Prevention and early resolution of workplace conflict

Prevention and Early Resolution of Workplace Conflict

To better understand the topic, this paper begins with an overview of the concept of workplace conflict. A discussion regarding workplace conflict prevention is then given. This is followed by a discussion of early detection of conflict in the workplace. Lastly, effective resolution of workplace conflict is presented.

In today's hyper-competitive, increasingly globalized business world, organizations have to operate as efficiently and effectively as possible. One of organization's most valuable resources to remain competitive is their human resources. In addition, organization's are increasingly turning towards teams to further facilitate productivity. When workplace conflict arises, it negatively affects morale and productivity. This can result in not only lost profits, for the organization, but in increased employee turnover, which further affects organizational effectiveness and efficiency. For this reason, managing workplace conflict is critical to the organization.

To better understand workplace conflict, this paper begins with an overview of the concept of workplace conflict. Conflict is a product of human nature and can manifest itself in a variety of forms. it's a costly phenomenon for organizations, resulting in lost productivity, decreased morale and increased employee turnover. For this reason a discussion regarding workplace conflict prevention is then given. Improved communication within the organization and conflict training are both effect ways to prevent conflict from taking hold and negatively affecting employees. This is followed by a discussion of early detection of conflict in the workplace. As stress is a leading cause of conflict, the signs of stress are overviewed in this section. Lastly, effective resolution of workplace conflict is presented. Conflict resolution strategies fall into five general categories. Within each of these categories are specific strategies employers may wish to utilize. As each conflict is unique, so too must be the strategy. However, no matter which strategy is utilized to facilitate conflict resolution, active listening must be a part of the process.

Workplace Conflict Overview:

Dana (2001) defines workplace conflict as: "A condition between or among workers whose jobs are interdependent, who feel angry, who perceive the other(s) as being at fault, and who act in ways that cause a business problem. (...) This definition includes feelings (emotions), perceptions (thoughts), and actions (behaviors)" (p. 5). These three dimensions are considered by psychologists to be the only dimensions of human nature, meaning conflict is rooted in human nature. Of course, organizational structures may also affect conflict. One recent business trend has had a significant effect on workplace conflict -- work teams.

Teams are being increasingly utilized by organizations as a method of improving productivity and garnering a competitive advantage. Sikes, Gulbro and Shonesy (2010) define a work team as an organized group of committed individuals, who have the same intent of accomplishing a common goal. Work teams are often used today for decision making, problem solving and solution development. The primary advantage a team has over individual employees is the diversity of resources at their disposal, as well as the diversity of ideas and knowledge that is present in a team. The eclectic styles of thinking of team members results in a greater level of creativity. In addition to enhanced productivity, work teams often realize quality improvements, thanks to bringing together employees with complementary skill sets. The multiple experiences and knowledge bases that come together with teams also allow teams a better ability to resolve issues (p. 15). Despite these many benefits, however, the increased use of teams, and therefore the increased interaction of employees, often results in increased incidence of workplace conflict.

"Organizational conflict is costly, consuming 20% of a manager's time, and unresolved conflict can result in antisocial behavior, covert retaliation, and violence" (Meyer, 2004, p. 183). In fact, Meyer cites previous research that found that heated conflicts can result in absenteeism in organizations. They increase personnel turnover and result in other inefficiencies. The ability to think clearly is reduced as tensions rise during workplace conflicts, further negatively affecting productivity. it's been shown that when an employee becomes involved in a conflict their reasoning becomes distorted. These employees tend to lose focus on their tasks as they become more emotional during a conflict, further negatively affecting productivity and resulting in poorer work performance.

As Edelman and Crain (1993) surmise, most workplace conflict "usually have at their core at least one of the following incendiary aspects of human behavior:

1. Misunderstanding or miscommunicatino

2. Disrespect or disregard for other people

3. Conflicting egos

4. Impatience

5. Fear and insecurity over perceived 'loss of control'" (p. 238).

As Wienclaw (2010) notes, rarely do employees have the opportunity to work completely alone. Collins and O'Rourke (2005) joke that "If you want to avoid conflict at work, you can. All you have to do is find a job that doesn't require you to have any contact with people" (p. 1). Even employees who work independently or telecommute often have to interact with customers, suppliers and other employees. However, when there is more than one party involved in a situation, with interests in the outcome, workplace conflicts are likely to arise.

