Using the Stages of Conflict
Following the increase in the destructive potential of conflicts in organizations in the world today, I would use the stages of conflict variously to detect and address issues in my organization. I would employ the five stages of conflict to handle the problems in my organization. First, I would be keen on the detection of conflicts during the latent stage where individuals in conflict are not yet aware of the existence of the conflict. In order to ensure the conflict does not exist during this stage, I would analyze the probability of the conflict developing. Second, I would use the perceived stage where the individuals involved are now aware of the conflict to find the cause of the conflict. Third, the felt stage would be important because I would use it to analyze the probable effects of the conflicts, which will result in the manifest stage where I would observe the conflict and its destructive potential. I would then use the aftermath stage to formulate resolutions of dealing with the conflict.
These stages of conflict will be essential for me because they will present me with an opportunity to evaluate the destructive potential of the conflicts by addressing them in all the stages. The stages will be an avenue to deduce possible solutions before reaching the aftermath stage (Jones & Fabian, 2006). Using these stages of conflict, I will be able to monitor the actions of people in my organizations and evaluate whether they could develop into potential conflicts in my organization.
I would address the challenges of cross-cultural, gender and diversity conflicts in various ways. I would formulate measures that address the challenges effectively. That is since these challenges exist mostly because of variations in the conceptions, perspectives, beliefs and ways of life, I would strive to build cooperation and teamwork in my organization. As such, I would minimize the possibility of conflicts. In order to do so, I would promote shared goals and visions in my organization. I would share significant information by keeping all individuals in my organization up-to-date with the current issues. I would advocate positive expectations about each of them. I would also empower all of them by crediting the colleagues with good performance publicly and encouraging all of them to achieve commendable results.
Lastly, I would bring their differences of opinions into the open to facilitate conflict resolution. Promoting teamwork and cooperation in my organization will be effective because it will bring all individuals together to work towards a common goal. The common goal will be the success of the organization. I will constantly remind individuals that the success of the organization will be the success of everyone because of the combined efforts of every person in the organization. I will also reiterate the destructive potential that diversity, gender and cross-cultural conflicts can have on the organization. That is; the conflicts would derail the progress and success of the organization and every individual as well. I will let individuals understand that developing conflicts against each other will only affect them as well.
As the emotions become controllable, the supervisors can find it easy to negotiate settlements. The education will also provide the supervisors with the capacity to conduct enforced resolution in their methods of resolving conflicts in the organization. That is, in some cases conflicts may not benefit from the de-escalation, compromise or negotiation. When the two fail to resolve the conflict, it might be prudent for the supervisors to step in and give their resolutions to both sides. The enforced resolution might inspire the involved sides in a conflict to consider compromise (Maynard-smith & PRICE, 2009). Therefore, I would educate the first-line supervisors on these styles and how they can implement them in my organization.
Negotiation is an important aspect in the resolution of conflicts. There are various types of negotiation including integrative and distributive negotiation. These two types of negation have their strengths and weaknesses in conflict resolution. Their strengths promote conflict resolution while their weaknesses undermine conflict resolution in an organization. First, it is important to understand the meaning of the two forms of negotiation. Distributive negotiation is a process that often entails one problem to be negotiated. The issue being negotiated normally involves a price and relates to the process of bargaining frequently. In this type of negotiation, a single party often benefits at the expense of another included party. As such, it creates a win-lose situation during negotiation. This form of negotiation has various strengths. First, it is advantageous when the resource of bargaining is limited. As such, it is flexible because it is essential in situations where there are limited resources of bargaining during the process of negotiation.
With the limited resources for taking, each of the negotiating parties conceives the other parties as adversaries, which reflects in the debate over allocating shares. Each of the parties strives to gain more from the resources. As such, the distributive negotiation allows for the reserved and defensive actions. The second strength of distributive negotiation is that it is the safest choice when the short-term dependability among the negotiators is necessary. That is; it offers a flexible approach and operation when there are only a single negotiation deal and one will not require any assistance from the negotiators in the future. The first weakness of distributive negotiation is that it creates a win-lose situation where certain parties become advantageous as the others lose out. As such, it is somewhat unfair to the losing party. Another weakness of distributive negotiation is that it is competitive is competitive in nature and encompasses each involved party to view the other as a competitor. As such, it fuels the conflicts further.
On the other hand, integrative negotiation involves joint initiatives that prove beneficial to all the involved negotiating parties. This form of negotiation aims at creating cooperation by increasing the payoff of then involved parties. Each of the involved parties perceives the other as collaborators because this form of negotiation focuses on the joint efforts and common interests of the parties involved. The first strength of an integrative strategy is that it is collaborative in nature. Therefore, its win-win situation for the involved parties enables them to negotiate on friendly grounds and end up acting as allies to each other (Schelling, 2010). Second, integrative negotiation acts as a tool of conflict management because it focuses on the mutual interests of the involved parties, hence creating constructive solutions for the benefit of all. On the other hand, integrative negotiation has its weaknesses. First, it is not flexible in situations of limited resources. As such, satisfying both parties involved in the conflict can be challenging. Therefore, integrative negotiation only applies to specific conflicts. Second, integrative negotiation is somewhat long-term. As such, it might be challenging to employ it in situations where the intended resolution of the conflict is short-term.
Mediation and facilitation are important aspects of conflict resolution. In order to implement effective strategies of conflict management in my organization, I will build the mediation and facilitation skills through various ways. I will promote an understanding of mediation and facilitation skills in my organization. I will outline the various ways through which one can become an effective mediator. First, one should possess the ability to gain cooperation, acceptance and trust of the conflicting parties. One should also have clear thinking in the identification of the real issues of the conflicting parties and providing practical solutions to the problems (Tajfel & Turner, 2011). In order to be an effective mediator by being knowledgeable about the various organizational attitudes, strategies and structures of the conflicting parties. The individuals should also be knowledgeable about the relevant agreements and laws of the conflicting parties. Another way of becoming an effective mediator would be through becoming diplomatic and tactful with the required persuasion powers and strong character that can enable one to nudge participants progressively towards a consensus.
I would also build mediation styles by outlining the various measures of running a mediation process. The process would include an introduction and clear establishment of credibility, steering of the negotiation process and moving towards an agreement. I would also build the facilitation skills by reminding individuals that for facilitation to be effective there must be an emphasis on both the acquisition and use of new abilities, attitudes, skills and knowledge. I would also elaborate the facilitator roles and the key facilitator skills employed in facilitation. I would emphasize the role of the group leader such as modeling the appropriate communication skills. Lastly, I would ensure that there is effective leadership in my organization to facilitate the mediation and facilitation skills throughout the organization. In order to do so, I will advocate a team-based organization in my organization.
References
Jones, M., & Fabian, A. C. (2006). Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maynard-smith, J., & PRICE, G. R. (2009). The Logic of Animal Conflict. Nature. doi:10.1038/246015a0
Schelling, T. (2010). Strategy of Conflict.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2011). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.
