accomplish common goals.

Table 2:Differences between Teams and Working Groups


7/14


7


Considering the above information it is being clear that team is not an actual team and even

being categorized as a working group, working group activities are not being followed properly.

This will also affect the future operations of the organization as well.

Section 03

3.1 What Caused the Conflict?

According to Roloff (1987), organizational conflict occurs when members engage in activities

that are incompatibla with those of colleagues within their network, members of their collectivity

and etc. Basically conflict is the disagreement between two or more parties who are

interdependent, conflicts such as, intergroup, interpersonal and intrapersonal exists in an

organization (Shin, 2005). In the HBR virtual team case (1998), the conflict is occurred between

two persons working in the same virtual group. Identified by Draft (1992) and Terry (1996),

there are seven different factors causing conflict in an organization; scares of resources (money,

supplies), jurisdictional ambiguities (job boundaries and task responsibilities are unclear),

personality clash (when two people dont get along), power and status difference, goal

differences and communication breakdown.

Considering the HBR virtual team case (1998), it is seen that the main reasons for the conflict to

occur was a personality clash between Allison and Penny, which was backed up by the poor

management of the manager in charge of the virtual group (Egan, 1998, Miles, 1998, Birstler,

1998, and Klayton-Mi, 1998). According Bristler (1998), conflict between Allison and Penny

created after they were being made to work off-site. The personality clash between the two, it

was more of a competitive situation between them where Penny would agree on Allisons work

also made hostile situation for Allison and these situations has been building for sometime

(paragraph A1 and A2). Conflict that was occurred was informed to the manager in charge,

through e-mails, but wasnt considered as a serious issue (paragraph A1and B5). One of the facts

that led to increase the conflict situation is that the Craig is being more biased to Penny, Craig

used to individually discuss with Penny, as she works in the office more than the others, about

team performance and issues as well as Allisons performances, making Penny an informal

leader where there was no proper leader appointed or a shared leadership style in the Pnobscott


8/14


9/14


9


conditions for the members (paragraph C1, C2and C4). The conflict or the context is the major

cause of conflict such as communication barriers, leadership styles, power status, goal

differences and etc.

3.2 Options for Resolving the Conflict

Conflicts are inescapable in an organization, further discussed by Mukthar (2012), conflict is

not a new issue, it is natural and conflicts do exists with the existence of human beings. In order

to deal with conflict, it would be either follow conflict management or conflict resolution.

According to Rahim (2002), conflict management involves using micro level strategies to

minimize dysfunction and enhance constructive functions in conflict and conflict resolution tend

to reduce and terminate conflict by using procedures such as, mediation, negotiation and

arbitration. An organization, manger or the conflicting parties has various options for resolving aconflict. Below are three different models which are tended to mage a conflict.

3.2.1 Rizzo and Carrolls Strategies to Managing Conflict (1986)

Option Description Case Review

Styles

Includes styles such as

integrating, obliging,

dominating and avoiding(Rahim, 2002) that a

conflict is handled

Craig used the style of

avoiding the conflict

considering it was normal

(paragraph B5).

Improving Organizational

Practices

The use of organizational

practices to resolve the

problem

Craig would have practiced

altering the communication

(meeting every week instead

of every two weeks time),

establish specific goals and

etc.

Special Roles and Structures

A manager has to-initiate

structural changes needed,

including re-location or

There is no proper structure

(leader for the group) and

special roles assigned to the


10/14


10


merging of specialized

units.

members

Table 3: Strategies of Rizzo and Carroll (1986)

3.2.2 Khun and Pooles Strategies to Managing Conflict (2000)

Option Description Case Review

Distributive

Conflict is approached as a distribution

of a fixed amount of positive outcomes

or resources, where one side will end

up winning and the other losing, even ifthey do win some concessions.

Obliging and dominating style.

The conflict is shared

between Allison and Penny,

but if conflict wont stop

ultimately one party would

win

Integrative

Sees conflict as a chance to integrate

the needs and concerns of both groups

and make the best outcome possible.

Compromising style.

Craig would be able to see

the concerns of both parties

and make decisions as to

comfort them (such as make

decision to have a shared

leadership, paragraph C1

and C2 show Allisons

concern about leadership)

Table 4: Strategies of Khun and Poole for Managing Conflict

Source:Khun and Poole, (2000) and Rahim, (2002)

Source: Rizzo and Carroll, (1986) and Rahim, (2002)


11/14


11


3.2.3 De Bono's Strategies to Managing Conflict (1985)

Options Description Case Review

Fight

Try to eliminate, overcome andprevent any issues by

continuous fight until one winsor they figure out what was

wrong in them

Let Allison and Penny fight,

until they mange the issue

themselves Craig can influence them to fight

or influence them not to.

NegotiationTry to reach an agreement onthe conflict through discussion

Craig as the manager in charge

can bring the two conflict

creators and make them

negotiate with each and Craig

negotiate with them on different

issues.

Problem solve

Find out solution for theconflict occurred, which would

be difficult to deal and

understand. Integrating process(Rahim, 2002)

Allison and Penny could discuss

between them and solve theproblem.

Craig as the manger in chargeshould find for solutions relevantissues caused without letting the

conflict to continue or till the

two solves it

DesignProduce a plan or plan on how

to resolve the conflict

Craig has to design a conflicthandling plan such as producing

a set of organizational practices,ways to be more close to the

group (communication plandesign) and etc.

Table 5: De Bono's Strategy to Managing Conflict

Source: De Bono's (1985) and Rahim, (2002)

The model that Craig can best use is the Khun and Pooles (2000), which allows him to interfere

into each and every issue (such as communication and leadership issues) effectively. Since the

conflict has being growing for some time Craig should focus much more on Problem Solving

and Designing of plans to overcome the conflict. Strategies used in the models can be defined in

to three broad types of resolution methods; Co-operative methods (negotiations), Competitive

methods (combat) and Third Party method (arbitration) (Easterbrook, 1991).


12/14


13/14


13


Styles Description Case Review

Integrating

Style is associated with

problem solving, involve

openness, exchange of

information to reach effective

solutions

Very much needed style that is

to be practiced, but not used

by any party in the conflict

Obliging

Style is associated with one

person neglecting own

concerns for others concern

Allison is more into the

obliging style (paragraph A3)

and Penny used the style for

some extent, the writing of

letter to the client (paragraph

B4)

Dominating

Style consider one party trying

to win in a win or lose

situation

Penny is more into the this

style, especially influencing

Craig about Allisons issues

(paragraph C2)

Avoiding

Used when dysfunctional

effect of confronting and other

party outweighs the benefit of

the resolution of the conflict

Considering the Harvard

virtual team case, Craig uses

avoiding approach (A1, B4,B5), which is not being

suitable

Compromising

Used when goals of parties are

mutually exclusive and

equally powerful

No party involved in the

conflict uses the

compromising strategy

Table 6: Conflict Management Styles

Source: Rahim (2002) and Maruca (1998)

As evident above HBR virtual team case (1998), uses the styles of avoiding, obliging and

dominating. But according to Rahim (2002 and 2011), integrating and compromising are the best

styles that can be used to manage conflict.


14/14


14


Styles When to be Used

Assignment Hasihntha

Documents

Transcript of Assignment Hasihntha