Sikes, Gulbro and Shonesy (2010) note that "when individuals come together (…) there are differences in terms of power, values and attitudes, and social factors that all contribute to creation of conflict. Conflicting factors such as these may cause deviation from the key goals of the group and may generally fall into three categories: communication factors, structural factors and personal factors" (p. 16). The primary source of conflict typically finds itself due to some form of communication factor. Misunderstanding of information, cultural difference among employees, differences in perceptions and interpretations, and poor listening can all result in barriers to communication. Different communication styles too may add to the challenge.

Sikes, Gulbro and Shonesy (2010) use the example of an employee whose communication style means that when a conflict arises they express their feelings and views with a raised voice. An employee who is more reserved may see this communication style as aggressive and arrogant. In addition, the more forceful employee may see the restrained employee as untrustworthy, if they feel the employee is not fully expressing their feelings. These same misinterpretations can also result in false opinions regarding the intent of either of the party's communications (p. 16).

The structural category of workplace conflict usually comes from elements of the employees of the organization and the organization itself. This includes the background of employees and organizational infrastructure. For organizations using teams, participation levels of team members and the size of work teams utilized fall into the structural category of conflict resolutions strategies (Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 16) .

Individual values, goals, needs, and motives fall into the personal category of conflict sources. The individual's level of self-esteem is another factor that falls into the personal category. Lastly, "an individual's perception of the situation that is significantly different from that of another team member's may also bring about conflict" (Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 16).

These three elements manifest themselves into several forms of workplace conflict that affect employees and employers. One of these is bullying in the workplace. Workplace conflict can include interdependence conflicts, goal incompatibility and differentiation, and resource scarcity. One common form of workplace conflict manifests itself as workplace bullying.

Seagriff (2010) defines workplace bullying as academics, scholars and organizational psychologists define the term. It is the "repeated mistreatment of a 'Target' (the recipient or victim of the bullying) by a harassing bully (a supervisor or co-worker) that is motivated by the desire to control the Target" (p. 576). A secondary definition of the term cited by Seagriff is the "repeated, unreasonable actions of individuals (or a group) directed towards an employee (or a group of employees), which is intended to intimidate and creates a risk to the health and safety of the employee(s)" (p. 576).

Bullying can manifest in a variety of ways. It can include non-physical activities such as: discrimination, non-status harassment, humiliation, innuendo, harming another's credibility and reputation, malicious isolation, and intimidation. Bullying is often expressed through physical activities too. These include:

aggressive eye contact, either by glaring or meaningful glances; giving the silent treatment; intimidating physical gestures, including finger pointing and slamming or throwing objects; yelling, screaming, and/or cursing at the Target; angry outbursts or temper tantrums; nasty, rude, and hostile behavior toward the Target; accusations of wrongdoing, insulting or belittling the Target, often in front

of other workers; excessive or harsh criticism of the Target's work performance;

spreading false rumors about the Target; breaching the Target's confidentiality;

making unreasonable work demands of the Target; withholding needed information; [and] taking credit for the Target's work (Seagriff 2010, p. 578).

Seagriff (2010) notes that part of the challenge of workplace conflict stems from today's culture. As an example, popular culture makes bullying, for example, seem like an acceptable behavior. Shows like American Idol and House use bullying partially for comic effect (p. 575). it's not surprising when this popular culture entertainment behaviors than spill over into the workplace.

Bullying in the workplace is a significant problem for employers and employees. "Twenty-three million Americans experience workplace bullying within their work lifetimes" (cited in Seagriff, 2010, p. 575). With the economic challenges Americans are facing recently, tensions in the workplace are also on the rise, as employees increasingly worry that their jobs are in jeopardy. This fear over possibly losing their job means many employees will not risk reporting bullying to their employers.

Interdependence conflicts, as mentioned, are another common type of workplace conflict. This type of conflict centers on an employee's dependence of another person's assistance, input or output to perform their job (Kankanhalli, Tan, & Kwok-kee, 2007). In other words, task interdependence varies depending on the extent which an employee needs materials, information or support from their workplace peers, in order to do their job. "Task interdependence alters the course and consequences of conflict. Some have asserted that because high task interdependence implies the need for intensive interactions among members, it creates more opportunities for conflict (Somech, Desivilya & Lidogoster, 2008, p. 363).

