[University]
Introduction
The case of Julie and Susan occurs often in a work environment where a subordinate relationship and job description are not clearly defined. Misunderstanding between co-workers most often escalate into emotional confrontation inside and sometimes outside of the work premises. Behavioral issues are always the main factor why conflict between people happens and most workplace conflict occurs due to external influences. Individuals with personal problems are at higher risk of being easily irritated and they tend to show intolerant and aggressive behavior. On the other hand, the case also reflects the different attitudes of people towards work. Some people enjoy work that are mentally and physically challenging while others see work as physically, emotionally and mentally exhausting activity. Apparently, there are different factors that motivate individuals to work and these motivations reflect how individuals perform at work. People may work for survival, career advancement and for other personal motivations. As far as the management is concerned, the attitude of employees towards work is of utmost importance. As much as possible, management take serious efforts to address human relations concerns as labor disputes are cumbersome and can adversely affect the organization’s operation. However, as much as management and labor would like to avoid disputes, conflict occurs when stakeholder demands are not met. A lot of studies have shown that a demotivated work force is a drain on an organization’s resources and productivity, which the management would like to avoid. Dr. Griffith, the person that represents management in this case study, would have to approach the problem from a management perspective. In resolving workplace conflicts, a management’s primary goal is to find a resolution wherein workers will find their work more satisfying and will address the goal of the organization. Dr. Griffith would have to keep the delicate balance between labor and management relationship as he try to settle the conflict between Julie and Susan.
Conflict of Interests between Individuals and the Organization
The conflict between Susan and Julie needs serious consideration as far as conflicting interests are involved. For Julie, she is confident that her abilities are adequate to address most of the task at hand. However, here comes Susan who has a different lifestyle and professional activities. Unlike other professors who spend most of their time in the office, Susan’s hectic schedule makes her unavailable and difficult to reach. Accordingly, Julie can perform the task assigned to her by Susan but she needs more time and better feedback from her. Apparently, nothing can be done for Susan’s hectic schedule as it appears that she is a career driven woman. On the other hand, Julie could not be forced to go beyond her limits as it seems that she has already done everything she could. It would be unreasonable for Susan do demand exemplary work from Julie if she could not be reached for collaboration. On the other hand, it would be unfair for Susan to be forced to spend more time in the office so that Julie can perform her work properly. While Susan and Julie are having professional issues, work productivity is adversely affected that creates a ripple effect to the efficiency of the organization as a whole. Stakeholders such as the school administration, other faculty members, staffs as well as the students could be directly affected with the ongoing conflict. Apparently, the scenario creates a conflict of interests wherein both parties are already stretched to their limits that no one is willing to concede. It is, therefore, necessary for management to intervene and resolve the conflict the soonest time possible.
Clarifying Job Description and Expectations
In order to resolve work related conflicts, it is necessary that work descriptions and obligations must be clearly defined. Julie’s work in the case study is quite broad. Apparently, boundaries of her role as support and secretary were not clearly defined. In most educational institutions, occupations are unbounded wherein people can do whatever they please as long as it is for the good of the organization. The problem with unbounded work though is that expectations might exceed the capability of the worker, which results to conflicts and frustrations. Similarly, in this case study, Susan expected too much from Julie despite her shortcomings. However, it could have been avoided if a rigid job description of what Julie’s occupational responsibilities would be has been pre-defined. Without setting work boundaries and expectations, a stressful and exploitative work environment is most likely to occur. According to studies, of the main reasons why most employees are getting disappointed and leave their job is because they are dreaming of ideal jobs yet their expectations are not met. As based on the case study, Susan’s expectations of having a smooth working environment were not met because Julie could not cope with the work load, which is one of the major reasons of their conflict. Julie, on the other hand, believe that her services are already beyond what is expected of her as most faculty members are agreeable with her performance. Without a clear job description, individuals could get easily exploited. As a result, they get demotivated and lose interest in their careers. Work pressures may results to a significant decrease in productivity because of burn-out. Most people would like to choose their own career path and take jobs in line with their interest and passion. However, some end up doing jobs that are far from what they wanted to do. There are also instances wherein people still find themselves frustrated and dissatisfied with their work even though they are working their ideal jobs due to work pressures that are beyond their capabilities. Julie, for example, has been working in her own field and educational background. We can assume that she’s satisfied and contented yet she feels that she is being exploited by Susan because she sees her demands as excessive.
