Organizational conflict resolution and power dynamics at Walt Disney under Iger

Politics Walt Disney

Conflict, Politics, and Conflict Resolution

A major source of conflict that plagued Walt Disney in the previous periods was organizational conflict. In particular, organization conflict is defined as the battle that takes place when the goal-oriented behavior of one party impedes and interferes with the goals of another party. In this case, organizational conflict came about when Michael Eisner the CEO of Walt Disney started to lose the support of the board of directors owing to his centralized decision-making and as a consequence, failure of the company's performance (Jones, 2013). Eisner's centralized decision-making insisted that he approve all decisions for the company, which slowed down the organization. This hindered the development of new strategies.

Interventions used by Iger

The approach undertaken by Iger with respect to conflict resolution appears to be more of a compromising approach. In particular, the case study outlines the manner in which immediately after taking over the CEO position at Walt Disney, he reached out to the aggrieved parties. He made reconciliatory relationships with the Weinstein brothers by making a settlement (financial) with them. In addition, Iger also reconciled the torn relationships with Steve Jobs and Pixar that Eisner had previously caused. Iger made this possible by adding the number of jobs to the board of directors of the company (Jones, 2013).

Effects of Power on Organizational Structure

Identify sources and effects of power on organizational structure

In definition, power is referred to as the potential or actual capacity to influence others in a desired way or manner. The sources of power in an organization can be either structural or interpersonal (Aquinas, 2008).

1. Reward power

This source of power comes about when the power emanates from an individual's control over rewarding outcomes. This sort of power can bring about better performance, only if the personnel perceived a clear and resilient connection between performance and rewards (Aquinas, 2008).

2. Coercive Power

Coercive power comes about when exertion of power is actuated by evoking fear. This more often than not encompasses forcing individuals to partake something, usually through intimidations of punishment. This power can generate stress and anxiety in employees within an organization. More so, in serious cases, it can lead to increased employee turnover and absenteeism (Aquinas, 2008). This power is not quite beneficial to an organization.

3. Position Power or Legitimate Power

This refers to an individual's capacity to influence others through the position or status they hold within the organization. In essence, legitimate power is centered on the position itself.

4. Expert Power

This power refers to that which comes about from an individual's knowledge, expertise, or skills. Within an organization, individuals with expert power have a great deal of influence as others have the belief that they can benefit from the knowledge and information such experts are able to provide (Aquinas, 2008).

Recommendation

In the evaluation of a strategy or design for an organization in the global setting, it is imperative to take into account the context of the environmental factors. Some of these factors include government stability, transportation, language barrier, economic status, culture, and currency. The development of global strategies necessitates laying emphasis other details that occasionally, if at all, come into frame in the native market (Gupta and Gorindarajan, 2003). These other areas of apprehension originate from cultural, geographical, and political uncertainties. As a result, whereas a company is forced to advance a strategy taking into consideration acknowledged governmental regulations, one semantic, and one currency in a domestic market, it ought to deliberate on and plan for dissimilar levels and categories of governmental regulation, numerous currencies, and linguistic differences in the global market (Gupta and Gorindarajan, 2003).