This was initially a group presentation and was. the group conflict was due to lack of communication and arrangement, the group was to take part in a PowerPoint presentation and was actually unsuccessful because of t8he discomposure of the actual people within the group, it involved the people making wrong decisions and no time keeping, as time had gone on the work task had not been completed and there was limited time left, therefore more and more people within the group were becoming frustrated, and then finally work was done as everybody had decided to work together and agree to dis-agree, the conflicts involved the fact that no one was putting their head down and everyone just wanted the easier tasks, therefore the whole group was under achieving, it was only when the team leader had sat everyone down that people started using their own initiative and made the most of what time they had left, after that the work was completed and we had learnt a lesson for the future.
Conflict within a group can be stopped in many ways, including prevention methods; these would include drawing up ground rules, revisiting the task to draw up the ground rules. Establishing the interest in the roles that the individual member partakes in, communicating in clear context and taking responsibility in any way that deems necessary.
Coercive power – this is power by force, using corporal punishment if not obeyed. For example Adolph Hitler who would punish those who stood in his way
Legitimate power – someone who seems to be right all the time because of the position they are in, tony Blair was a good example, Gordon brown on the other hand has no legitimate power.
Reward power – this implies to those who have been granted power by royalty or by someone of high position, like Sir Alex Ferguson.
Expert power – someone who is known for experience and is very powerful in the category at hand, bill gates would be a good example for computers as he is the director of Microsoft.
Referent power – more to do with the reputation of the person, world footballer of the year Lionel messy would be a suitable candidate for this example as he is spoken out to be the best, automatically there will be a great sense of respect and referent.
Once at the workplace I had witnessed to employees fall out over something petty, it wasn’t a big quarrel however the two people did exchange verbal abuse to one another that was intriguing as we was in a professional environment.
It was only when the third party, I, had entered the dispute and corrected all that was wrong in the conversation, once they had acknowledged the fact that there was a disarray of argumentative behaviour the situation had resulted in a truce.
It is a good method however the actual argument should never have taken place in the first place to begin with. I suppose sometimes in the working environment it sometimes happens.
To be corrective in some circumstances the methods of conduct in a working environment can sometimes be very argumentative, especially in the heat, its human nature to argue and become frustrated but throughout there should never be any unprofessional display of manner,, conflict in cultures in workplaces can take place buts it’s how well they are understood that allows them to become truly successful in the matter.
For any organisation to be effective and efficient in achieving its goals, the people in the organisation need to have a shared vision of what they are striving to achieve, as well as clear objectives for each team / department and individual. You also need ways of recognising and resolving conflict amongst people, so that conflict does not become so serious that co-operation is impossible. All members of any organisation need to have ways of keeping conflict to a minimum - and of solving problems caused by conflict, before conflict becomes a major obstacle to your work.
Three methods of resolving situations that have reached the stage of open conflict are often used by many different organizations. It is important to understand these methods, so that people can decide which methods will work best for them in their specific conflict situation.
Negotiation: this is the process where mandated representatives of groups in a conflict situation meet together in order to resolve their differences and to reach agreement. It is a deliberate process, conducted by representatives of groups, designed to reconcile differences and to reach agreements by consensus.
Mediation: when negotiations fail or get stuck, parties often call in and independent mediator. This person or group will try to facilitate settlement of the conflict
Arbitration: means the appointment of an independent person to act as an adjudicator (or judge) in a dispute, to decide on the terms of a settlement.
No comments:
Post a Comment