Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Team Work / Conflict Management
How to acheive conflict resolution
Impact Of Conflict On Teams
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Team Work / Conflict Management
Dealing with conflict is always a challenging situation, which requires team members to be integrated into a single, organized unit (Bolger, 2003). Conflict among teams is bound to occur no matter how much one tries to avoid it. While resolving all conflicts is not possible, these conflicts can be dealt with using the correct methodology. To address team conflict there are five methods: Accommodate, Compromise, Enforce, Explore, and Postpone (Bolger, 2003).
Accommodation
Bases for using the accommodation strategy occurs when working together to accomplish goals are far more important than sorting out personal differences. This means that individuals or teams decide to go along with another's point of view or decision. This strategy can be chosen when there is a subject matter specialist present who has more expertise in a given discipline or when a team has greater ownership of the issue and the outcome or result is not as important (Sessa, 1996). The accommodation strategy reduces group disagreement and helps an individual appear reasonable by submitting to another person's point of view. In many, situations this approach provides good will for bargaining at a later date. However, caution should be exercised, because if this strategy is overutilized the team will assume that individual is weak. Conversely the team will consider that individual unreasonable if accommodation is overutilized.
Compromising
Compromising occurs when individuals or teams agree to yield their positions on certain issues in order to meet each other half way; however, this means that no one individual will have his or her needs met. With this strategy, the team feels ownership towards achieving an agreement or positive o...
... middle of paper ...
...ce from their teams.
References
Barker, J., Tjosvold, D., & Andrews, I.R. (1988). Conflict approaches of effective and ineffective project managers: A field study in a matrix organization. Journal of Management Studies, 25 (2), pp. 167-177.
Bolger, C. (2003). Conflict Resolution Strategies. Retrieved Feb. 9, 2007 from http://www.members.aol.com/bolgersd/conflict.html.
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin Books.
Miles, S. J. & Mangold, G. (2002). "The impact of team leader performance on team member satisfaction: The subordinate's perspective. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 8, 5/6, pp. 113.
Sessa, V. I. (1996). Using perspective taking to manage conflict and affect in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(1), pp. 101-115.
Many situations present the important synchronization of internal versus external negotiations. Many individuals have studied how each side in the negotiation is able to manage the internal opposition to agreements being negotiated. This can also be known as “on the table”, or what exactly is on the line in a heated argument. Each individual involve in an argument has a particular position to be managed, and often times own personal interests are widely expressed. This paper will expand upon the case of Fischer collecting needed funds from Smith with proposals and ideas for a manageable negotiation.
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in. 2nd ed. New York, N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1991. Print.
Lewicki, J. R., Barry, B., & Saunders, M. D. (2011). Essentials of negotiation (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill. ISBN-13: 9780073530369
Michael R. Carrell, C. H. (2008). Negotiating Essentials: Theory, Skills, and Practices. New Jersey: Pearson.
Most of the common activities in our daily life present an opportunity to negotiate, whether or not we realise it. Meta-reflecting upon my negotiation experiences during the class and other activities have led me to identify few common themes. In this assignment, the two themes I will be discussing are (1) the importance of being clear on the strategic intent and big picture thinking, and (2) the importance of managing the negotiation process through understanding the various phases and visualising negotiation as a train journey.
In several occasions, conflict occurs in the communication of one or two people. Several people have thought of conflict as cases involving pouring of furious anger in a communication process. Nonetheless, conflict is the misinterpretation of an individual’s words or values (Huan & YAzdanifard, 2012). Conflict can also be due to limited resources in an organization (Riaz & Junaid, 2010). Conflict may as well arise due to poor communication or the use of inappropriate communication channel of transmission of information between the involved parties. Management of conflict has various conflict management styles that include avoidance style, forcing style, passive-aggressive style, accommodating style, collaborating style and compromising style. Workplace conflict comes in two different kinds: task involving conflict, which focuses on the approaches used in resolving the problem and blaming conflict that has the aspects of blame and never brings element of resolving problems between the conflicting parties. In the perception of several individuals, relationship conflict is negative.
Whether or not we are aware of it, each of us is faced with an abundance of conflict each and every day. From the division of chores within a household, to asking one’s boss for a raise, we’ve all learned the basic skills of negotiation. A national bestseller, Getting to Yes, introduces the method of principled negotiation, a form of alternative dispute resolutions as opposed to the common method of positional bargaining. Within the book, four basic elements of principled negotiation are stressed; separate the people from the problem, focus on interests instead of positions, invest options for mutual gain, and insist on using objective criteria. Following this section of the book are suggestions for problems that may occur and finally a conclusion. In this journal entry I will be taking a closer look at each of the elements, and critically analyse the content; ultimately, I aim to briefly bring forth the pros and cons of Getting to Yes.
According to the Theorists as groups turn into teams, most conflict happens in the “storming” stage of team development (De Janasz, Dowd & Schneider, 2001). First, one must understand what conflict is. Capozzoli (1999) cites Boulding’s 1962 definition of conflict as “a situation of competition in which the parties are aware of the incompatibility of potential future positions and in which each party wishes to occupy a position which is incompatible with the wishes of the other.” Conflict can be either constructive or destructive to the team and can be created in several ways. Conflict must be analyzed and understood for the team to resolve it.
Negotiating styles are grouped into five types; Competing, Collaborating, Comprising, Avoidance, and Accommodating (Colburn, 2010). Even though it is possible to exhibit different parts of the five types of negation styles in different situations, can see that my tendencies seem to default to, Compromise and Accommodating. In reviewing the course work and reviewing my answers for Questionnaire 1 and 5, I find that the data reflects the same assumption. The accommodating profile is one where relationship perseveration is everything and giving what the other side wants is the route to winning people over. Accommodators are well liked by their colleagues and opposite party negotiators (Colburn, 2010). When analyzing my accommodating tenancy in negations, I find often it is easier to give into the demands when they are within a reasonable range. I often consider it the part of providing a high level of customer service. It has been my experience that continued delaying and not coming to an agreement in a topic will only shorten the window in which you will have to meet the request since. The cons to this style are by accommodating highly competitive styles the accommodator can give up to much ground in the process. “Giving away value too easily too early can signal to your negotiation counterpart that you've very deep pockets, and your gift is just a taster of bigger and better gifts to come”. The other negations type I default to is compromising. Compromising “often involves splitting the difference; usually resulting in an end position of about half way between both parties’ opening positions” (Colburn, 2010). In the absence of a good rationale or balanced exchanged concessions, half way betwee...
Zaccaro, S. J., Rittman, A. L., & Marks, M. A. (2001). Team leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 12(4), 451-483.
Interpersonal conflict is very common with many relationships. It occurs when two people can not meet in the middle or agree on a discussion. Cooperation is key to maintaining a healthy debate. More frequently; when dealing with members of your own family, issues arise that include conflict and resolution. During this process our true conflict management style appears “out of thin air”. (Steve A. Beebe, 2008, p. 191).
Team Dynamics - Conflict Resolution Strategies People work in groups or teams every day, whether in their career, education, political organization, church, or any other social setting. Conflict while working in teams or groups is inevitable. When taking people of different backgrounds, personalities, moral and ethical beliefs, and putting them together in a group, conflict will arise. The key to achieving your team goals is to construct and conquer your goals while keeping the greater good of the team in mind. Conflict, as it arises, should be combated and abated through swift and thorough resolution techniques.
Fisher, R & Ury, W (1991). Getting to Yes: Negotiation Agreement Without Giving In. Penguin: New York
Levine, S. (1998) Getting to resolution turning conflict into collaboration. San Francisco, CA, Berrett-Koehler, (p.125)