Issues in Management: Critical Thinking Workplace Dispute Analysis
Issues in Management: Critical Thinking Workplace Dispute Analysis
Introduction
Cogent, critical thinking in role-playing skills assist managers in maintaining salubrious workplace conditions. This exercise assesses an application to the problem of Lauren’s case study in figuring out what happened, and remedy a dispute arising in the office. The framework for arriving at a decision rests upon four key steps, which include the following: (a) identify, (b) gather/analyze, (c) consider options, and (d) develop well-reasoned ideas. Besides the buzzword of ‘sustainability,’ perhaps the most often discussed business topics revolve around issues of ethics and communications – which often arise in the context of workplace disputes.
The situation for analysis herein is as follows. The newly hired engineer, Lauren, locates at the center and difficult crossroads of the dilemma. Although the dispute is not over wages, Mules (2013) characterizes workplace disputes as “industrial dispute(s),” in reference to disagreements “between employers and employees,” which may include working conditions (p. 2). In this case, Lauren has been informed by the general manager to push the manufactured product through, despite the factor of its falling just a hairline short of quality control. Understandably demonstrating concern over the situation, given that Lauren will need to ‘sign-off’ and thus risk her professional-ethical position, her immediate supervisor agrees with going ahead and approving the production rollout. While it is true that actual working conditions may not stretch the product’s limitations in the extreme, Lauren is responsible for adhering to company policy in terms of safety standards. Since it is a large contract associated with the project’s manufactured item, Lauren (by refusing to agree to let the order pass) the order could be lost, and Lauren might very well lose her job by refusing to cooperate with the advice of her employers. Thus, the dilemma is clear. Either risk strained relationships between her employer, and possibly lose the contract, or stick to her firm ethics in not allowing the production to continue due to failing to meet quality-control standards. The thesis is the analysis explores probable conflicts and considerations in a workplace dispute.
Clearly so far, it is understood that Lauren has a responsibility she does not wish to breach, especially given the fact she just recently landed this important job with a very good company. The main issue identifies the problem as a two-fold dilemma of either personally offending her management/employers, or risking losing the huge order – as well as something else which has not been mentioned: incurring a lawsuit due to a safety issue, or accident later on if the decision is made to sweep the failed quality-control outcome under the rug. Escalating stress on the job is something that makes most people cringe. Having to spend so much time at the workplace, to add a greater level of discomfort in an already high-pressure environment is to be avoided. Yet, in the complex global economy of today’s business world, conflicts and disputes unfortunately arise all too often. The key three stakeholders include Lauren (employee), her managers (general manager and supervisory boss), and the company. Indirectly, the customer contract represents an important stakeholder as well.
The bottom line is that Lauren will, first of all, need to think quickly. If she goes along with the production rollout, she will not only risk responsibility for not adhering to company policy safety standards, but may incur greater legal risk in time should the product endanger lives of the end-users. Therefore, Lauren has to consider and analyze how to approach the problem from a legal standpoint too. Since the manufactured product is part of a large order, due to fast growth of the clients, its impact of something going terribly wrong could turn into a huge mess. Gathering written material on company policy, is a foundational way to investigate the heart of the issue. It may or may not be a good idea to consult with the corporate attorney. But at this stage of consideration, and initial analysis, all viewpoints must be perused and explored as possible solutions.
Analysis of Info & Analysis of Alternate Viewpoints
As aforementioned, but was not originally forecasted in the case study presentation, legal constraints and fallout can potentially be a huge problem. Before moving forward to a well-reasoned idea for a solution, it must be remembered that two major stakeholders are the company and the client (along with end-users of the manufactured product). One analytical thought not yet considered, is for Lauren to approach the chief engineer and inquire about the sort of quality-control standard which has specifically not been met. In other words, it may be wise to use this as a starting point because if the quality failure only involves – let us say, for example – a paint color not quite being exact, or something of a slight cosmetic nature, Lauren may not suffer any adverse consequences if she decides to authorize and sign-off on quality control. Of course, this idea is conjecture.
Closely keeping the analysis purely based upon the given situation, and information, Lauren realize and accept the fact that her managing employer interpreted the failed quality-control outcome as insignificant enough that neither general manager, nor her immediate boss, felt that strict adherence to standards was not worth jeopardizing loss of the contract altogether. Money and capital then is squarely an issue that drives the decision of both her managers. Yet the troubling reality is that Lauren as an engineer, understands the seriousness of less-than-acceptable quality control could mean, in terms of the outcome for end-users. Also, Lauren is a grown woman and a professional adult. She did not get through engineering school acting like a coward, or a wimp. In other words, certainly in her university training, ethics and environmental safety standards were covered.
