CONFLICT IN
ORANISATION
1.0
INTRODUCATION
Interest
in the study of conflict in organisation has continued to grow inspite of early
dismissals of its governing hand in organisations. Early perceptions of
conflict as the result of error in planning deliberate sabotage and system unavailability
have largely changed to an appreciation of its necessary presence, as well as
the adoption of pragmatic principles in its management.
A common
view has been that the presence of conflict may be inexplicable. This is borne out
of the very subtle build-up of the elements that mature to full-scale conflict
and the lack of vigilance in tracking their early indicators.
Conflict
conditions then appear to take organisations unawares and lead to a stampede of
ideas, all aimed at bringing conditions back to normal, with the ultimate goal
of organisational stability.
There is
agreement among scholars that conflict in organisations is inevitable. While
there is no position among scholars that organisations should deliberately stir
up conflict in the organisation, the point is that conflict and plans, as well
as strengthen the necessary interaction process for the ultimate good of the
organisation and its staff.
2.0 THE NATURE OF CONFLICT IN ORGANISATIONS
Conflict
is often the result of poor, ineffective communication, a breakdown in normal
communication, social-cultural factors, environmental factors, personality
factors, among several others. It could also be influenced by economic or
political consideration which is an
expressed struggle between at least two interdependent parties who perceive
incompatible goals scarce rewards, and interference from the other party in
achieving their goals.
Conflict
is only possible among those who interact, have interacted or will interact. It
can be safely ruled out or said to be quite unusual among parties that have
never interacted nor have no plans to interact. Organisations experience
conflict at various levels because there are stated relationships and common
objectives, there are stated means and there is a select group of people,
management and staff that have to interact within defined structures.
3.0 CAUSES OF CONFLICT IN ORGANISATION
Five
conditions are among those identified that leads to conflict. They are as
follows:
a.
Incompatible
Goals
This
happens when two or more parties involved in coordinating activities do not
agree on expected results or goals of such activities. A manager and foreman
may have different goals or ideas about the effect of introducing automation in
the company factory. While one would see automation as easing the production
process, they may see it as the first step in reducing staff strength.
b.
Unrealistic
Expectations
Unrealistic
expectations are usually the features of many organisational yearly
projections. These projections introduce fear, tension and an uneasy work
climate.
c.
Differing
Rates of Relational Growth
This
is a prominent feature of international and group dynamics. Parties or partners
view relationships as being of different level of growth and this affects their
sense of judgment of otherwise normal occurrences. Imagine that two colleagues,
Mr. Jones and Mallam Abdullahi, are both Administrative Officers in the
organisation. Mr. Jones is informed through a memo, that he is no longer required
to oversee the cross-checking of invoices but to only ensure that they are
assembled. Mr. Jones could view this development as a question on his
competence to supervise the cross-checking of invoices. The premise of both
thinking is that it is a much easier task to assemble invoices. It can be
assumed here that Mr. Jones who would not want to feel inferior to his
colleague. This is a veritable source of conflict interaction. Similarly,
transfer of responsibility from one unit in an organisation to another unit may
be perceived as gain and loss by competing units. This could precipitate
conflict interaction.
d.
Inaccurate
Perceptions and Attributions
Conflict
is shaped by the parties perceptions of the situation rather than what the
situation may actually be. Usual organisational stereotypes of who is likely to
be a good employee or a bad one are informed by perceptions relating to self
confidence, charisma, carriage, mode of dressing, communication skill ad very
importantly, testimonials, usually verbal. The well dressed, loud-talking,
charismatic young manager may not be as productive as the quiet, reflective,
even sober one. No positive correlation exists, to our knowledge, between level
of intelligence or intellectual ability and competence.
e.
Cultural
Differences
This
is another condition that easily leads to conflict. Behaviour and attitude are
usually a function of cultural orientation, so are bases and prejudices, which
are learnt informally in the process of development. Plurality of cultural
orientation in an organisation would definitely allow for some conflict
interaction. In some organisations, cross-cultural prejudices are so strong
that they create multiple interest groups and ultimately hinder the attainment
of set goals.
f.
