When working in a team, conflict is inevitable. People have different opinions, ideas, they have misunderstandings, cultural differences, and many other reasons that can lead to conflict. Conflict can be taken negatively, but in reality conflict could have a positive impact on the team. It takes great leadership to manage conflict successfully. Some of the conflict management styles are accommodating, avoiding, collaborating, competing, and compromising (Meier, 2011).
Thomas, from Device Products Unlimited (DPU) had to hire a new human resources manager to deal with several conflicts that he was facing at his organization. The engineering supervisor called Abram, disciplined his employee named John for missing work often. John also filed a complaint because other employees missed work more often than he did, but nothing was done about it. Jon violated the attendance policy, used all his earned time off, and did not get paid for the extra days that he missed work. John also requested to get paid for the days that he missed work. Regardless of the conflict cause, there are several ways that we can try to resolve this conflict. First of all, we can look at the accommodating style. This approach emphasizes cooperation instead of assertiveness (Cross, 2016). As a leader, you put your own interest to the side and focus more on the other party. You are pretty much giving up everything to keep good relationships with the other person. If you Jon has a good solution to his problem and Adam or the HR manager wants to keep their relationship in good standing, this might be a good option. The avoiding technique is where you simply avoid the issue (Meier, 2011). As a manager you just avoid communicating or confronting the conflict, hoping it goes away on its own. This will not be a good style to use to resolve this conflict, because both Adam and Jon are trying to get a resolution. Adam needs Jon to be more responsible and Jon wants to get paid for the days that he missed. The collaborating style is one of the best ways to resolve conflicts since both parties will work together to try to find a solution to their conflict (Cross, 2016). Both sides win and …show more content…
This is appropriate to use when a quick decision is needed, when the outcome cannot be compromised, when the leader is correct and the other person is wrong, or when an important decision needs to be made such as cutting cost or downsizing (Eilerman, 2006). Using this approach with Jon must likely will result in Adam losing Jon as an employee, therefore it would be better to opt for another conflict resolution method.
The compromising style is also a good way to resolve this situation between Adam and Jon, however both parties will be losing something (Meier, 2011). Adam and Jon will need to find something that they are willing to lose. Jon for example, can lose a few days of pay and keep his job, while Adam can become more flexible and work some hours for Jon, forgiving him for what happened in the past. Adam will be willing to trade some of his needs to keep Jon in the good side and resolve their conflict immediately. This will only work as long as both parties are willing to work together for a conflict
Thomas, from Device Products Unlimited (DPU) had to hire a new human resources manager to deal with several conflicts that he was facing at his organization. The engineering supervisor called Abram, disciplined his employee named John for missing work often. John also filed a complaint because other employees missed work more often than he did, but nothing was done about it. Jon violated the attendance policy, used all his earned time off, and did not get paid for the extra days that he missed work. John also requested to get paid for the days that he missed work. Regardless of the conflict cause, there are several ways that we can try to resolve this conflict. First of all, we can look at the accommodating style. This approach emphasizes cooperation instead of assertiveness (Cross, 2016). As a leader, you put your own interest to the side and focus more on the other party. You are pretty much giving up everything to keep good relationships with the other person. If you Jon has a good solution to his problem and Adam or the HR manager wants to keep their relationship in good standing, this might be a good option. The avoiding technique is where you simply avoid the issue (Meier, 2011). As a manager you just avoid communicating or confronting the conflict, hoping it goes away on its own. This will not be a good style to use to resolve this conflict, because both Adam and Jon are trying to get a resolution. Adam needs Jon to be more responsible and Jon wants to get paid for the days that he missed. The collaborating style is one of the best ways to resolve conflicts since both parties will work together to try to find a solution to their conflict (Cross, 2016). Both sides win and …show more content…
This is appropriate to use when a quick decision is needed, when the outcome cannot be compromised, when the leader is correct and the other person is wrong, or when an important decision needs to be made such as cutting cost or downsizing (Eilerman, 2006). Using this approach with Jon must likely will result in Adam losing Jon as an employee, therefore it would be better to opt for another conflict resolution method.
The compromising style is also a good way to resolve this situation between Adam and Jon, however both parties will be losing something (Meier, 2011). Adam and Jon will need to find something that they are willing to lose. Jon for example, can lose a few days of pay and keep his job, while Adam can become more flexible and work some hours for Jon, forgiving him for what happened in the past. Adam will be willing to trade some of his needs to keep Jon in the good side and resolve their conflict immediately. This will only work as long as both parties are willing to work together for a conflict