Action alternatives for the scenario: (Conflict structures) Please evaluate each

Question

Action alternatives for the scenario: (Conflict structures)

Please evaluate each of the following courses of action, by showing the positive or negative sides of each one, and indicate which one is the best:

1. You go along with Kathy Gordon’s view and advise Jane Wilson to select either accounting or finance as a major for her MBA.

2. You decide to withdraw from the situation completely and tell Jane to work it out with Kathy Gordon on her own.

3. You decide to take the matter to those in higher management levels and argue forcefully for your point of view. You do everything in your power to ensure that a decision will be made in your favor.

4. You decide to meet Kathy Gordon halfway in order to reach an agreement. You advise Jane to pursue her MBA in accounting or finance, but also recommend she minor in organizational behavior by taking electives in that field.

5. You decide to work more closely with Kathy Gordon by attempting to get a clear as well as flexible policy written that reflects both of your views. Of course, this will require a significant amount of your time.

Explanation / Answer

The Scenario is related to Conflict Management Styles in an Organizational setting. Ideally there is no right or wrong way of dealing with conflicts, it depends and varies from situation to situation.

There are primarily five conflict management styles namely:

1. Accommodation

2. Avoidance

3. Competition

4. Compromise

5. Collaboration

Anyway, as far as this situation is concerned, I personally feel that the Collaborative Style of Conflict Management, has an upper edge.

Appended are my views and explanation on the questions:

Option 1. You go along with Kathy Gordon’s view and advise Jane Wilson to select either accounting or finance as a major for her MBA.

Explanation 1. This option is typically referred as the Accommodation Technique.

Pros: Accommodation may be an effective strategy if the issue at hand is more important to others compared to oneself. However, in this case, the only benefit that this would reap is that relations with Kathy would continue to be cordial and there will be no conflict at work.

Cons: This will be demotivating for Jane and can be perceived as the manager’s inability to handle conflicting situations and/or to stand up for the team members. Jane might lose faith in the manager’s leadership abilities.

Personally, this is not a viable option.

Option 2. You decide to withdraw from the situation completely and tell Jane to work it out with Kathy Gordon on her own.

Explanation 2. Deciding to withdraw from the situation is not a viable option at all, as this reflective of the Avoidance Style of Management.

Pros: This decision (in this situation) would hardly have any positive connotation. While conflict avoidance may not be a significant problem if the issue at hand is trivial, it becomes a problem when individuals avoid confronting important issues because of a dislike for conflict or lack of faith in one’s own abilities to stand up for what is right.

Cons: This will again be demotivating for Jane and she might perceive this as the manager’s inability to handle conflicting situations and/or to stand up for the team members. Jane might lose faith in the manager’s leadership abilities and possibly look at quitting the job.

Option 3. You decide to take the matter to those in higher management levels and argue forcefully for your point of view. You do everything in your power to ensure that a decision will be made in your favour.

Explanation 3. This would be The Competition Style. People exhibiting a competing style want to reach their goal or get their solution adopted regardless of what others say or how they feel. They are more interested in getting the outcome they want as opposed to keeping others happy.

Pros: This will impress Jane and she will look up to her Manager for taking such a strong stance for her. Her faith in the manager’s leadership abilities will be intact and she would appreciate this decision.

Cons: Competition may lead to poor relationships with others if one is always seeking to maximize their own outcomes at the expense of others’ well-being. This approach may be effective if one has strong moral objections to the alternatives or if the alternatives are unethical or harmful.

This can be one of the options though in this scenario; but not the most preferred one.

Option 4. You decide to meet Kathy Gordon halfway to reach an agreement. You advise Jane to pursue her MBA in accounting or finance, but also recommend she minor in organizational behaviour by taking electives in that field.

Explanation 4. The Compromising Style is a middle-ground style, in which individuals have some desire to express their own concerns and get their way but still respect other person’s thought process.

Pros: This might come across as the Manager is trying to help Jane, whilst trying to maintain his relations with Kathy. This could be perceived as a Win-Win Situation, only if Jane is convinced and sees some value addition in pursuing Accounting or Finance. If not, then this option might not be useful or accepted as readily by Jane as the manager expects.

Cons: As mentioned above, if Jane doesn’t see this as adding value to her stream of choice, she might perceive the manager as non-assertive.

Option 5. You decide to work more closely with Kathy Gordon by attempting to get a clear as well as flexible policy written that reflects both of your views. Of course, this will require a significant amount of your time.

Explanation 5. This is the Collaborative Style of Management that I was referring to in the beginning of the answer. I will start with the Cons first and then list the Pros for this option.

Cons: Well, the only drawback to this technique is that it can be time consuming. Considering that the Manager is hard-pressed for time, he can delegate or leverage his team members to formulate the first draft of the policy, which can be further reviewed by him before suggesting Kathy.

Pros: The Collaborating style would ensure that the manager is perceived as someone as highly assertiveness and rational. I feel that this strategy is used for achieving the best outcome for most conflicts. This involves a healthy discussion of ideas, considers both sides by listening to both sides of the argument and is supported with rational facts as opposed to prejudices, perceptions and/or egoistic decisions. This is typically a win–win solution to the problem in which both parties get what they want as the point of contention would be to challenge thought processes and not individuals. This can eventually lead to better organizational processes as well, which have become outdated and/or need improvement to become more beneficial for the organization and its employees.

Hope the aforementioned is free of any ambiguity and is useful to you.

Thanks

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.