Management
Styles
Over
time, the advantages and disadvantages of general management have been
highlighted by various scholars. It is clear that management can set the agenda
for the structure and function of an organisation and invariably determine the
direction of interaction. Conflict could come in as a deliberate or inadvertent
result of management style.
g.
Overload
Huge
volume of work at different levels of an organisational structure could lead to
conflict interaction. The normal frustration expressed as a result of the
pressure of much work is a sure sign of the imminence of conflict. Complaints,
harshness, short temper, rudeness etc are features of overload. It should be
noted that information overload could precipitate the overload attitude and
turn material transaction into a problem requiring attention, especially at
higher levels in an organisation.
h.
Communication
Breakdown
Basic
problems in interpersonal communication could be played up and lead to
conflict. The blocking of information, distortion, alteration of details,
omission of information or addition of details are ready causes of conflict.
i.
Organisational
Politics
The
treatment of politics in an organisation is often ambivalent, owing to the
conformed virtues of its existence. Behaviours which fall outside those which
are either required or desired by the organisation or are forbidden by the
organisation and which are designed to promote or protect the self interest of
individuals or subunits, have as their intent the attaining of some kind of
competitive advantage.
In
its classical cases, politics in organisations could be exercised smoothly with
little suspicion or overt negativism to provoke a problem. When there are
indications of its existence, however, accusations of distrust or by passing
become definite pointers to conflict.
4.0 TYPES OF CONFLICT
Conflict
manifests in different ways and at different levels of the organisational
structure. Its manifestation could also be restricted to the immediate
environment or spread to other segments of the organisation. We can categorise
its manifestation under the two broad groups of manifest conflict and latent
conflict.
a.
Manifest
Conflict
This
is characterised by clear and overt indicators and expressions of grievances,
ultimately leading to full-blown conflict interaction such overt indicators
would include verbal or written expressions of grievances, open threats of
industrial action etc.
b.
Latent
Conflict
Latent
conflict captures the under-the-current and subtle evidences of conflict
interaction. These do not and may never, become expressed openly or formally
and could be tapped only through the grapevine or some informal networks of
communication. The major reason for latent conflict is the absence of power to
openly express grievances, fear of the consequences of open expression or a
weak group cohesion and plan of action. The result of latent conflict could be
as dangerous as that for manifest conflict, for example, a poor work attitude
that could affect productivity, or create a heightened rumour mill that
distracts from organisational goals, etc.
We
shall attempt now to describe some types (and levels) of conflict interaction
in organisations, knowing that conflicts are really dynamic in structure and
function.
c.
Intra-Personal
Conflict
This
deals with crises emanating from inside the human personality. These matters
are concerned with how the individual takes in, processes, and produces
communications. It should be clear here that intra-personal conflict could be a
big and dangerous problem where those affected do not acknowledge the existence
of these problems. Since intra-personal communication is the first level of
communication and governs the other levels, any form of imbalance, especially
latent imbalance, could be particularly problematic. When an individual losses
control of his intra-personal processes, there is a sure danger of conflict
interaction. Some symptoms of this (certainly not all the time) include
aggression, shouting, avoidance, excessive thinking, short temper, poor mode of
dressing, insubordination and even substance abuse. These are all likely to be
predictive of conflict within the organisation.
d.
Inter-personal
Conflict
Organisations
are made up of several individuals, with various background training, frames of
reference, ethnic and religious affiliation, gender and above all, their unique
idiosyncrasies. The fact that members of this largely interrogeneous group have
to work together in pursuit of similar organisational goals makes conflict
inevitable. Friction arises from contact and the most frequent contact in any
organisation is interpersonal.
This
would include non face-to-face contact such as telephone conversations, memos,
letters, etc.
e.
Intra-unit/Section
/ Departmental Conflict
This
is conflict interaction that involves members of a unit, section or department
in an organisation and that is restricted to those designated places. This may
arise as a result of workload problems, incentive spread, lack of trust among
member of the group, insubordination or high handedness, differences in
socio-cultural orientation etc. It could occur among unit/section/department
members and between members and supervisors or heads of unit.
f.
Inter-Unit
/ Section / Departmental Conflict
This
conflict interaction that involves groups that work together within
organisations. In this case, one group (or unit, section or department) has a
problem relating or work with another group.
