Conflict Resolution Group Paper

Jessica Adams, Dezerae Carmona, Chase Rice, Eda Talushllari

Conflict Resolution

HRD 5344.060

December 8, 2016

Introduction

Conflict can occur in any organization, as employees from different backgrounds and

with different priorities are forced to work together. Conflict can arise for a variety of reasons,

including scarce resources such as time, responsibilities, status or budgets. Conflict may be

about values, such as political preferences, religious convictions and deep-seated morality, or

conflict may be about insights, facts and the way employees understand the world. Conflict may

arise from a combination of issues (De Dreu, 2008).

This paper attempts to identify the type of conflict, as well as the source of the conflict,

occurring at Texas A&M University-Commerce (A&M-Commerce). The issues of conflict will

be presented and evaluated throughout, and various tools will be presented to help address the

conflict. Finally, effects of conflict within the workplace will be discussed to help further guide

the organization with selecting a strategy that best fits their needs.

A&M Commerce was established in 1889 and is the second largest university in The

Texas A&M University System (A&M-Commerce). A&M Commerce offers 144 total areas of

study at the undergraduate, masters, and doctoral levels (A&M-Commerce). The previous

President of A&M Commerce, Dan Jones, passed away on April 29th, 2016; Dr. Keck was

named interim President of Texas A&M University-Commerce on June 1, 2016 until a long-term

President can be appointed (President's Biography - Texas A&M University-Commerce.) While

we found many issues of conflict through our analysis and insight from current employees, we

felt two stood out.

Issues of Conflict

Issue #1: Working together as a team with different background, styles, positions (faculty, staff

and administration), etc.

Issue #2: Working with the new Interim President who is filling in, while a search is being done

for a permanent replacement. The Interim President has a straightforward approach to problems

and how he gets things done. He has signed on for one to two years and two of the four VPs are

new to their position.

To discuss how to solve the conflict, we must first understand what kind of conflict is

going on in the first place. The first kind of conflict is described as ideological conflict and this

deals with different feelings and attitudes within people in the organization; this kind is very

difficult to solve (Stevens, Williamson, & Tiger, 2013). The second kind of conflict is called real

conflict and this deals with “real” conflicts such as poor performance; this conflict is more

tangible, so it is easier to solve (Stevens et al., 2013). In this organization, there are two conflicts

that are happening.

One of the first conflicts is attributed to team building and how everyone can work

together, within different backgrounds, styles, and positions. This kind of conflict is considered

as an ideological conflict because it is attributed to feelings, and attitudes of the different

individuals (Stevens et al., 2013). It is understood that this kind of conflict is difficult to solve,

but perhaps the best way to solve it is to think about the conflict in terms of team based goal

settings. Posthuma and Al-Riyami (2012), stated that the best way to lead teams of higher

education was by integrating goal setting, team role and team life cycle theories. The way to do

this, is to first, establish SMART goals; this is defined as Specific, Measurable, Achievable,

Relevant, and Time Bound (Posthuma & Al-Riyami, 2012). An example of this would be to

state by 2020 we hope to increase the number of students to be admitted into our college by 10%,

and we will do this by spreading awareness about our institution and making the application

process easier to submit. All the team members are achieving towards one goal and they will

take critical steps to achieve that goal. Posthuma and Al-Riyami (2012) also say that you need to

attribute certain roles to certain team members and these roles are: completer-finisher,

implementer, team workers, specialist, monitor evaluator, coordinator, plant, shaper, and

resource investigator so that the group can better understand what each person is doing and so

that they can see what each person is contributing. A coordinator is somebody who loves to be

around people and they enjoy leading so that everyone can work together, while a team worker is

the peacemaker of the group; they are the ones who make sure that everyone contributes in the

group and they are all heard (Posthuma & Al-Riyami, 2012). A resource investigator is someone

who enjoys research and figures out how to accomplish the team’s goals, while the completer-

finisher, is the one who sets out to finish all the tasks of the team and makes sure that the team

stays on track (Posthuma & Al-Riyami, 2012). Not only do the team roles matter, but so does the

team life cycles: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning; this allows the team

to figure out where they are in the process, and where they need to be (Posthuma & Al-Riyami,

2012). The two authors believe that this will have great success in the workforce, and especially

in higher education.

