Conflict Resolution Strategies in Diverse Workplaces

Introduction

Conflict is inevitable. Individuals and groups differ in gender, race, ethnicity, religion, values, beliefs, and personality, and these differences can often be a source of conflict (Raines, 2012). This is particularly true in the organisational environment, where individuals work alongside others to accomplish shared goals and objectives. In such an environment, conflict is bound to occur, and the likelihood increases where an organisation's workforce comprises individuals from diverse backgrounds. Accordingly, an organisation must create an atmosphere in which conflict is resolved in a proper manner. Without effective resolution of workplace conflict, the achievement of organisational goals and objectives may be hindered. This paper focuses on a number of issues relating to conflict resolution, including resolution strategies, whether conflict is always bad, conflict management in a diverse workforce, and the role of supervisors in resolving conflicts at the workplace.

Conflict Resolution Strategies

Theoretically, there are five major approaches for resolving conflict: competing, accommodating, avoiding, collaborating, and compromising (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015). Competing entails pursuing one's own concerns without regard for other people's concerns (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015). For instance, a supervisor or manager may ignore the feelings or views of subordinates, irrespective of how important they may be. In a conflict situation at the workplace, it is not rare for supervisors or managers to want to impose their decisions, views, or ways of doing things on their subordinates. This is particularly true in organisations characterised by bureaucratic or autocratic structures. Competing is also common in the home setting — parents will often disregard the views and thoughts of their children regarding important matters such as sexuality, friends, academics, and career, instead insisting that their children abide by parental decisions. In most cases, the competing approach ends up disfavouring the less powerful party, which may heighten the conflict. It is, however, important to note that competing may be appropriate when decisions need to be made quickly.

Accommodating entails sacrificing one's own concerns in favour of another person's concerns (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015). It essentially means giving in, or allowing the other party to have their way, while acknowledging their point of view. This approach is also common at the workplace. Some individuals easily give in during a conflict situation, focusing more on ensuring peace and cooperation rather than exploring alternative solutions. This is particularly appropriate when the other party has a clearly better solution. While accommodating can quickly end a conflict, the accommodating party may sometimes harbour resentment toward the other party.

Closely related to accommodating is compromising. In this case, attempts are made to find common ground, though only partially or temporarily (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015). The parties in conflict may concede on certain aspects in order to reach a solution. However, the failure to establish a permanent resolution is a major shortcoming of the compromising approach.

Conflict can also be resolved through avoidance, which entails ignoring the conflict altogether (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015). It is common for some individuals to avoid participating in a conflict by choosing to remain silent. Research conducted by Goulston (2015) demonstrates that 10% of individuals at the workplace never ask colleagues to stop or change behaviours that trouble them, and 24% rarely do so. Choosing silence during a conflict situation typically occurs when one party is not invested in the conflict, is unwilling to create tension, or hopes the situation will normalise without intervention (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015). While avoidance can occasionally be beneficial, pretending nothing is wrong can be disastrous. Unspoken disagreements may accumulate over time, eventually causing enmity and even stress.

Collaboration arguably offers the most appropriate solution to conflict. The conflicting parties work together to find a permanent, mutually beneficial outcome (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015). Every party is given the opportunity to present their side of the story, and a win-win scenario is created. Though collaboration is the best approach for conflict resolution, it is not as widespread in organisational settings as one might expect. Overall, each strategy offers its own merits and drawbacks, and no single approach is applicable to all situations. In practice, some circumstances call for avoidance or accommodation, while others call for competing or collaboration.

Is Conflict Always Bad?

Generally, conflict is viewed as a bad thing — perceived as negative, characterised by fighting, shouting matches, bitter exchanges, harsh confrontations, disharmony, or hostility. This is not always the case. Conflict can sometimes be positive or productive (Prause & Mujtaba, 2015). For instance, disagreements or differences in opinion over how to approach a particular task can be beneficial, as they offer an opportunity to consider different ways of accomplishing the task and thereby select the best or most appropriate approach. Conflict can therefore enhance the quality of decisions. It may also promote a culture of creativity and imagination. When individuals are given room to offer their ideas and perspectives — however contradictory — creative solutions and alternatives can emerge. Organisations that encourage differences are more likely to be innovative than those accustomed to a single way of doing things (Raines, 2012).

The benefit of conflict can also be viewed through the lens of team development. Conflict can be important for fostering cohesion, trust, and understanding among team members. The accomplishment of organisational tasks increasingly takes the form of group work, meaning that conflict is bound to occur. When conflict emerges, teams tend to seek solutions that benefit everyone. Since the disagreement is articulated, efforts are typically made to ensure a win-win outcome. For example, when a team member is offended by a remark made by a colleague during a team discussion, it is more helpful for the offended individual to communicate their feelings than to remain silent. An atmosphere in which conflict is expressed and addressed reinforces honesty, unity, and trust between team members, as individuals gain an opportunity to understand one another better (Raines, 2012). On the whole, conflict within the organisational setting can be desirable, providing opportunities for problem-solving and mutual understanding.

Conclusion

Conflict is an unavoidable phenomenon, particularly in today's work environment, which increasingly features individuals from diverse backgrounds. This presents an ideal breeding ground for conflict. Though conflict is not always negative, organisations must effectively address and manage it if they are to successfully accomplish their goals and objectives in an environment ever more characterised by diversity.

References

Goulston, M. (2015). How people communicate during conflict. Survey. Retrieved from http://proxy1.ncu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=102785004&site=ehost-live

Green, K., Lopez, M., Wysocki, A., Kepner, K., Farnsworth, D., & Clark, J. (n.d.). Diversity in the workplace: Benefits, challenges, and the required managerial tools. Retrieved from http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/HR/HR02200.pdf

Prause, D., & Mujtaba, B. (2015). Conflict management practices for diverse workplaces. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 6(3), 13–22.

Raines, S. (2012). Conflict management for managers: Resolving workplace, client and policy disputes. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.