Organizational Behavior

Conflict Management Approaches ADN Human Behavior Conflict Management Approaches and Human Behavior Desired outcomes of disputants The primary source of intra-organizational conflict is represented by a perceived difference in the desired goals of different parties. Therefore, whenever managing an organizational conflict, the consideration of the outcomes desired by the parties is of the utmost importance. The article reveals several desires as pointed out in the literature, but emphasizes on Sheppard's research (1984) to reveal four desired outcomes, namely: fairness, participant satisfaction, effectiveness and efficiency.

In terms of fairness, the disputants seeks out to obtain an objective opinion from a third party and to set a precedent in conflict management. Then, at the level of participant satisfaction, this can be measured in terms of the desire to make the conflict public or keep it private, the personal need for vindication or actual resolution, as well as the need to ensure some acceptable degree of recovery after the conflict.

At the level of the effectiveness desired by the disputants in the conflict, this measure is rather limited, with the single desire being that of improving the relationship. In terms of the party mediating the conflict, its desires are more complex. For instance, the third party will desire to prevent the repetition of the conflict, to draw lessons from it or to improve the quality of the decision making process.

Last but not least, the disputant's desire for efficiency is reflected in terms of settling the conflict in a "timely manner" (Katz Jameson, 1999). 2. Importance of fairness, effectiveness and participant satisfaction Throughout conflict management approaches, it is essential to continually ensure fairness, effectiveness and participant satisfaction. Unless these criteria are all simultaneously met, the conflict stands little chance of being truly resolved.

The combination of these outcomes is essential in ensuring disputant satisfaction and ensuring that the conflict is not only well managed, but also lessons are learnt and future situations are already improved. In terms of fairness, it is important to be shown that the conflict was managed with an objective eye and an interest towards the well-being of all parties involved. In other words, it is crucial to show that better rules were created and instituted as a result.

Then, at the level of participant satisfaction, it is important from a more objective point-of-view, to ensure that the participants in the conflict fully accept the solution and that they are allowed to main privacy as they desire. Last, at the level of effectiveness, the importance to ensure it refers to the longer term effect of the method currently employed to resolve the conflict.

In such, this method has to improve the working relationship between the disputants, to "prevent repetition, teach parties to manage conflict more effectively in the future, work on a structural solution by altering work structure, create more clarity, learn from the conflict without resolving it, try to create a workable solution and find a pragmatic solution" (Katz Jameson, 1999). 3. Major conflict resolution strategies Whenever conflicts arise within the intra-organizational setting, managers employ three types of strategies to resolve them. These are the interest-based strategies, the rights-based strategies and the power-based strategies.

The interest-based strategies revolve particularly around negotiations, meaning that the parties discuss the conflict and seek to identify a mutually beneficial solution. In some cases, this approach is fruitful, whereas in others the disputants cannot come to a resolution on their own. At this point, labor unions can become involved to help mediate the conflict, or the disputants can seek the counsel of a different third party, such as a manager.

The scope is to include a third party which is objective and can understand and pursue the interests of the disputants. The rights-based strategies, similar to the interest-based strategies, seek out to resolve intra-organizational conflicts with minimal external intrusion. But the difference relies in the fact that the rights-based strategies are more formal and aim to identify facts and rights and resolve the conflicts in a highly objective manner, considering the facts and the rights, rather than the persons, the demands or the nature of the conflict.

When third parties are brought in, they serve as arbitrators. Last, the third category of conflict management strategies are based on the power employed by the various members of the organizations. The most eloquent example in this sense is that of a manager demanding that an employee address a task, threating repercussions if he does not or promising rewards when he does -- this is a clear case of power usage to create an outcome and manage a potential conflict.

Power is used by managers to resolve conflicts between other disputants, and the power is often employed to enforce a solution. 4. Interest based and power-based strategies The scope of the interest-based strategies as well as that of the power-based strategies is to resolve a conflict in a quick and efficient manner. Still, the concepts at the basis of the.