There are many other ways to resolve conflict. In 1967, Thomas listed out the theory of

the five simple types of how to handle conflict: competing (win/lose), collaborating (win/win),

accommodating (lose/win), compromising (lose/lose) and avoiding (lose/lose) (Stevens et al.,

2013). In, The Manager as Politician, Gilley, (2006) also referenced this theory, but he called

them Supporter (accommodating), Avoider (avoiding), Compromiser (compromising), Gladiator

(competing) and finally Political Navigator (collaborating) (p. 33). Avoidance means just that,

you are avoiding the conflict that is occurring, and Stevens et al., (2013) state that “avoidance is

the most common way to deal with conflict in universities.” This way of dealing with conflict is

not working since by using the avoidance style everyone loses (Stevens et al., 2013).

Accommodating means certain groups are willing to step down, so that the other party will win

(Stevens et al., 2013). Competing is also called forcing, in where you are forcing the other party

to have it your way or the highway (Stevens et al., 2013). Compromising is something that

everyone has heard of and a lot of people assume that this is the best way to resolve conflict, but

it is not. Compromise deals with parties accepting some loss and some gains, resulting in a

“zero-sum game” meaning that nobody wins (Stevens et al., 2013). Finally, the best way to deal

with situations, in where it is a win/win for everyone, is called collaborating (Stevens et al.,

2013).

Collaboration is best used whenever the conflict is a real conflict. The second conflict,

the issue with the Interim President and his straightforward approach to get things done, would

have to be solved through collaboration. Gilley (2006) said that it is important to realize that

“political navigators attempt to work with other people to find solutions that fully achieve the

results-outcome for all parties while maintaining positive relationships” (p. 37). Collaborators

recognize that there is a conflict that has a solution and that can be solved (Stevens et al., 2013).

The best strategies to use for solving conflict, lie with making sure that a “healthy relationship

exists”, initiating the discussion by giving and receiving feedback, and then finally agreeing to a

conclusion (Stevens et al., 2013).

Stevens et al., (2013) state that for collaboration to work, confrontation must take effect.

In this, you need to make sure that you are bringing up the conflict at an appropriate time; if you

decide to tell the interim president about the conflict at a Christmas party, then this is an example

of an inappropriate time (Stevens et al., 2013). The second thing you need is to have the courage

to initiate the conversation by describing what exactly the cause of the conflict is – make sure

that you are skilled at communicating to individuals and are paying very careful attention to your

word choice (Stevens et al., 2013). The third aspect is that the Interim President needs to listen to

the concerns of his staff, and not just listening, but he needs to become an active listener and

listen attentively (Stevens et al., 2013). The last part that Stevens et al., (2013) suggest is to

follow the problem-solving process which are explained below:

1. Identify exactly what the problem is and how people feel about the problem.

2. Brainstorm and come to a few possible solutions of how you would like the problem

to be solved.

3. Come to a solution that both parties can agree on, so that way they are both winning,

and there are no losers.

4. Create a plan that will take appropriate steps to solve the solution.

5. Assess the plan and figure out where the plan is lacking in; repeat the steps from the

beginning.

Stevens et al., (2013) state that “the opportunity for change in attitude or behavior comes

only after an individual is aware of the change” and in this instance, perhaps nobody has brought

up to the Interim President the conflict that has been brewing. It is important to note that the

individual that will talk to the president needs to be a skillful communicator and negotiator;

Gilley (2006) even goes on to say that the Political Navigator needs to have a “mastery of people

skills” (p.37). Even though using the Political Navigator/Confrontation style is a lengthy process,

it is one of the best processes to use since everyone wins and everyone has a voice (Gilley,

2006).

