This paper examines the role of employee empowerment in organizational conflict situations, drawing on scholarship in industrial/organizational psychology and leadership theory. It defines empowerment as a mechanism for redistributing authority, power, and communication within modern organizations, and explores how it serves as a substitute for direct managerial oversight. The paper contrasts the behaviors of empowered and disempowered employees when conflicts arise, illustrates these dynamics through a hypothetical organizational scenario, and analyzes how leaders' perception of power — rooted in either confidence or diffidence — shapes team outcomes. The paper concludes that empowered employees are more likely to resolve conflict constructively, while disempowered employees tend to respond from a personal rather than organizational perspective.
Modern organizations often grow beyond executive control, making management processes expensive to monitor. This challenge is compounded by the fact that quality managers are scarce. However, organizations have the option of building internal mechanisms — such as employee empowerment — to substitute for gaps in direct managerial oversight. This paper examines how empowerment is applied to build consensus within an organization, identifies the conditions that prompt organizations to use empowerment as a management supplement, and explores how perceptions of power influence conflict resolution.
Aamodt (2012) establishes that organizations achieve meaningful change when managers have done their homework in matters related to employee appraisal. Previous research has examined the close relationship between the complexities of organizational empowerment and the general quality of employee output. Empowerment is grounded in the recognition that modern organizations are frequently confronted with challenging labor conditions. As a result, organizations may face the negative effects of labor mobility when employees feel they are not proactively empowered.
Empowerment equips employees to make successful autonomous decisions, which fosters efficiency and encourages employees to feel both independent and responsible. It is also important to understand empowerment as a channel for redistributing authority, power, and communication within an organization (Daft, 2007). However, there is a close relationship between the nature of the empowerment strategy adopted and the quality of its outcomes. In certain situations, an overly ambitious empowerment strategy can paradoxically lead to disempowerment.
Empowered employees will often take a positive, proactive role in different situations. Disempowered employees, by contrast, tend to retreat to a posture of criticism or complaint. It is important to affirm that a conflict situation requires the diligent participation of all members of an organization. In any conflict, disparities in decision-making are created, and different employees find themselves either party or non-party to the conflict.
Consider, for example, organization XYZ, which has tasked its Research and Development department with examining whether activity ABC is profitable for the company. Empowered employees will engage with the technicalities involved in activity ABC, while disempowered employees will tend to distance themselves from the principle of collective responsibility. In this scenario, the administration has inadvertently created a conflict by acting on the assumption that all employees are equally empowered — an assumption that does not reflect organizational reality.
Perception of power carries two psychological dimensions rooted in either confidence or diffidence. Chen (2008) argues that subordinates use their implicit leadership theories to identify effective and ineffective leaders. When a leader is perceived as confident and competent, their confidence levels are reinforced, allowing them to develop internal organizational social power. A successful leader, in this sense, is one who inspires employees positively and has built an organizational command grounded in diplomacy.
Returning to XYZ Corporation, an empowered individual — such as a team leader — will be expected to have sufficient information about the nature of the conflict at hand. This information can be generated by initiating close dialogue between the parties involved. The leader is expected to demonstrate habitual understanding through techniques consistent with the notion of leading from behind — guiding the group rather than dictating to it. This approach not only inspires employees but also provides hope for the possibility of reaching a consensus regarding situation ABC.
"Confidence, diffidence, and implicit leadership theories"
"Empowered leaders guiding conflict toward consensus"
Daft, R. (2007). The Leadership Experience. New York: Cengage Learning.
You’re 73% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.