The authors of this article are Gilin Oore, D., M. P. Leiter, and D. E. LeBlanc. The article concludes with important implications for resolving conflict strategies and future research directions. The most comprehensive definition of “organizational conflict” is as follows: Social discord is characterized by unpleasant feelings and interpersonal conflict. Conflict occurs in the workplace when one or more parties believe an unresolved disagreement threatens any fundamental human condition. Task conflict and relationship conflict are two common forms of organizational conflict studied by psychologists. This description clearly shows that frequent relational conflict within a workgroup is harmful. Employee turnover, absenteeism, and dissatisfaction are all linked to high levels of relational conflict in the workplace. Workplace conflict is common and costly, both financially and emotionally. Managers and leaders in Canada spend an average of 3 hours a week dealing with workplace conflict. Interpersonal conflict, particularly economic negotiations, can trigger severe physiological reactions (Gilin et al., 2015). That is probably because we are afraid of being rejected by our peers and community. As a result of prolonged exposure to high conflict-related stress, decreased work satisfaction, burnout, sick leave, and turnover increase. Unlike workplace hazards like unsafe conditions, excessive noise, or toxic fumes, interpersonal conflict is not always avoidable. We think this is best for you for two reasons. According to some studies, task conflict can be beneficial. Involvement of top management and no routine task-oriented groups can improve team performance.
An advantage of conflict is that it fosters problem-solving, interpersonal connections, and character and strength development. The theory goes that if we “lean into” interpersonal conflict rather than run away from it, we will win in the long run. According to transformational theory, conflict can transform from “a negative, destroying, alienating, and demonizing relationship to one that is positive, productive, connecting, and humanizing.” This article combines studies from various psychology domains to identify positive individual and organizational characteristics. Individuals with good conflict management skills have four main characteristics: learning preferences, self-and other-attention balance, emotional control, and a fit with the environment (Fiol, et al., 2009). Individual conflict resolution training, workgroup conflict resolution, counselling and mediation are all examples of organizational interventions that improve effective conflict management. Our review’s main contributions are the inclusion of positive variables for conflict management and an optimistic outlook on the benefits of work disputes. We conclude by suggesting real-world applications and future research areas for workplace conflict psychologists.
Recommended steps for conflict management based on the case study.
The article suggests various ways to arrive at a conflict solution. While workstation conflict is a fairly common and sometimes demanding event, it is certainly an important and required element of human connection. Relevant to this special edition on positive psychology, the article argues that the important short-term severity of interpersonal may result in good long-term outcomes such as insight, connection, and strength (Gilin et al., 2015). It is recommended for blend organizational, social, family and interpersonal mindset studies to find features that augment operative conflict resolution. Discrete variables such as cognitive elasticity, a suitable stability of self–other attentiveness, emotion controlling, and fit to the conflict situation all show promise for conflict resolution and seem to be trainable. Organizational treatments, such as individual training, team at work conflict training, and arbitration, also develop conflict skills.
Effects of mediator’s Behavior
When the mediator employs balanced and equitable mediation strategies to both conflicting parties, the likelihood of coming with an amicable solution is high. However, if the mediator’s behavior favors a particular side, and both the emotional and psychological framing are unbalanced, then it would not be easy to arrive at a decision. Instead, it would only jeopardize the situation at hand. While construction conflicts often grow to a court of law level, this is not always the best approach to settle them. Litigation is one approach to attain a final resolution. Still, it is not always peaceful, and depending on the law when a mediation analysis session would suffice might poison an otherwise positive relationship. The mediator will have to constantly analyze the situation and decide the best solution while each party takes turns expressing their views and opinions. To keep the session objective and free of pathos, they must recognize emotions and lies.
Throughout the mediation process, an attorney may give clear, precise, and competent guidance. They may also assist in articulating difficult issues and identifying potential legal stumbling blocks. During mediation, experience counts for a lot, and a development attorney would have undoubtedly dealt with owners who were adamant about their position and refused to yield. They may indeed know the appropriate words to say to find an amicable resolution and prevent additional conflict. Patience is essential throughout the mediation process. Even just getting started on resolving a problem might take hours. Even if one of the parties is a customer, mediators must be patient and polite to create rapport with both sides. When a mediator lacks patience, one or both parties may lose respect for them, and one side may believe that by being uncooperative and wasting time, they may influence the result.
Mediated Steps for Conflict Resolutions
The first step is for the mediator to make an opening remark. As soon as the parties are seated at a table, the mediator gives an overview of the mediation, explains its goals and procedures, and encourages the parties to work cooperatively to find a settlement to their dispute (Kacmar et al., 2012) The disputants’ opening statements. Each party has a chance to explain the problem and its monetary and non-monetary implications to the other. In general, the mediator may have some suggestions for resolving the issue on the table. Interrupting the person who is speaking is not authorized.
Shared discussion. Participants’ openness may dictate whether or not mediators push for rapid responses from both sides in an attempt to gain a clearer picture of the issues at hand.
Private caucuses. Both sides may meet with the mediator privately in a secret caucus session. The rooms will be divided equally between the two teams. The mediator will move back and forth between the two rooms, debating the benefits and drawbacks of each position and exchanging suggestions (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977). The mediator keeps the talk going as long as necessary throughout the specified period. These one-on-one sessions are at the core of mediation.
Joint negotiations. After caucuses, the mediator may bring the parties back together to negotiate, although this seldom happens. The mediator usually waits until the parties have reached an agreement or the mediation time has concluded before bringing them back together. Once a deal is reached, the mediator will certainly have the essential points spelled out and have everyone sign off on the written agreement. During the mediation, if the parties are unable to agree, the mediator will aid them in deciding whether they should meet again later or continue negotiations over the phone.
Part 2
REQUEST FOR MEDIATION
Date: _______________________________________________
- The party/Parties submitting request for arbitration or mediation
Name: __________________________________________________
Telephone Number: _______________________________________
Address: ________________________________________________
Email or Fax number: ______________________________________
( ) Program ( ) Department Any other: __________________
If the mediation is within an organization, state the name of the organization:
____________________________________________________________
Name of Mediator: _____________________________________________
Telephone Number: ____________________________________________
Address: _____________________________________________________
Email or Fax Number: __________________________________________
- Other parties
Name: _______________________________________________________
Telephone Number: ____________________________________________
Address: _____________________________________________________
Email or Fax Number: ___________________________________________
References
Fiol, C. M., Pratt, M. G., & O’Connor, E. J. (2009). Managing intractable identity conflicts. Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 32-55.
Gilin Oore, D., Leiter, M. P., & LeBlanc, D. E. (2015). Individual and organizational factors are promoting successful responses to workplace conflict. Canadian Psychology/psychologie canadienne, 56(3), 301.
Kacmar, K. M., Bachrach, D. G., Harris, K. J., & Noble, D. (2012). Exploring the role of supervisor trust in the associations between multiple sources of relationship conflict and organizational citizenship behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 43-54.
Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & organization studies, 2(4), 419-427.
