Problem Identification
The case in question is a typical scenario, which regularly occurs in a corporate environment. As many other junior or middle managers, Joe is experiencing serious hardships in reconciling his personal and employment-related issues. Many studies showed that work-life balance has evolved from a chimerical job advantage into one of the fundamental employment conditions, especially in today’s turbulent economy (Baumeister & Vohs, 2004). While Joe psychologically understands that his family and educational priorities are more important than his current job commitments, company productivity is naturally more important for Jim, whose career progress is dependent on effectiveness of his department.
In addition, evidently Jim and Joe belong to dramatically different psychological types. It is obvious from the case description that for Joe family well-being, as well as his future career is more important than his current job position, although it is necessary to subsist himself and his family. Thus, he regards his position with the company as nothing, but a temporary solution to provide for the needs of his family. Psychologically, if he has an opportunity not to work there, he would definitely use this opportunity. If he regarded his job position as a launch pad for the future career in that company, he would have coordinated his educational curriculum with the manager, as well as he would have found an opportunity to agree with June on the household chore.
In contrast, Jim is viewing his position as a long-term career option. Otherwise, he would not have been insistent and exigent to Joe. The practice demonstrates that these two professional typologies rarely get along with each other, although some forms of effective cooperation between them are nevertheless available (Murphy, 2010).
The key problem, which engenders hidden and open conflicts in this environment, is that productivity and efficiency of the division strongly depends on Joe’s ability to work overtime hours. While working regular hours may suit the both parties to the conflict currently Jim cannot provide this option for Joe, although he should do this. At the same time, Joe is no longer capable of performing duties of the leader of customer desk overtime, because other important parts of his life will inevitably suffer. The practice shows that although temporary violations of the work-life balance are possible and even necessary to keep the employees disciplined and motivated, prolonged overworking is negative for both employees’ productivity and their professional gratification (Beumeister & Vohs, 2004).
Thus, analyzing seven principles of effective communication, it is important to develop the solution, which will be suitable for all stakeholders.
Solution Development
In order to develop the most effective solution for this scenario, which will be suitable for all, parties, seven principles of effective negotiation should be taken into consideration. In particular, the negotiators should prioritize the following elements:
Interests – the solution should not be unilateral and serve the interests of a one party only;
Alternatives – different possible solutions should be analyzed by the stakeholders;
Relationship – while interests and desires of the negotiators may be conflicting, the parties should attempt preserving good relationships to preserve future productiveness of their cooperation;
Options – the parties should be free to discuss any options to conflict resolution they consider necessary;
Legitimacy – the options offered for discussion should be fair and protect interests of the both parties or potential third-party stakeholders, who were not present at the meeting;
Communication – it is important ensuring that the parties have the possibility of freely expressing their ideas and thoughts relating to the subject matter of discussion
Commitment – once the negotiations are finished, the parties should act bona fide to accomplish the developed solution.
The practice shows that the development of mutually satisfactory solutions in employment disputes requires both parties to make respective concessions (Murphy, 2010). Yet, before the scope and nature of such concessions is defined, understanding which party is performing his obligations inadequately is important.
The case demonstrates that Joe is regularly working overtime. While occasional extra work is a normal practice in today’s dynamic economy as a form of employment loyalty and commitment, the practitioners contend that these cases should be exceptional (Murphy, 2010). In other words, it is reasonable concluding that in order to demonstrate that his loyalty to the company, sometimes Joe should work extra hours. However, it is obvious that in this case sixty-five hours workweeks have evolved into the expected standard of professional performance, but not as a method of resolving urgent job situations. Yet, Joe continued attending to his professional duties, and he did not remonstrate. Yet, it is important emphasizing that regularly performing over-time contractually non-agreed duties do not operate as a waiver of strict adherence to the conditions of employment. In general, it is inferable that Joe entirely complied with his job obligations, and the fact that he regularly worked overtime should not signify that he agreed to sixty-five hours job week.
In contrast, Jim did not perform his duty to find a competent professional to fill the position of a leader of the customer service department within reasonable time. While he had the option of asking Jim to perform such duties on a temporary basis, asking him to work indefinitely and failing to find someone to fill this position is a clear violation of the employment agreement.
Thus, the most fair and effective option in this case is to start looking for a suitable candidate for the customer service leader position. Because of his loyalty to the company, Joe should consent to work overtime for another week while Jim will be looking for a suitable professional. If he fails to find someone during this timeframe, then Jim should start performing these duties himself, until a suitable professional is found.
References
Baumeister, R. & Vohs, K. (2004). Handbook of self-regulation : research, theory, and applications. New York: Guilford Press.
Murphy, J. (2010). Inner excellence: achieve extraordinary business success through mental toughness. New York: McGraw-Hill.