Task interdependence offers organizations many benefits. As Somech, Desivilya and Lidogoster (2008) note, organizational teams with high task interdependence may employ competitive strategies that can maximize their resources and power. High task interdependence also increases the interaction between team members and provides an incentive for employees to collaborate. When interdependence is high, typically these members communicate more often when interdependence is not present. They are also physically closer, typically, and influence and support each other regularly. For this reason, task interdependence positively affects the communication between employees and the level of collective planning needed to coordinate the integration of tasks (Somech, Desivilya & Lidogoster, 2008, p. 363).

Goal incompatibility is another common source of workplace conflict, when two or more parties in a situation have competing goals. Wienclaw (2010) notes that "goal incompatibility becomes an even stronger source for potential conflict in situations in which there are financial rewards for achieving one's goals since, in such situations employees tend to be more motivated to achieve their own goals at the expense of others" (p. 741). Differentiation is also a factor in goal incompatibility, according to Wienclaw. Differentiation centers on divergent attitudes, beliefs, backgrounds, training, and experiences. It is these factors that often result in goal incompatibility and the increased tendency for workplace conflict.

Resource scarcity can also lead to workplace conflict, as can ambiguity and communication challenges. Fae (2007) describe resource scarcity as conflict between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots.' Wienclaw (2010) gives the example of multiple technicians needing the same laboratory equipment, and the conflict that is likely to arise if the two technicians are forced to share. Ambiguity too can lead to conflict because it increases the likelihood that one party may interfere with another, which can also lead in increased office politics. When effective communication doesn't exist, this further complicates matters and increases the chance of conflict. "Good communication skills are necessary in order to communicate with other parties in a diplomatic, non-confrontational manner. The lack of necessary skills for diplomatic communication can escalate a conflict situation and result in less motivation for effective communication in the future" (p. 745). This is also often results in cross-cultural conflicts.

Sikes, Gulbro and Shonesy (2010) note that the increasing globalization of today's business world means that there is a new source of conflict -- cross-cultural conflicts. Oftentimes employees from different cultures have misunderstandings, mistaken perceptions and communication challenges that arise due to their cultural differences.

Workplace Conflict Prevention:

Understanding that there are numerous sources where workplace conflict can arise and that there are significant negative effects to workplace conflict, the most effective and efficient way to deal with conflict is to prevent it from happening in the first place. There are a number of conflict prevention strategies organizations may employ, in order to stop conflict before it starts.

The first step to any conflict prevention strategy is for management to understand the seriousness of the problems that can occur due to conflict. Even if the manager hasn't encountered any noticeable incidents, workplace conflict exists. This conflict can escalate, if not resolved, into workplace violence. "One out of four workers is attacked, threatened or harassed each year. Most harassers are co-workers" (Masters & Albright, 2001, p. 205).

Paniagua, Bond & Thompson (2009) uses the healthcare industry to discuss the benefits of a zero tolerance policy for organizations, as a means of preventing conflict. Although the conflict they are preventing is regarding a patient's aggressive behavior towards a healthcare provider, this can be applied to certain conflict sources between employees. A zero tolerance policy against violence and aggressive behavior can help prevent bullying as a form of conflict in the workplace. If employees know that this type of behavior will not be tolerated, and their jobs are on the line, this may serve as a significant deterrent, preventing the behavior from happening in the first place.

To further prevent conflict, employers can help bring issues out in the open before they escalate into full-blown conflict. Encouraging open communication as a part of organizational culture is key to this strategy. This strategy helps if the employer is aware of conflict triggers within their organization, and respond to them when they're first discovered ("Tips," 2010).

The company should also have a process for resolving conflicts in place (Perkins, 2010). Any potential issues should be encouraged to be brought up at employee meetings. In addition, the process for handling a situation when there are differing viewpoints should be established. Everyone in the organization must fully understand the process, the goals and the expectations. In addition, because conflict resolution skills are learned and not innate, employees should receive appropriate training. ("Tips," 2010).

