Conflict Identification and Resolution - Assignment Example

Business: conflict identification and resolution Conflict identification and resolution Generally, conflict can be termed as some kind of discord, disagreement or friction occurring inside a group especially when the actions or beliefs of 1 or more group members are either opposed by or intolerable to 1 or more members of a different group. Normally, conflict can occur between individuals in the same group (intragroup conflict) or can arise amongst individuals of 2 or more groups, leading to interpersonal discord, violence as well as psychological tension called intergroup conflict(Baack,2012). A conflict often follows a certain course. Conflict can help in determining essential changes in a workplace or home environment. Nevertheless, unresolved conflict may lead to feelings of unhappiness, dissatisfaction; depression, hopelessness as well as a whole wide range of other emotions. In addition it can lead to such behaviors as resigning from jobs, ending of personal relationships, aggressiveness as well as violence (Coombs & Avrunin, 2013). The way one communicates can both be the cause of as well as the cure for conflict. It should be noted that understanding how to communicate effectively as well as satisfactory resolution of disputes can result into a happier and more productive life. The fundamental components of most conflicts include; involvement of 2 or more individuals, there is a perception of incompatibility in regard to ideas, goals, beliefs or actions and finally the opposing parties view their way as the only way to accomplish their objectives and goals (Baack, 2012). Boeing conflict Boeing is a top aerospace corporation in the world as well as the largest manufacturer of military aircraft and commercial jetliners. Boeing designs in addition to manufacturing rotorcraft defense and electronic systems, satellites, missiles, launching vehicles etc. The company has been a leader and an authority in aerospace industry for the past century. Boeing’s headquarter is in Chicago, Illinois. It employs more than 27,000 employees in America as well as in 70 other countries (Greenberg & Moore, 2010). On 6th of September, Boeing was on headlines when about 27,000 of its employees in Washington, Kansas, California and Oregon went on strike. At the time, the company was holding negotiations with International Association of machinist and Aerospace Workers (IAM) in regard to benefits pay as well as job security. The main stakeholders in Boeing’s conflict were its employees alongside their families, suppliers and customers affiliated to Boeing. The strike affected several parties spanning from its employees to their families as well as its customers (Pettis, 2013). Sources and levels of conflict One incident that actually led to the strike in 2008 was the fact that some of the union members were still bothered by the outsourcing stipulations that had been incorporated in the 2002 agreement. This agreement therefore came into effect because of the union’s failure to muzzle 2/3 vote for a strike, inspite of the fact that several employees were opposed to the clause. This clause according to the members put their jobs at risk .The union’s aim was therefore to get the power to tender for additional work that Boeing would outsource (Greenberg & Moore, 2010).In addition, there had been a history of poor relations between IAM and Boeing, a factor that further aggravated the already hostile situation. When carrying out last-minute talks, in 2005 strike, Boeing’s Vice President for Human Resources, Jerry Calhoun and Union’s Representative, Mark Blondin were in a deadlock over a further issue pertaining to training of workers. Blondin thought that Calhoun was always fighting them. However Calhoun on the hand was of the opinion that he represented corporate America and therefore would never get along with labor representatives since they will always be antagonists. However, on 3rd September when 87% of the employees walked out, it was clear that several had already been prepared for the strike (Greenberg & Moore, 2010). Steps taken to resolve the conflict On 9th of May 2008, Boeing issued a statement detailing the negotiations the company would embark on with the IAM. Boeing claimed that they had an incredible opportunity to undertake the 2008 negotiations with IAM in a different way as compared to the past. Boeing further intended the negotiations to be transparent as well as open and actually had started conversations early so that they could resolve issues soon and hence avoid eleventh-hour bargaining. Boeing’s further proposed that as they discussed, listened, as well as tried to find common ground with IAM,they would try to understand one another’s positions in addition to being respectful and would continue in talks till they agreed. Finally Boeing suggested that they would look for solutions that would be in the best interest of their customers, employees, communities as well as itself (Greenberg & Moore, 2010). Boeing’s statement goes on to break down every aspect of the conflict and in every aspect, Boeing starts sympathizing with the IAM. For the subsequent 4 months, Boeing and IAM representatives continued with negotiations. Boeing’s website does follow many stages of the process like the discussions as well as proposal for pay, healthcare and pension increments. On 14th October, the fifth week of the strike, President Tom Wroblewski of IAM blogged on the union’s website that the talks between the Union and Boeing had been adjourned by the Federal Mediators without arriving at any agreement. Thus, the union was hopeful that Boeing would finally arrive at the table seeking to resolve the stalemate, then on its 5th week, but that was not the case. On 28th October, 2008, Boeing and IAM arrived at a tentative agreement which allowed union employees to return to their duties on 1st November. The amended contract permits Boeing to continue being flexible while at the same time rewarding its workers, addressing their issues pertaining to job security. As a result of this conflict resolution, the following would be the most likely outcomes that would occur; 1-Possible introduction of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) method, which basically ought to be accessible to all employees of Boeing in the US except the executives as well as those under collective bargaining agreement cover or rather the union members. Nevertheless, ADR has offered cordial solutions to more than 1000 disputes particularly between employees and managers.ADR mostly makes use of 4level approaches with every level being mutually exclusive.ADR thus utilizes, one-on-one discussion whereby the manager and employee hold a meeting, and try to solve the issue. Second step involves internal mediation, third step is external mediation or a panel review. The fourth and last step is binding arbitration. 2-The second outcome would be Federal Mediation and Conciliation service -So that in future Boeing could solve disputes pertaining its union employees, it needs to bring from its own Human Resources; a team of negotiators, having supervision from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service(FMCS). 3-The last outcome would be implementation of conflict management and Evaluation Plan-The Company lost a lot in revenue. To avoid such a thing in future, Boeing ought to use a different negotiation approach or instead be ready to give in to IAM’s demands quickly. References Coombs, C.,& Avrunin, G. (2013). The Structure of Conflict. New York,NY: Psychology Press. Donald, B. (2012). Organizational Behavior. San Diego,SD: Bridgepoint Education,Inc. Greenberg E., & Moore, S. (2010). Turbulence:Boeing and the State of American Workers and Managers. New York,NY: Yale University Press. Michael, P. (2013). The Great Rebalancing;Trade,Conflict,and the Perilous Road Ahead for the World Economy. New York,NY: Princeton University Press. Read More