Conflict Resolution at General Hospital - Essay Example

?Running Head: Conflict Resolution at General Hospital Conflict Resolution at General Hospital of Introduction Hospitals, just like any other business organizations with employees and management teams with different mandates and objectives, are faced with certain conflicts. In these conflicts, one or some of the parties involved may feel that their interests are not accorded the attention and seriousness they deserve (Wilmot & Hocker, 2007). Either the interests of one party are ignored or opposed by the other(s). Conflicts could occur between or among individuals or groups, necessitating the use of different conflict resolution and management styles to resolve these conflicts. In the case of General Hospital, the conflict was intergroup, pitting the CEO Mr. Mike Hammer and Marge Harding, the chief operating office on one hand and, the director of medicine Doctor Williams and the company’s physicians on the other (WordPress.com, 2011). There are various sub-categories of intergroup conflicts including those among teams, divisions, departments, employees, and management. In the conflict at General Hospital, while physicians were more interested in the correct and timely readings of the EKG and proper diagnosis of patients, the CEO and the operating officer were more concerned with cutting costs. This paper thus explores the conflict at General Hospital, touching on the management style employed to resolve the stalemate. In addition, the possible use of teams and negotiation skills to resolve the conflict are also discussed. The Conflict at General Hospital Some years back, renovation activities at the General Hospital led to a drop in the number of patients admitted at the Hospital. Consequently, bed occupancy went down by about 65% (WordPress.com, 2011). The other effect of the renovation exercise at the General Hospital besides the dropped occupancy was a rise in the number of Medicaid and Medicare patients. In other words, the number of patients under private health insurance covers dropped, implying that General Hospital could not make profits from attending to patients with private health insurance covers (WordPress.com, 2011). Realizing the hospital was on the verge of failing to obtain its objectives and remain profitable, the CEO, Mr. Mike Hammer decided to implement certain changes, which he thought would stabilize the hospital. The first option to Hammer was to cut costs and increase the Company’s revenues. In addition, Hammer intended to initiate changes that would ensure the hospital retained its current services and even expanded into new areas. To implement these strategies, Hammer hired one Marge Harding, empowering her to make crucial decisions such as the firing of the hospital’s employees, more so those serving under the at-will employment status (WordPress.com, 2011). The first opinion of Harding’s was that the electrocardiogram (EKG) readings could be done electronically. Therefore, according to Harding, a physician was not needed to read the EKG. In fact, she suggested that at least $100,000 could be saved by computerizing the reading of the EKG. After the installation of the new equipment for EKG proposed by Harding and the training of EKG technicians, the physician, a Doctor James Boyer, was informed that his services were no longer needed at the General Hospital (WordPress.com, 2011). Harding’s plans soon started to flop as EKG’s arrived late, cases of misdiagnoses increased, and the staff became irritated as they looked incompetent, making them feel that Dr. Boyer was rather important and was needed at the facility. Nonetheless, Harding completely ignored these complaints from the General Hospital’s staff. Therefore, the main conflict at the General Hospital pitted cost control and management against physician agreement. To realize any positive results from his cost reduction strategies and policies, Mr. Hammer had to win over the physicians making up his staff. This was just another of the instances and incidence in which Hammer’s policies did result in a conflict at the General Hospital. In this incident, Hammer had tried to convince Dr. Mark Williams, the Director of Medicine to make his staff more sensitive to costs in their decision-making and practices (WordPress.com, 2011). However, the staff rejected the directives, stating that all their practices were good medical practices. In fact, even the hospital’s board of trustees opposed Harding’s manner of conducting operations at the hospital. To resolve the conflicts at the hospital and meet the goal of reducing costs, Hammer had to work together with the physicians at the hospital. An example of conflict management approaches that was evident in handling the conflict at the General Hospital was the Forcing and Avoidance Styles (WordPress.com, 2011). While the forcing aspect refers to uncooperative and assertive tendencies from the management, which promotes a win-lose situation, avoidance on the other hand refers to a situation in which the management does not have enough time and enough facts and allows Harding to proceed as she thinks best. This approach to conflict resolution has always been criticized for leaving conflicts unresolved. Instead of the win-lose approach, negotiations and teams should have been used to resolve the conflicts. Resolution by Negotiation and Teams Negotiation and team use are the two strategies that Mr. Hammer may have used in resolving the conflict at the hospital and achieve cost-reduction at the same time. The main objective of negotiation in this scenario would be the attainment of joint decision, congruently agreed upon by all the parties involved. There are four major steps that Hammer would have followed had he opted for negotiations. The scene and the context of the negotiation should not only been made comfortable but also mutually acceptable or at least the setting should not be off-putting to the parties. Second, all the parties to a negotiation must be allowed to express their concerns without interrupting them since it is of great importance to understand the other parties’ views although one does not have to agree to them (Ury & Fisher, 1981). The third step entails the framing of the negotiation as a joint venture to resolve the conflict. That is, the negotiation should be a shared concern in which the available possibilities that are acceptable to each and common to both are sought. After reaching an agreement, the parties should not only summarize but also confirm the solutions arrived at. If necessary, it is advisable that resolutions be written down and each party given a signed copy. In addition to negotiations, teams could also be used in solving the conflict at General Hospital thereby ensuring cost reduction. First, to ensure the hospital’s entire team is behind its strategies and policies, the CEO needs to incorporate the scope of work baseline, human resource plan, and risk assessment among other factors related to the hospital team (The Team Building Directory, 2011). Second, the utilization of in-house expertise instead of hiring Marge Harding would not have reduced the chances of conflicts at the hospital. This strategy, coupled with the effective management of the hospital’s human resources, would have ensured that the hospital team worked efficiently and in corporation to achieve the cost-reduction objectives. Recommendations and Conclusion To assist General Hospital staff and management avoid or solve conflicts that are poised to occur at the hospital, some recommendations are in order. First, the management should avoid competitive style of conflict management, which is characterized by individual assertiveness and embrace the cooperation style, which emphasizes pro-self as well as pro-social behaviors during negotiations. In addition, the avoidance style to conflict resolution, emphasizing low concern for own self and others’ interests should be avoided during conflict resolution (Wilmot & Hocker, 2007). Also recommended is the conciliation conflict resolution style, which promotes an intermediate-level of concern for both personal and others’ outcomes. This approach focuses on fairness, resulting in the anticipation of mutual give-and-take interactions among the involved parties. References The Team Building Directory. (2011). Resolving Conflicts in Work teams. Retrieved on November 21, 2011 from http://www.innovativeteambuilding.co.uk/pages/articles/conflicts.htm. Ury, F., and Fisher, R. (1981). Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. New York, NY: Penguin Group. Wilmot, W., and Hocker, J. (2007). Interpersonal conflict. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies. WordPress.com. (2011). Conflict Resolution at General Hospital. Retrieved on November 21, 2011 from http://fpolom.wordpress.com/2011/03/07/conflict-resolution-at-general-hospital/. Read More