James (2010) notes that one way to prevent conflict is to help prevent stress among employees. For this reason, James notes many organizations have implemented stress management courses and implemented flexible working schedules. Some have even gone so far as installing a punching bag in a common area, for employees to physically alleviate some of the stress their feeling. Other organizations have set aside a 'time-out room' for employees to have a quiet place to retreat to, to help work out challenges they may come across (p. 16).

Organizational leaders should develop training programs and prepare employees to work in team settings, as a means of proactively preventing conflict. Training should be provided to increase awareness of how conflicts arise and the different strategies for managing conflict, as a means of maximizing team effectiveness. This type of training allows employees to develop strategies to address conflict even before it occurs (Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 17) . In this way, employees will be well-equipped to prevent workplace conflict, or, at the very least, be able to employ conflict resolution strategies, when conflict occurs.

Bacal (1998) notes that much of conflict can be prevented by "defusing hostile, manipulative people" (p. 5). Bacal continues to note that a great deal of workplace conflict occurs because employees do and say things that cause the conflict. This is typically done unintentionally, but occurs because employees simply aren't aware of their behavior and the way they communicate. For this reason, an effective conflict prevention strategy centers on educating employees about not only how their behavior and communication styles can lead to conflict, but also how to handle these factors when they encounter them from other employees, so as not to respond in a confrontational manner that spurs conflict.

Early Detection of Workplace Conflict:

In the most general of terms, workplace conflict can be a result of "poor communication, organizational change (… and), life changes as individual circumstances change" (Cooke, 2006, p. 365). These factors often result in stress in the employee, which can manifest itself in workplace conflict. For this reason, early detection of workplace conflict often centers on recognizing these factors, especially stress.

Stress is the body's reaction to the environment or external events. According to Hussin (2008), "stress is a state of physiological imbalance in the body which has unpleasant emotional and cognitive components. It is the state the body is supposed to be in when you're faced with a real threat, like the approach of a hungry lion" (p. 16). People's level of stress differs greatly depending on the individual. A similar event can have a different level of stress for different people. Long-term exposure to stress can not only have negative physical effects, but psychological effects as well. When an employee is under long-term stress, this can result in an increased likelihood of workplace conflict.

When an employee is under stress, their brain releases the hormones known as glucocorticoids, which has several physiological effects (Hussin, 2008). The physical signs of stress are often a result of the release of adrenaline in the body. These include the heat beating faster and stronger and perspiration increase. When someone is under stress they may experience headaches or chronic pain in a variety of parts of the body. The employee may experience tightness or pain in the chest, back, jaw or neck. They may clench their jaw or grit their teeth. People under considerable stress may stutter, have speech difficulties, or may have muscles that tremble or twitch. Nausea, vomiting and diarrhea are also physical signs of stress.

The psychological consequences of stress may not be as evident as the physical effects; however, these effects can directly result in increased incidence of workplace conflict. Hussin (2008) surmises that stress can be directly associated with both behavior problems and emotional difficulties. Anxiety, depression, phobias, aggression, insomnia, and more can all make normal workplace challenges more difficult than they need to be, resulting in increased incidents of conflict when normally the problem could have been sorted out without any confrontation. Training should include: "understanding conflict incubation phases, psychographics, interpersonal dynamics and workplace constraints" ("Practical," n.d., p. 3/4).

Effective Resolution of Workplace Conflict:

Maravelas (2008) notes that "people have strong needs for a sense of belonging. When workplaces don't provide an opportunity for respect, camaraderie, and attachment, individuals make their emotional investment in unions, local bars, gangs, recreational activities, home-based businesses, faith communities, or families" (p. 152-153). This sense of belonging can't be maximized if the employee is embroiled in conflict turmoil.

With workplace conflict almost a certainty, it's important for organizations to have effective resolution strategies in place. When conflict is handled effectively, organizational members can use conflict to gain knowledge from their disagreement and come to a better decision. In fact, as Kerzner (2001) notes, "conflict is fundamental to complex task management" However, there are potential negative consequences that may occur if conflict is not resolved in an effective and efficient member by employees. "If conflict is not properly managed, the effects can be damaging to the team, as well as the organization" (Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 16).

