Dealing with Conflict in Organization - Essay Example

DAN AND MIKE Q. What are the antecedents of the conflict between EPI and Mike A. Conflict is part of the day-to-day functioning of any organization. "While conflict is generally perceived as being dysfunctional, it can also be beneficial because it may cause an issue to be presented in different perspectives' (Koontz et al, p 342). In the instant case, conflict brings to the fore the differences in the approach between EPI's objectives as perceived by the founder-partners and Mike's perception of a company urgently in need of change, as manifested by Mike's 'maverick' style of functioning. EPI had been founded with the primary aim of providing consistent and safe returns for pension funds. Accordingly the 'risk' element was deliberately kept low in keeping with the organizational ethos. This safe but sure strategy had enabled EPI to weather many "social and technological changes as well as economic volatility" (p 372), yet delivering safe returns. However, the return on investment (ROI), was low as compared to other funds thereby meriting a change in approach a view also subscribed to by the younger generation of analysts in EPI. Mike's entry into EPI challenged the existing 'status-quo'. The founder members of EPI were unprepared and therefore unwilling to accept Mike's style of functioning as the traditional values of the firm were being challenged. That these new methods practiced by Mike produced amazing results as also earned the loyalty of junior analysts further caused jealousy amongst the senior partners. Riding on Mike's success, other fund mangers and researchers also began to back Mike in various forums, further widening the rift between the 'old' and the 'new'. This dissension within the organization had the effect of adversely affecting the operations of other members. The senior partners felt that Mike was deliberately going against EPI's laid down policy to "provide safe and moderate income[and that it was]the philosophy we used to solicit the investment[and therefore]approach we are obligated to maintain"(p373-4). In such an organizational climate, Mike began o criticize those who would not toe his line. This would even include the senior partners who felt that Mike was willfully challenging their authority and position in the company by being insubordinate. Thus the conflict was both at a personal as well as organizational level. Q. What are the approaches to manage the conflict A. Essentially, the conflict was between the conservative senior partner of EPI and Mike the maverick. Obviously there was a need for a mediator who would be acceptable to both parties. Accordingly, one of the senior partners approached Dan, a founder member of EPI, as also is CEO. As the CEO it was Dan who had recruited Mike, overriding the reservations voiced by the other partners while at the same tie offering Mike, "the freedom and flexibility to operated a segment of the fund as he [Mike] desired"(p 373). By requesting Dan o resolve the conflict, EPI showed a degree of maturity. However, by insisting that, "Mike must either conform to the philosophyof the organization or else resign' (p 373), the senior partners showed a forcing approach to conflict management of impinging their views on others, an approach that can also have a negative fall-out. Dan on the other hand, had a reputation as a 'great equalizer' who liked to work through consensus. Dan's management philosophy was based on, "loyalty - loyalty to the organization...to membersto friends"(p372). Dan approached the situation keeping in mind this very fact that the resolution of the conflict must be a 'win-win' situation for all the players. Not only should the concerns of the partners be met and the EPI itself continue to prosper, but his promise of autonomy to Mike should also be upheld. Accordingly, Dan tried to reason with Mike in an attempt to find a compromise solution. While accepting the need for change, Dan pointed out that everyone in the company had to be taken on board and that, "The rate of change is as important as the direction "(p 375). Dan suggested that Mike needed to view things from others' perspectives and that Mike should try to follow Dan's approach of working through consensus as a means of gaining acceptability within the firm for his novel ideas. Mike however was unimpressed by these suggestions. Mike felt that performance was all that mattered and that Dan was not backing him as promised. Dan also tried the emotional approach by highlighting that he [Dan] had hired Mike to be the vehicle of change that EPI needed. If Mike left, Dan's reputation would also suffer, not to mention the loss to EPI as a result of loss of customers and staff. Any hopes of bringing in change within EPI would remain stillborn. While acknowledging his fact, Mike however was not willing to change his style and remained adamant that EPI urgently required radical changes and not a PR exercise, if it was to remain relevant. In the face of these inflexible attitudes it seemed that Mike would have to resign, Nevertheless both Dan and Mike agreed to continue the discussion later ad there was no breakdown of communications. Q. How could Dan have better managed the conflict A. "The logical conflict management approach rests on the assumption that people can and will make conscious decisions about how they will deal with a specific conflict"(Conflict Prevention). Different situations therefore will call for different approaches. There are different methods for managing conflicts, "focussing either on interpersonal relationships or on structural change" (Koontz et al, p 343). One approach that could have been used is through 'smoothing' i.e. to emphasize commonalties, at the same time downplaying dissimilarities. In this case, both the parties seemingly want what is best for EPI - only the philosophy and methods differ. However there can be other hidden reasons too. In this case, it appears that Mike's need for recognition than out of organizational interest. Sometimes the individual is not aware of this need and unconsciously begins to act out his so-called 'reputation'. Similarly the senior partners pulled out of their 'comfort zone' feel threatened and insecure. If both parties are satisfied that the other is no threat to them, then the conflict will resolve itself. Otherwise, a more appropriate approach could be the 'problem-solving' approach o organizational conflicts where, "differences are openly confronted and the issues analyzed as objectively as possible"(Koontz et al. P 343). Q. What can now be done to minimize conflict and to keep Mike at EPI A. As brought out earlier the underlying cause of conflict is 'change'. The old-guard is satisfied with the way things are being run, while the young-blood wants fundamental changes. The issue is to find common ground. One of the ways to achieve this is to make structural changes, namely, "modifying and integrating the objectives of groups with different viewpoints"(Koontz et al, 343). Coordinating activities and re-assigning tasks and workspaces so that synergy is achieved can also reduce friction. If everyone keeps organizational interest at the forefront, consensus is possible. This requires all parties to recognize and respect each other's viewpoints. "Consensus requires that each participant must agree on the point being discussed before it becomes part of the decision" (Dealing with Conflict). Ultimately, all must realize that the conflict has brought to the fore the necessity of change in order to maintain EPI's competitive edge. Organizational interest and not individual self-interest must be he driving factor. References Conflict Prevention. Retrieved from http://www.work911.com/conflict.carticles/conav.htm Dealing with Conflict. Retrieved from http://www.nbsa.org/sbot/oolkit/Conflict.html Koontz, O'Donnell & Weihrich, "Essentials of Management. International Students Edition", Fourth Edition, 1986, McGraw-Hill Book Co. Read More