Critical Thinking and Conflict Resolution
The importance of Strategic Thinking in the workplace is well documented and evidences of it helping an organization to grow and remain competitive and profitable are innumerable. The place where the strategic thinking can help most is in conflict resolution. Conflict between coworkers, between the management and employees and even between partners in a business are very common in our world. There are enormous social and economic costs associated with non resolution or ignoring of a conflict.
A very recent event of friction had developed in our company between two employees, A and B, in our company. Both the individuals were very senior in terms of experience and were consider experts in the respective fields. A carried 10 years experience in advertising and built successful marketing and advertising for many products for our company. B carried an extensive experience in logistics, warehousing and operation and was called in for his inputs to assist on the marketing plan for the new product under development. The conflict began when the two were at loggerheads on the topic of how to move forward on a new project. Employee A had proposed one action plan which was shot down by Employee B and this had hurt the ego of employee A. This resulted in tension to rise as both individuals tried to push their case in the marketing plan. The conflict was based on the different values each possessed.
The Strengths of both the parties was in the experience of the two employees. A proposed a more aggressive sales strategy with more investment in advertising and promotion. B proposed that the company should consider lesser spending on advertising and more on controlling cost and gaining competitive advantage through better management of operations.
A few alternatives are suggested in the strategic thinking process. They are of accommodating, collaborating, competition and avoiding. Accommodation would need either A or B to give up on a few of his demands so that the ideas of the other can be accommodated. This way, harmony can be maintained but the cost is of one person losing substantial influence over the subordinate, which perhaps neither wanted. The second method is of direct competition. It is a power oriented mode and this would have both the individuals implementing their own schemes to see who produces better results. This is decisive technique but has considerable cost associated, both financial and loss of human capital. Then there is avoiding, where they might want to push such decision for later date. This might give time for the conflict to cool down now, but might blow over into a bigger conflict later. Then finally, there is collaboration. It is a method aiming to bring the two warring parties together to talk it out between themselves and arrive at a mutual and creative solution. This is an ideal method and promises a healthier team building and a solution acceptable to all. This might however be a lengthy and time taking process and every conflict might not allow such luxury.
Collaboration, to me is the best way to handle conflict. Both A and B are experts in their fields. Instead of looking for bigger budgets for their respective domains, they should work together to build a plan that serves its actual purpose- be profitable to the company.
The process might take more time than expected. However, the time and efforts well spent here would translate into a better plan and thus a more profitable initiative for the company. The best way to get a collaborative team is to undergo team building exercises and realizing that all the elements and individuals are equally important in a business plan.