Tools to Solve Conflict

Conflict is inevitable. People are all different and when you get a group together, there

are bound to be differences of opinion. In an area like higher education, conflict is frequent and

not necessarily bad. Arguments and debate transfers ideas which lead to learning.

Unfortunately, such arguments can escalate beyond a good place. A common issue is when

people are unwilling to back down from an argument or letting the conflict destroy the group

rather than working things out. With a few tools, conflicts become manageable and the damage

they inflict is minimized.

Different Approaches

According to Phillips & Cheston (1979), “two popular but contradictory strategies for

conflict resolution are the tough guy approach and the problem-solver approach” (p.76). These

strategies can be likened to trying to enter a house. The problem-solver approach is taking the

time to open the door, while the tough guy approach is breaking a wall down and strolling inside

(Phillips & Cheston, 1979). The tough guy strategy may be faster, but just like the analogy of

the house, it will not win you friends (Phillips & Cheston, 1979). The strategy requires someone

to stand firm and force everyone into their line of thinking (Phillips & Cheston, 1979). The

problem-solver approach is an approach suited for patience, peace keeping, and middle of the

road person (Phillips & Cheston, 1979). This approach is trying to find a way to make everyone

happy; it is the way to make sure the people involved in the conflict can deal with each other

after the conflict is resolved (Phillips & Cheston, 1979).

There are pros and cons to both approaches. A pro of the tough guy method is a faster

way to combat conflict, while a con is that it includes people who do not like being forced into a

decision (Phillips & Cheston, 1979). A pro of the problem solver method includes that it leads to

friendlier outcomes, while a con is that it may take longer (Phillips & Cheston, 1979). While

these may be two of the most common conflict resolution tools, they are not the only ones.

The compromise method is similar to problem-solver but both sides must agree to give

something up, and the best way to use this method is to have some type of impartial third party

leading the negotiation (Phillips & Cheston, 1979). In higher education, this is a commonly used

method with most universities because it can be adapted to meet their needs; mediation may be

carried out by the HR departments or a consultant. With people of different job levels and

backgrounds, an impartial third party can weigh all opinions and can bring in an outside

perspective to the group. With a new person to the university, in this case a President, a third-

party mediation can make sure that all sides are working in good faith and that no one is trying to

get the better of the other. It can allow the new President to become acclimatized to the new

school, while at the same time making sure that the workers already there become used to the

new administration.

Avoidance is one of the worst methods to use in a conflict situation (Phillips & Cheston,

1979). Just simply keeping your head down and avoiding arguments, this method can lead to a

person not being happy with the results of group work and much worse, conflict if the person

saves up their anger and releases it in one go.

While the above methods deal with a conflict as an obstacle to overcome, there is a

method that takes things a little differently. In Maes & Schifo (n.d.) article, the authors introduce

the idea of the “reset button”. Much like restarting a computer to clear an issue, this method

calls on the group members to start over and re-approach their task in a way that should bypass

the original situation that created the conflict (Maes & Schifo, n.d.). This method works best for

groups that may not have a lot of experience working together but can help in many situations by

calling on the people to think of different ways of approaching a project (Maes & Schifo, n.d.).

Wrap-up of Tools

Regardless of method chosen, there are many ways of ending conflict. Conflict can be a

healthy exchange of ideas and opinions but if carried too far, it can destroy a group. All

strategies have pros and cons so it is important to weigh all choices before embarking on a

method. Also, it is important to remember that regardless of the conflict you are dealing with,

these are people that you may have to deal with in the future. People can have long memories

and remember past “slights” both real and imagined, but with time, and consideration, conflicts

can be managed and overcome. In the end, regardless of form, the main way to manage and end

conflict begins with one main factor, communication. By and large people are not telepathic,

and without communication nothing can change and issues can escalate.