Attrition Issues
Work conflicts such as in the case study of Julia and Susan often results to attrition of one or both employees. Employees leaving an organization are one of the most pressing concerns of management. Acquiring talents and maintaining them is an important aspect since recruitment and training entails costs for the organization. Time, effort and money are the cost businesses pay for employees leaving their jobs. According to estimates, it takes an equivalent of six to nine months of salary of the replaced employee to hire a new one; and experts believe that this estimated cost is an understatement . The cost of losing an employee, according to experts, is far more expensive than what is obvious. Advertising, screening, interviewing and hiring are just some of the activities that could place a heavy financial burden to an organization. Also, the newly hired employee undergoes training that management should also consider. Statistics have shown that at an average, the United States spends $44 billion annually for training of new hires. The additional cost of attrition that is often overlooked is the decreased productivity, which is one of the biggest contributors to the hidden cost of employee turn-over. Apparently, a new employee could not replace the productivity level of an older one. Most often, it takes time for a new employee to reach the productivity level of the older employee that he replaced.
Conclusion and Recommendation
The case of Julie and Susan is a typical example of workplace conflict that usually happens when conflict of interests occurs. In cases wherein conflicts occur because of work related issues, an organizational overhaul and redesign might be necessary. Requiring faculty members to be always available would be unreasonable and impractical. On the other hand, pushing support groups beyond their limitation might cause burn-out and eventually led to attrition. In order to keep up with the changing trends and schedules of faculty members, support groups where Julie belongs must also adapt to these changes. For efficiency, additional staffing might be necessary. On the other hand, faculty members should also commit themselves to their work related tasks. Dr. Griffith could require all faculty members to spend at least an hour of their time within the day at the faculty office in case there are concerns that need their attention. In order to be efficient, the structure of an organization has to reach a certain level of effectiveness or the ability to accomplish a purpose for an intended or anticipated result. Depending on the target or goal, there are times that management may deem it necessary to redesign the organizational structure to increase its productivity. In order to effectively manage change, executives should accept the fact that changes, whether it is revolutionary or evolutionary, can be considered as constant or recurring. An organization could not stay stagnant or unchanged at some degree for a period of time. Just like in the case of Julie and Susan, it is apparent that support groups should be able to address and adapt to the personal and professional members of its faculty and not only rely to the conventional types of faculty member. However, the largest challenge that management can encounter is on how to make the organization adapt to changes.
References
Bodnarchuk, M. (n.d.). The Role of Job Descriptions and Competencies in an International Organization. Retrieved October 2014, from http://www.theseus.fi/: http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/44051/Bodnarchuk_Marianna.pdf?sequence=1
Branham, L. (2005, June). THE 7 HIDDEN REASONS EMPLOYEES LEAVE. Retrieved October 2014, from ww.12secondstoprojectmanagementgreatness.com: http://www.12secondstoprojectmanagementgreatness.com/member/resources/summaries/Personnel_HR/7_Hidden_Reasons_Employees_Leave.pdf
Bretz, R., Thompsett, R. (1991, November). Comparing Traditional and Integrative Learning Methods in Organizational Training Programs. Retrieved October 2014, from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1359&context=cahrswp
Goth, G. (2013, August 9). Effectiveness vs. Efficiency – What’s the Difference? Retrieved November 2013, from http://www.insightsquared.com/: http://www.insightsquared.com/2013/08/effectiveness-vs-efficiency-whats-the-difference/
Greiner, L. (1972). Evolution and Revolution as Organizations Grow . Retrieved November 2013, from http://www.ils.unc.edu/: http://www.ils.unc.edu/daniel/131/cco4/Greiner.pdf
Merhar, C. (2013). Employee Retention - The Real Cost of Losing an Employee. Retrieved October 2014, from http://www.zanebenefits.com/: http://www.zanebenefits.com/blog/bid/312123/Employee-Retention-The-Real-Cost-of-Losing-an-Employee
Quora. (2013, March 27). Why Do So Many People Hate Their Jobs? Retrieved July 2014, from http://www.forbes.com/: http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2013/03/27/why-do-so-many-people-hate-their-jobs/
Tracey, D. (2014, January). Disengaged employees cost UK economy billions. Retrieved July 2014, from http://staffmotivationmatters.co.uk/: http://staffmotivationmatters.co.uk/disengaged-employees-cost-uk-economy-billions/
Trent. (2010, February 16). Why Work? Retrieved July 2014, from http://www.thesimpledollar.com/: http://www.thesimpledollar.com/why-work/