These
problems could be the result of disagreement or misunderstanding in the work
process and is often a betrayal of the inter-relationship and interdependence
that exists in groups within the organisation. In some cases, the problem
spirals from personality problems between heads of the affected groups.
The
attendant sympathetic alignment of unit staff with their heads is often called
solidarity. In rare cases, the conflict could occur between units with unequal
power or influence or even between units and management.
g.
Industrial
and Labour Conflict
This
is a very common feature of organisational function. It is also the best
example in the description of manifest conflict. It is caused by several
factors, including work conditions, failed promises, threat to job security,
breakdown in collective bargaining, measures and policies perceived as
unfavourable or other unexpected events. It is severe conflict because it could
paralyse activities in an organisation. Some of its unique features include the
fact that it almost always formally begins after a build-up of warning signals
or indicators, it is championed by an organized interest group and it is almost
always formally resolved.
h.
Inter
Organisational Conflict
This
refers to the conflict interaction that an organisation may have with another
organisation, several factors could cause this, and they include the
competition that arises from producing and marketing competing brands in the
same product category, failed collaboration or the breakdown of a working
agreement adversarial advertising strategies, etc.
i.
Community-Related
Conflict
This
is a conflict interaction between an organisation and its host community. It
could involve a section of the community interest groups in the community
(youths, women, fishermen, cattle rearers, the sick, etc) or the entire
community. Factors abound that precipitate this type of conflict interaction.
They include the unmet expectations of the community on job placement for
members of the community, environmental problems created in the community as a
result of the organisation’s activities. These could include noise, emission of
effluents and dangerous gases (gas flaring) degradation of the ecological
system, etc. Conflict could also arise as a result of the host community’s
perception of marginalisation and neglect by the organisation, and
organisation’s insensitivity to corporate social responsibility or a violation
of socio-cultural values.
In
Nigeria,
oil producing companies and big manufacturing companies including Nigeria
National Petroleum Corporation, have had to contend with community-related
conflicts of dangerous dimensions.
5.0 INDICATORS OF CONFLICT
There is
a general agreement that conflict is usually the result of a long process of
agitation, disharmony, insensitivity to demands and neglect of warning signals
that are either manifest or latent. An organisation that has put machinery in
place to monitor disaffection and displeasure of all levels is likely to
quickly locate possible predisposing factors to conflict and nip them in the
bud. Every organisation has a unique presence of conflict indicators and thus
should devise ways of noting these threatening signals. The indicators are
discussed as follows:
a.
Road
Blocks to Communication
The
road blocks to communication is a listing of conflict-inducing expressions such
as: you must, you have to, you had better or else…, you are lazy, you are a
truant, you are just trying to get attention, why should you do that? You are
wrong, etc.
b.
Organisational
Climate
The
climate is the habitat of operation within organisations. Like all habitats,
the climate may be favourable or unfavourable. It could prevent conflict
interaction or facilitate it remarkably. It is the environment, which would
invariably influence measures of action and reaction. It may determine
direction content and quality of relations within the organisation. In conflict
interaction, climate may determine whether it would prove useful to the
organisation or it would present features of destructiveness.
Climate
is created by the sum of relationship among all elements and stakeholders in
organisations. While management has a strong role to play in determining the
nature of climate an organisation may have, other stakeholders could affect the
texture of the atmosphere and predispose the group to good organisational
weather or bad organisational weather. Bad organisational weather is,
naturally, the breeding ground for conflict. Climate can be influenced by
policies on welfare, organisational structure, communication networks and
profile, management style, organisational politics, etc.
c.
Communication
Profile
Communication
is the most central factor in organisational dynamics. With communication, problems
may still arise but without communication, problems are bound to arise, and
that very often. Four questions may be pertinent to its subtopic. First, what
structures exist for communication in an organisation? Often, there are formal
structures, including the telephone, notice board, memo, newsletters and word
of mouth. There are informal routes too including lunch time chats, lateral
interaction and of course, the grapevine. Where an organisation has not created
room for definite structures, it is a strong indicator of the imminence of
conflict.