Effects of Conflict in the Workplace

Handling workplace conflict initially belongs to the employees who are at odds with one

another; however, the employer plays a significant role in conflict management as well.

Employers are responsible for developing a workplace culture designed to prevent conflict. This

includes fostering an environment favoring strong employee relations such as openness, fairness,

and mutual respect amongst employees and managers (Society for Human Resource

Management, 2015). Conflict can have a positive effect in the workplace, but without successful

management, and intervention when necessary, conflict also has a negative effect in the

workplace.

Positive Effects

Workplace conflict can have several positive effects in the workplace. Conflict may

foster creativity and innovation. Employees may be inspired to brainstorm ideas while

considering different viewpoints from other individuals in the group. As the group and

organization works to resolve conflict by encouraging discussion, group members are more

likely to share opinions and listen to others within the group (Brookins, 2016). The sharing of

ideas can lead to an environment of healthy competition, leading to innovation and invention

amongst employees (Adams, 2016).

Another positive effect includes company goals and objectives becoming more attainable.

Conflicting parties can force the business to review overall goals and objectives, which can lead

to goal congruence and coherence in operations. Leadership is forced to review its objectives

and strategies to help foster teamwork amongst competing parties and encourage working

towards a common goal (Adams, 2016).

Workplace conflict often leads to improved communication and identifying newly

productive members (Brookins, 2016). Requiring employees to work together encourages them

to learn more about each other. Increased communication also gives employees the necessary

tools to easily solve conflicts in the future. Employees that usually do not speak up may finally

feel comfortable enough to step up and demonstrate leadership skills by offering meaningful

solutions to conflict within the group (Brookins, 2016).

Conflict encourages and can even accelerate change within an organization. Conflict can

help identify inefficiencies and prompt modification of policies and operation procedures.

Change may include a complete overhaul of leadership and bringing in new managers with new

ideas, or it may include a reassignment of roles and responsibilities (Adams, 2016).

Although workplace conflict may have some positive functions within an organization,

De Dreu (2008) writes, it is only “under an exceedingly limited set of circumstances” (p. 9).

These circumstances include that the conflict should be task-related and not involve issues

related to personality, identity, religious values, humor or political ideologies, and the task

should be of moderate intensity (De Dreu, 2008). Team members should also be willing to

compromise on decisions, and the group should be high on psychological safety and within

group-trust (De Dreu, 2008). Any other reasons for the conflict within groups or organizations

will result in negative consequences for the members, the groups and the organization.

Negative Effects

Workplace conflict may have costly consequences for organizations. Conflict takes a toll

on the organization, affecting the mental health and well-being of the employees. Conflict is

stressful for all parties involved and relates to rigidity of thought (De Dreu, 2008). Employees

may become frustrated if they feel no solution is in sight, or if they feel their opinions go

unrecognized by group members (Brookins, 2016). Employees may appear stressed, experience

loss or increase of appetite, headaches; they can also become unapproachable and begin to miss

meetings to avoid the conflict (Brookins, 2016).

Employee productivity may be negatively affected by conflict. When time is used to deal

with conflict, rather than producing goods and services, the organization begins to lose

efficiency. The organization’s goals may be compromised during times of extreme

disagreement, when conflicting parties push the pursuit of their own interests rather than the

company’s objectives (Adams, 2016). Employees may lose focus on core goals they have been

tasked with, and organizations can lose money, donors and access to essential resources

(Brookins, 2016).

Workplace conflict leads to a waste of time and resources. Conflict is a hurdle to

overcome in any capacity and usually results in minimal loss of time when managed

constructively. However, when excessive conflict exists in the organization, it becomes a

struggle to overcome. Workplace conflicts require time and other resources that cannot be used

to perform other tasks, attend to customers or pursue other business opportunities (De Dreu,

2008).