While Lauren considers sticking to her principles, and not allow the quality control to proceed with the manufacturing process, she most likely has a strong enough character to endure a bit of strain in her interpersonal workplace relationships. A large part of the analysis is communication. Lauren must consult with the general manager, and perhaps even the firm’s attorney to emphasize her trepidation. However, all have been consulted initially. But if the general manager is open to consideration of Lauren’s concerns he may re-evaluate his previous advice.
An analysis of alternative viewpoints consist of Lauren’s choice, or decision, to consult third-party industrial entities. These may include a phone consultation with a respected leader in the industry, like an association, or an outside attorney. If the general manager changes his mind, and allows the manufactured items the appropriate amount of time to pass quality-control inspections, Lauren will have at least one manager who agrees with her assessment. Employers’ perspectives will almost always embrace the concern, as Mules (2013) indicates, of “some disruption to the production process as one side or the other might take action to highlight the issue” (p. 2). Another possible viewpoint to approach the situation is for Lauren to consider some sort of mediation channel.
Although it has not clearly been defined in detail in the case study, the company Lauren works for probably has a mediation division or stakeholder attached to the organization. It is most likely typical for industrial firms to have other mediation stakeholders to help when similar situations, or wage disputes, arise. All possible actions could reflect styles of Utilitarianism, Rights Approach, Justice Approach, Common Good Approach, or the Virtue Approach. Obviously, some of these stances of evaluation overlap. If Lauren’s general manager takes the re-consideration approach and agrees the production must pass inspection, this shows a Utilitarian approach thinking about who might be affected, and cause the least harm (Velasquez et al. 2015). According to the same source, the Rights Approach means that stakeholders would tell the truth, and respect the aspect of others not becoming injured by passing the production through. The Justice Approach is unlikely for the firm, since it would prompt stakeholders to not show favoritism towards its own revenue growth. Fat chance of that happening. The Common Good Approach would involve Lauren’s consulting with a top industry association, or outside attorney, or even a government authority. This is because it appeals to “members of the same community, reflecting on broad questions” concerning the type of society the organization wishes to be part of (Velasquez et al. 2015). The Virtue Approach would match if the general manager feels guilty, and chose to be the kind of person who wants to promote self-monitoring in moral decision-making.
Conclusions, Proposed Decisions, & Summarized Personal Commentary
We entertained several different scenarios, and ethical approaches to the dilemma. It was learned that Lauren’s major problem was offending her managers, and risking a strained relationship as well as possible loss of client contract. If Lauren chose to go along with her managers’ advice, in the instance of the quality-control fail to merely represent a minor cosmetic factor, she may solve the problem by agreeing with them. However, it was also discussed that the impact of a wrong decision could damage health, safety, and lives. The main thesis herein was to explore an analysis and possible considerations in a workplace dispute. Therefore, mediation was considered. This is a more realistic scenario in today’s global marketplace economy. Bennett (2013) stated “a growing interest in the field of employee relations in the use of mediation in seeking to resolve disputes in the workplace” is a model when stakeholder parties are unwilling to change their positions (p. 189). If you really think about it, mediation is a model we all have sometimes used in our personal lives. A child steals a candy bar, then lies about it. A mediating parent or relative is called in.
At the end of the day industrial issues weigh heavily, in terms of serious outcomes. The best possible option is for Lauren to engage a mediator, if the stakeholders have their heels dug in and refuse to change. First, she should do her homework and decide if the quality-control failure is cosmetic. In this way, all parties may embrace several levels of ethical principles and approaches. Everybody is happy, the company keeps the contract, and earns its anticipated revenue. Federal arbitration is another matter entirely, and we do not hope for the situation to escalate to that.
References
Bennett, T. (2013). Workplace mediation and the empowerment of disputants: rhetoric or reality? Industrial Relations Journal, 44(2), 189-209. doi:10.1111/irj.12012
Castro, J. J. (2014). EMPLOYMENT ARBITRATION REFORM: PRESERVING THE RIGHT TO CLASS PROCEEDINGS IN WORKPLACE DISPUTES. University Of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 48(1), 241-273.
Mules, R. (2013). Workplace Disputes: The Qantas Disputes and the Toll/Coles Dispute. Busidate, 21(4), 2.
Velasquez, M., Andre, C., Shanks, T., S.J., and Meyer, M.J. (2015). Thinking ethically. Markkula Center for Applied Ethics – Santa Clara University. Retrieved from https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/thinking-ethically/