Conflict can be classified as either functional or dysfunctional. Conflict in and of itself is not a problem for organizations. Instead, it's the way the conflict is handled and managed that often determines if it's a problem (Falconer, 2004, p. 11). Functional conflict is present when a confrontation between two or more employees enhances and benefits the organization, through enhanced performance, when the conflict is finally resolved. As long as individuals involved in the conflict are able to derive the most beneficial decision from the conflict, this is considered to be functional conflict. Positive results from functional conflict include: search for solutions, awareness of problems, positive organizational changes, organizational adaptation, and organizational innovation. Without functional conflict, change within an organization may not occur, resulting in the organization becoming stagnant and unproductive (Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 16). In fact, teams can become stronger and more effective when they've worked through conflict (Miller, 2010).

In contrast, Sikes, Gulbro and Shonesy (2010) note that dysfunctional conflict occurs when conflict harms or hinders the goals of the organization. When this happens, the conflict often leads to a disruption of activities within the organization, and can lead to a significant dissention among employees. Dysfunctional conflict is damaging to morale, the goals of the group and inter-organizational relationships. When dysfunctional conflict occurs within teams, it impedes the team's ability to maintain their group cohesiveness. Dysfunctional conflict can damage team communication channels, decrease innovation and idea creation, result in project cancellation, and even ultimately result in extreme profit loss for the organization. Whether an organization is facing functional or dysfunctional conflict, handling the situation with effective conflict resolution strategies is critical to maximizing the benefit from the conflict and minimizing the threat when the conflict is dysfunctional.

There are five conflict handling strategies, according to Meyer (2004). These are: integrating, compromising, obliging, avoiding, and forcing (p. 183). Sikes, Gulbro and Shonesy (2010) and Jones (2009) classify these as five generic approaches to intergroup conflict and label them: dominating, accommodating, problem solving, avoiding, and compromising (p. 18). The integrating style (or problem solving approach) of conflict handling involves problem solving and collaboration, and centers on all parties sharing information and working towards a satisfactory goal. Sikes, Gulbro and Shonesy note that this is often the ideal approach due to the collaborative aspect and the merging of insights, experience, perspective, and knowledge.

The compromising style or approach features dividing the issues down the middle as a means of resolving conflict. This is a good back-up strategy, when other approaches to conflict resolution fail (Meyer, 2004, p. 183; Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 18). it's often seen as a "fair" approach, due to its nature; however, it can be difficult to truly find the middle of the issues involved in a situation.

The obliging conflict handling style (or the accommodating approach) involves strategies where one individual gives in to another. This can be a beneficial approach when the conflict is more important to one party than the other. This is also often the best approach when maintaining the peace is more important than protecting one party's interest (Meyer, 2004, p. 183; Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 18).

The avoiding style or approach looks to resolution strategies where conflict is suppressed or parties withdraw from the conflict. This is typically only effective as a temporary measure or as a means of giving the conflicting parties a chance to cool down from their disagreement (Meyer, 2004, p. 183; Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 18). Falconer (2004) notes that conflict is at its most damaging when it's suppressed or avoided, as this often allows it to escalate out of control. Therefore, avoiding cannot be a long-term conflict resolution approach. Avoiding conflict in a vain hope that it will resolve itself on its own is a potentially dangerous strategy that likely will only make the situation worse.

Lastly, the forcing conflict handling style (or dominating approach) involves strategies where one party of the conflict forces the situation to ensure their needs are met at the expense of the other parties (Meyer, 2004, p. 183). This is an appropriate approach when the conflict needs to be resolved quickly. The forcing or dominating approach is also often used when the action that needs to be taken is unpopular, such as when a new policy is imposed (Sikes, Gulbro & Shonesy, 2010, p. 18).

There are a variety of factors that affect how people resolve conflict. These include: status, organizational culture, gender differences, familial learned behavior, and learned behavior from role models. Employees in higher status positions are more likely to confront conflict rather than avoid or ignore it. Some organizational cultures encourage productive conflict, while others discourage it. Males are often encouraged to be more confrontational than females. In some families, confrontation and conflict are a style of communication, while in others conflict is supposed to be hidden and avoided. Role models too can affect conflict, especially if an employee's boss models effective conflict resolution skills ("Managing workplace," 2010).