Second,
how much communication takes place within an organisation? It is erroneous to
think that productivity is enhanced when people are left to mind their
business. That would not be a complete story because people do not need to be
told things (direction, for example, or even assurances of management’s
interest in staff welfare), as they too need to express themselves often.
Third,
how easy is it to communicate? Industrial and labour harmony is often tied to easy
flow of communication at all levels of an organisation. When a manager does not
attend to communication of subordinate staff as a result of being “on the
phone” always or simply being too “busy”, conflict is definitely brewing.
Communication should be accessible, easy and unimpeded in an organisation.
Finally,
an organisation has to do periodic reviews of its communication machinery to
ensure that it is functional. This should relate to both internal and external
publics so that conflict could at least be minimized. A neglect of
communication or poor profile of it is a strong indicator of the imminence of
conflict.
6.0 RESOLVING CONFLICTS
Conflicts
are better prevented than cured – it is much easier to prevent a conflict (and
even begin one) than to resolve it. The options being discussed in this section
are, therefore, fallback options when, sadly, conflict does arise. Four
distinct ways are popular in conflict resolution and these are presented as
follows:
a.
Collaboration
This
involves the institution of constructive dialogue by the parties involved in a
conflict as a means of finding a solution to the problem. Interests of both
parties are tabled and there is an effort to satisfy all interest inequitably.
The
goal is to ensure that everyone is satisfied takes home again and the
relationship is strengthened. This is often at the interpersonal level in
organisations.
b.
Negotiation
This
is a common and useful method in resolving conflicts in organisations. It
involves a bargaining process in which each p arty in a conflict situation
presses for the absolute satisfaction of its interest. The unique feature here
is that each party aims to satisfy its interest and not concede anything
without a strong agreement. There is often extreme power play sometimes threats
and no party wants to lose face. Each party advances its own points and
downplays those of others and every point raise is to the advantage of who
raised it. Damaging information is presented only if it affects the other
party. This form of resolution is common in inter-unit/section and departmental
conflicts, as well as in community-related conflicts. It is also popular in
handling industrial and labour crises within and outside organisations. The
main advantage is that the eventual agreement acts as documents that govern
cooperation and relationship.
c.
Mediation
Mediation
is generally defined as the intervention in a negotiation or conflict of an
acceptable third party who has limited or no authoritative decision-making
power but who assists the involved parties in voluntarily reaching a mutual
acceptable settlement of issues in disputes.
As
the definition states, a third party, who is neutral, is invited by parties in
a conflict to facilitate reconciliation and peace. Options left to the parties
are weak when compared with mediation. Such options include:
-
Ignoring the conflict
-
Allowing the conflict to escalate with grave
consequences
-
Negotiation
-
Going to court
Compared
to these options, mediators can be chosen from within or outside the
organisation, depending largely on the perception of the neutrality of the
mediator by parties in the conflict. A mediator must win the confidence and
respect of disputants.
The
task of the mediator is to facilitate a process of negotiation that helps
disputants to merge their differences. This will help parties to appreciate
their common and respective needs that are at stake.
d.
Arbitration
This
is a last resort, short of going to court, in the resolution of conflict. Here,
parties agree to submit their arguments and positions to a neutral party who is
empowered to act like a judge, pronounce judgment and the parties are bound to
abide by that decision. The major disadvantage here is that a party may win,
while the other loses. The natural fallout is that the continuity of existing relationships
may not be guaranteed.
The
real last resort, which is often discouraged in conflict management, is litigation
that is going to court. It is expensive, time consuming and often embittering.
7.0 CONCLUSION
As we
stated at the beginning, conflicts in organisations involve: Power, Value, Status
and Scarce resource.
It should
be restated that they are normal and it is possible to monitor them and attempt
viable solutions to them.
Conflicts
in the organisations are useful as they reduce stagnation, potential conflicts.
New issues are brought to the fore, individual or group grievances are
redressed, organisational focus or goals are adjusted and often better
positioned. There is room for dialoguing and engagement. There are other minor
gains such as emotional release and expression of personal or group opinion.
However, where conflicts are ignored, they could affect the health and
continued existence of the organisation.
