Organizational conflict is inevitable in a formal organization. Discuss.
. Organizational conflict is inevitable in a formal organization. Discuss.
The above subject matter cannot be discussed without first elucidating on the key subjects viz: 'conflict' and 'formal organization'.
The oxford dictionary of current English describes conflict as a lack of agreement between opinions another school of thought sees conflict as 'a state of dysfunctionality in a system'. What ever the case, conflict occurs in our everyday life either within a person when faced with problem and possible options and/ or with another individual either in a formal or informal setting.
On the other hand, a formal organization is typically understood to be system/ group of people of coordinated and controlled activities that arise when work is embedded in complex networks of technical relations and boundary-spanning exchanges.
In effect, organizational conflict can be described as the interaction of interdependent people who perceive incompatible goals and interference from each other in achieving those goals. This occurs in all formal settings. Disagreement between two or more parties who perceive that they have incompatible concern.
Unlike the traditional view which sees conflict as being bad and as such should be avoided, the contemporary view to which I belong, sees conflict as neither inherently bad nor good but is inevitable in any formal setting and structurally induced.
As earlier stated, no one person can constitute an organization and as such there come a time when people will hold divergent views of a particular issue.
As stated above that conflict is neither naturally bad nor good, it often times enhances organizational performance as can be seen in Intergroup conflict. This can lead to:
Increased problem awareness, increased exchange of information and knowledge, improved decision processes, increased innovativeness and creativity, Enhanced motivation and morale, Decreased tensions, Enhanced psychological maturity or decline of organizational performance such as: Increased stress and burnout, reduced organizational performance, reduced morale and job satisfaction, reduced loyalty to organization, Waste of resources and time.
To really understand the inevitability of conflict, we have to look at the causes. These can be analysed as follows:
. Mutually exclusive goals: both organizations and employees (group) have their respective goals. These goal(s) to a large extent are mutually inclusive. For example, if the goal of an employee is to financially okay by way of receiving good salary, bonuses, etc, while that of the company is to computerize its operations thereby reducing the workforce. Both goals could be said to be mutually exclusive which breeds conflict.
2. Reward structures: This mostly occurs in places ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
To really understand the inevitability of conflict, we have to look at the causes. These can be analysed as follows:
. Mutually exclusive goals: both organizations and employees (group) have their respective goals. These goal(s) to a large extent are mutually inclusive. For example, if the goal of an employee is to financially okay by way of receiving good salary, bonuses, etc, while that of the company is to computerize its operations thereby reducing the workforce. Both goals could be said to be mutually exclusive which breeds conflict.
2. Reward structures: This mostly occurs in places where the remuneration of employees is not up to standard. Cases of this can be seen in the Nigerian workforce where labour movement has always been at loggerheads with employers for improved pay package.
3. Different role expectations: in most cases, officers could be found wanting on their jobs as a result, there is bound to be conflict between the organization and the individual.
4. Different information environment: Information flow plays a major role in an organizational set up. Once information is distorted, there is bound to be conflict.
5. Different knowledge base: These could be another source of conflict in an organization. In the sharing of duties, a supervisor might assume that a particular subordinate X knows a particular job since subordinate Y who is on the same level was able to do the same job earlier. In event that subordinate X does not know this job, conflict is bound to arise as there could tasks left undone.
6. Different principles: No two people are the same and as such could differ in their principles. XY & Co is a partnership company co-owned by X and Y and engaged in building construction. They were contracted to erect a city mall which entails destroying residential homes of peasants. X could not stand the idea of rendering some less privileged homeless while Y sees it as a job. This type of situation is still being faced by organizations today.
7. Uncertainty avoidance: an employee could weigh his/ her options in continuing to work for a particular company who at present is not doing well. In the event of being uncertain of the future might put up a resignation letter. This, the company is reluctant to accept which sets in conflict.
In conclusion, conflict is quite unavoidable in the workplace as long as two or more people are involved. They issue there then, is to make the best positive use of it since as earlier stated is neither good nor bad.
2. Organizational politics is necessary in achieving personal and organizational objectives. Discuss.
The term politics have often times deceived people as they believe it is a term used mainly in government as such does not exist in other formal organizations. Recent researches have shows that 75 percent of the people have lost/fail in their jobs and companies, their market share because of politicking problems and not skill deficiencies. Many intelligent and capable people aren't as successful as they might be because they haven't learned to cope with organizational politics. Politics is not just the act of governing the state but the activities concerned with gaining and using power within an organization or group.
Organizational politics can then be described as the use of divisive tactics/ strategies to gain/ maintain control, or to elevate performance by fostering competition in the work place or within the industry for the organizational growth. It involves manoeuvring interpersonal arm wrestling, horse-trading, and power plays that exist in most work organizations.
Clearly, there's a need for a better understanding of corporate gamesmanship. Getting to the heart of the matter involves looking at what is meant by organizational politics and why it exists.
Among the specific actions commonly associated with organizational politics are: communicating indirectly, using covert tactics to advance, controlling other people through psychological manipulation, being cautious about telling the truth, hiding vulnerability, and currying favour.
Why does organizational politics exist?
Business is a competitive game ranging from friendly tests of skill to warlike combat. The game is sparked by survival conditions and by an expanding world market in which companies must continue to grow. There's a constant challenge to overwhelm the opposition with innovation, to reduce costs, and to acquire additional resources. High-technology companies are infused with a spirit of intense international competition, a quest for glory, and a desire to be Number One. For example, in Nigeria, two prominent brewers of alcohol have been emerged in politicking for some time now in both their adverts and product packaging.
This also can be seen in the popular parlance of 'who you know'. A major commodity trader in Nigeria, many believe has been able to convince the government to ban the importation of cement in some years time. This is after he must have completed the construction of a cement manufacturing plant.
In the organizational front, individual jockeying for rewards and recognition, sabotage, discrediting others, information hoarding are regarded as the dysfunctional aspect of political behaviour and is an outgrowth of this larger spirit of competition.
Political decisions encourage hypocrisy, secrecy, deal making, rumours, power brokers, self-interests, image building, self-promotion, and cliques - not a receipt for effective teamwork.
Organizational politics is not new, particularly in countries like Nigeria and tragedy is that most of the time "HR Department" is a center of such activities. Anyone who has ever had any job, anywhere, knows that the dynamics among those who are part of the work environment play an important part in how a business is run. Apparently organizational politics is an increasing problem according to a study by Accountemps. "Eighteen percent of an administrator's time -- more than nine weeks out of every year -- is spent resolving conflicts among employees" ("Surviving Office Politics." Talent Scout. April 16, 1998).
Besides causing problems for the individuals who work together, the end result can be far more devastating. Employees and managers who must concentrate on the political aspects of work may have less time to pay attention their jobs. This translates into financial loss, which may in turn translate into job loss.
Politics will always be a part of organizations so long as people are involved. Organizations that are overrun with politics, however, will sooner or later take their place among the also-rans.
MANAGEMENT THEORY & PRACTICE - NWOSU OKEZIE (PGD MANAGEMENT)