Employees may leave the organization if conflict is not handle constructively and

appropriately. When employees become increasingly frustrated and believe the issue will never

be resolved, they will eventually leave the organization (Brookins, 2016). Organizations with

extreme cases of conflict may find several members of their executive board or committee leave,

which could lead to dissolution of the business (Brookins, 2016). Organizations not dealing with

conflict appropriately will see increased spending in recruiting, hiring and training new

individuals due to the increased turnover.

Relationship conflicts are typically associated with emotions and may lead to bullying

and violence in the workplace. Continuous conflict may stress and wear out employees’

personal resources, leading an employee to offer little resistance against workplace bullying, and

therefore becoming an easy target (Baillien et al., 2016). Conflict management that either

minimizes the outcome for the employee in conflict in favor of others (yielding), or maximizes

the outcome for the employee in conflict at the expense of others (forcing) will result in a

favorable environment for bullying (Baillien et al., 2016). Without appropriate mediation in the

workplace, intense situations may arise between employees, leading to violent altercations.

Violence and bullying may lead to legal problems for employees, as well as the organization

(Brookins, 2016).

Unresolved issues of conflict and tension can create emotional stress for employees,

politicize the workplace and divert attention from the organization’s mission (Society for Human

Resource Management, 2015). If conflicts are not addressed appropriately, conflicts may

escalate into larger issues. Organizations may have to deal with increased discrimination and

harassment complaints, and the organization’s reputation could be damaged beyond repair

(Society for Human Resource Management, 2015).

Conclusion

A variety of tools and conflict resolution strategies have been presented for Texas A&M

University – Commerce to consider. Based on the conflicts presented, we propose a

collaboration strategy be used as the best way to combat and resolve the two different conflicts

presented. Although collaboration may force what feels like a confrontation at first, it will

ultimately lead to better communication amongst the group, and nobody will be made to give

anything up. Ideally, in the end, all team members will gain mutual respect within the group and

feel more comfortable working together.

References

Adams, D. (2016). Positive and negative consequences of conflict in organizations. Houston

Chronicle. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/positive-negative-

consequences-conflict-organizations-10254.html

Baillien, E., Camps, J., Van den Broeck, A., Stouten, J., Godderis, L., Sercu, M., & De Witte, H.

(2016). An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind: conflict escalation into

workplace bullying and the role of distributive conflict behavior. Journal of Business

Ethics, 137(2), 415-429.

Brookins, M. (2016). The effects of conflict within an organization. Houston Chronicle.

Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/effects-conflict-within-organization-

164.html

De Dreu, C. W. (2008). The virtue and vice of workplace conflict: food for (pessimistic)

thought. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(1), 5-18.

Gilley, J. W. (2006). The Manager as Politician. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Klingel, S., & Maffie, M. (2011, August/October). Conflict Management Systems in Higher

Education: A Look at Mediation in Public Universities. Dispute Resolution Journal, 66

(3), 12-17.

Maes, J., Stansbury, A. & Schifo, R. (n.d.). Before All Else Fails, Press “Reset”. Dispute

Resolution Journal, 70 (1), 59-65.

Phillips, E., & Cheston, R. (1979, Summer). Conflict Resolution: What Works? California

Management Review, 21 (4), 76-83.

Posthuma, R., & Al-Riyami, S. (2012). Leading Teams of Higher Education Administrators:

Integrating Goal Setting, Team Role, and Team Life Cycle Theories. Higher Education

Studies, 2(3), 44-54.

President's Biography - Texas A&M University-Commerce. (n.d.). Retrieved December 10,

2016, from

http://www.tamuc.edu/aboutus/administrativeOffices/president/biography.aspx

Society for Human Resource Management. (2015). Managing workplace conflict. Retrieved

from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-

samples/toolkits/pages/managingworkplaceconflict.aspx

Stevens, R. E., Williamson, S., & Tiger, A. (2013). Conflict Resolution Strategies In An

Academic Setting. Feature Edition, 2013(4), 10-21.