Conflict, in its various forms
can hold within it different definitions and meanings. For me, the essence of conflict can be
defined the following way. “Conflict is an expressed struggle between at least two
interdependent parties who perceive incompatible goals, scarce resources, and
interference from others in achieving their goals” (Wilmot & Hocker, 2007, pp. 8-9).
I find that I deal with conflict
depending on the role in which I hold at any given situation. As a Human Resources Manager, I see conflict
as the interplay of individuals and their personal and professional goals and
objectives. The conflict of two line
employees often takes the form of each one looking at their own circumstances
and how others affect them. For the
leader, his or her organizational role and or objectives often come into
conflict with others within the organization.
Often the Human Resources professional is sought as the mediator and, in
order to be successful, must approach conflict from a healthy resolution
perspective.
As a father and spouse, I see
myself jumping from being a participant to mediator depending on the
situation. The major difference I see is
in the fact that more emotion is incorporated into my interaction in this
environment regardless of which role that I play. The disadvantage that follows is that
conflict is not viewed as a process of constructive development, but a barrier
in which to navigate. These are
certainly different roles and circumstances, but in each an opportunity to see
the value and necessity of conflict and an ideal in which to strive.
As mentioned above, in my
organizational role, conflict is a daily occurrence and the opportunity to
mediate such conflict may yield benefit within the organization in which I
serve.
Having to admit that I really
never received formal mediation training, the process of learning through
mistakes has dominated the methods I now use.
There are certainly several basic approaches in which I do subscribe and find
helpful.
First, I do believe that
conflict is considered by most as a condition in which not to remain. I think all individuals do see conflict as uncomfortable
and therefore will seek a means in which to remove themselves. To me, the smart mediator knows this and
positions himself/herself as the solution.
In most situations, I think that
there exists a meeting place in which to operate. Although many pride themselves on a win/loose
mindset, the reality is that little in life really is that distinguishable. As humans I believe that we actually
negotiate through life and that the ability to give and take is a learned
process. Therefore, it is only natural
for someone to gain what is important to them while giving up other
things. Such a win or loose scenario really turns into a negotiation. The challenge to me has been keeping the
parties talking. In my past experience
as long as the parties are communicating openly and consistently a middle point
or at least the priorities of each parties are presented and from there meeting
points can be identified.
In addition, the mediator must
possess some very basic, but mandatory characteristics in order to assume this
role. First is complete impartiality.
This must be maintained at all times and consistently in order to be of
value to the parties. There has to exist
some form of perceived authority or credibility as well for a mediator to be
considered of value. This can be a form
of specific authority, unique knowledge, or experience wherein the parties have
a degree of respect for the mediator. I
find that many well meaning mediators attempt to create reconciliation while
either party will not recognize the mediator’s authority. As it relates to the human resources field
this can be a challenge since often times employees see HR as an instrument of
the organization against the employee.
As I think of where my own
approaches are at a deficit, would be in the use of a defined process in which
to approach conflict. It seems to me
that without a defined process, mediation appears to be choppy and unprepared. This quickly diminishes the credibility of the
mediator in achieving acceptable outcomes for the parties. Such a process or approach also shows defined
structure for which the parties are expected to interact and perform. This I see as a powerful tool in which to set
the expectations and later tone of the discussion to follow. There are no doubt various approaches in
which to take, but the pathway in which to define the method or approach that
matches my communication style and interpersonal skills is necessary for me to
adopt as natural and complimentary. In
addition, methods that are available should also complement the organization
and how it operates. Such skills within
the organization that I find to be significant include consensus decision making, neutral facilitation of
meetings, and peer mediation. One opportunity is by linking the methods of
the “Just in Time” philosophy to dispute resolution. In this method, especially in the
manufacturing environment in which I work, it becomes possible to improve
productivity and quality by making conflict an opportunity for
positive growth and change (Finkel, 1991).
Also, I find that for the untrained mediator a simple method in which to
approach conflict that can be easily communicated and shared with others is of
great value. Managing these disputes can
be reduced to a four-step process. The
first step is to create an environment for settling and controlling
disagreements by controlling the urge to feel as if someone has to win or loose thus creating a cooperative atmosphere. The second step includes facilitating a
positive mood so that the parties will want to find a solution and find common
goals.
The third step is to reduce disagreements to their simplest form by
discussing the issue to its most basic core and thus eliminating the emotions
affiliated with the conflict.
The final step in the process is to manage such conflict so long-term
solutions are identified and implemented (Denton, 1989).
Regardless of the approaches I have to learn, my hopes is to become more
aware of the cycle of conflict and more proven methods in which to operate.
References
Cahn, D.D. & Abigail,
R.A., (2007). Managing
Conflict Through Communication, Boston, MA:
Pearson
Education.
Denton, D. Keith (1989). Four Steps to Resolving
Conflicts. Quality
Progress, 22(4), 29.
Retrieved December 26,
2007, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document
ID: 1288333).
Finkel, Lee M. (1991). 'Just-In-Time' Principles
Can Strengthen Dispute
Resolution. Employment Relations Today, 18(2), 167.
Retrieved December 26, 2007,
from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document
ID: 392577).
Wilmot, W.W. & Hocker, J.L., (2007). Interpersonal Conflict, New York, NY: McGraw Hill.