Wienclaw (2010) notes that there are several ways to deal with conflict. In fact, research has shown that the best method is to modify a conflict management style to meet the specific situation. The appropriate conflict management style varies depending on the degree of party cooperation, or how motivated they are to satisfy the interests of the other party(ies) involved in the conflict. This style is also dependent on how assertive the parties are and how motivated they are to satisfy their own interests (p. 746).

Collaboration can also be an effective conflict resolution strategy, in the workplace. During the collaborative process, the parties must work together to find a mutually beneficial solution to the conflict, utilizing problem solving skills. In this style of management, information is shared among employees who are involved in the conflict, so that they can identify the most effective solution that will best meet the needs and interests of all of the parties. This is the preferred method of conflict resolution when the parties involved don't have perfectly opposing interests. Sufficient trust and openness must be present, between the parties, so that all feel that information is being shared fairly (Wienclaw, 2010).

Avoidance is the conflict resolution that is on the opposite side of the resolution spectrum from collaboration. This resolution strategy involves low assertiveness and low cooperativeness. In this strategy, the employees "attempt to manage their differences by smoothing them over or avoiding or minimizing the situations in which conflict might arise" (Wienclaw, 2010, p. 747). This can be an effective strategy for short-term conflict management, as a means of cooling down the parties involved in the dispute, or when the situation is minimal. In some situations, avoidance can not only keep the conflict from escalating, but also may help to de-escalate it. Davis and Kraus (2009) note that avoidance may not appear to constructive, on the surface; however, postponing a confrontation to allow strong emotions to subside is constructive.

Competition, according to Wienclaw (2010) also can be an effective means of resolving workplace conflict. Although this approach involves one party "winning" over the other's expense, it can be an effective strategy when one solution is obviously most appropriate and a quick solution is needed. The underlying assumption is that there is a limited number of resources that mean a win-win situation is simply not possible.

In contrast to the competitive model of conflict resolution is the accommodation style of resolution. Like the avoidance strategy, this strategy is low on the assertiveness scale; however, it is high on cooperativeness. Accommodation involves one party voluntarily giving into to the other party, or acting with little to no self-interest. This can be a successful conflict management strategy if one party has substantially more power than the other or the issue isn't as important to one party than the other (Wienclaw, 2010, p. 747).

Compromise, as a resolution strategy, involves the parties involved striving to find a middle ground in the conflict. This approach involves moderate levels of cooperativeness and assertiveness. During the compromise process, the parties involved traditionally look for solutions where their losses are offset by the gains they get with the solution. This is often the best resolution strategy, according to Wienclaw (2010), for "situations in which there is little possibility of mutual gain through problems solving, both parties have equal power, and there are time pressures to settle the conflict" (p. 748).

Mediation is often one of the most effective conflict resolution strategies (Bhattacharya. 2010; Budd & Colvin, 2008). it's success of mediation can be gauged by not only the satisfaction with the resolution, but also the parties confidence that the resolution will be successful (Poitras & LeTareau, 2009). In this process, a facilitator is delegated. Their role is to assist the employees having the conflict, to communicate their thoughts on the situation. The mediator must be a person that isn't directly involved in the conflict. Managers or human resource personnel are often well-positioned to serve as mediators, because they often have knowledge of the situation surrounding the conflict, without having a direct stake in the outcome (Krivis, 2006). The facilitator also is charged with removing doubt from the minds of the conflict participants, as well as removing any rumors they may have heard or any preconceived judgments they may have. The mediator must encourage all parties involved to speak openly and honestly about the situation, as well as their perceptions, frustrations, and emotions regarding the conflict (Fae, 2007).

Doherty and Guyler (2008) note that this mediation strategy is particularly valuable for several reasons. It can be adopted and suggested early on during a conflict, it includes full participation of the employees involved in the conflict, and this participation results in an accountability for the outcome of the dispute (p. 53). Mediation is also an informal and confidential process that often makes the parties involved feel more comfortable with the process. It is a cost-effective process in that once a resolution has been established, performance can be immediately renewed. Finally, "mediation offers uniquely the most significant chance of multiple win-win outcomes for all participants, as well as for their business or organization. Mediation can be said to give people the opportunity for their 'real' needs to be met" (p. 57).