Stockholder Conflict

The appearance of conflict is inevitable in organizations. It generally happens between two parties in organizations. From the textbook, the definition of conflict is, “a process in which one party perceives that his or her interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party” (McShane and Von Glinow, 2014, p194). Simply put, there are disagreements between different parties; these different parties have different solutions or opinions to the same situations. There are three basic kinds of conflicts: constructive conflicts, relationship conflicts, and stockholder conflicts. The definition of constructive conflicts is, “a type of conflict in which people focus their discussion around the issue while showing respect for people

They would like to communicate with each other; then, they can find weaknesses of their solutions. It will promote friendly and productive competition. Another conflict is relationship conflicts. The definition of relationship conflicts is, “a type of conflict in which people focus on characteristics of other individuals, rather than on the issues, as the source of conflict “ (McShane and Von Glinow, 2014, p197). This type of conflict is negative. Parties which have relationship conflict means that these different parties are not satisfied with each other’s personalities. They do not want to communicate with each other; therefore, the conflict will become worse. Finally, in relation to stockholder conflicts, there are two subtypes of conflicts: the conflicts between managers and employees as well as the conflicts between customers and shareholders. “Managers want to keep labors cost as low as possible in order to gain higher profits while employees want higher pay rewards. Customers and shareholders: customers will look for value for money - low prices and high quality while shareholders expect the business to maximise profits, meaning higher prices” ( Barfield,

To begin, problem solving is also called a win-win orientation. This means that both parties would like to find the best solutions for each other. The most important point of this strategy is that the different parties would like to share their information to each other. Finally, all parties will benefit from the solutions. Second, forcing. Forcing refers to using authority/some other power to satisfy the wants of one party. This strategy is also called win-lose orientation. This means that the different parties will not be kind to each other and they will choose not to cooperate with each other. Finally, not every party will win or benefit. Most will lose and only a small number will win. Third, avoiding, which is not paying attention to the conflict and hoping to solve it this way. Some parties will try to avoid the conflict, while others will not. When there are potential conflicts between parties, a few will change their plan and tasks to eliminate conflicts. Fourth, yielding is that some people will consider the interests of other people too much and ignore their own interests. It means that they would like help others without any pay back. Finally, compromising means some people will succumb to other people in some form or the other. However, they will benefit in a different way that the other party will agree to. Compromising is