STRUCTURAL CONFLICT
This is an excerpt from the paper...
This research paper examines the nature of structural conflict within organizations and discusses methods of managing such conflict. Structural or institutional conflict between different groups in complex organizations is not uncommon. The thesis of this paper is that such conflicts are not necessarily a sign of organizational ill-health but they can have dysfunctional effects if they are suppressed rather than managed effectively, as the conflict over the Corvair at General Motors illustrates. The keys to effective management of such conflicts in the short-run are an understanding of the organizational dynamics of each inter-group conflict and the use of modern conflict resolution techniques to deal with them. In the longer run, such conflicts can only be kept within tolerable limits if the top management of organizations articulate a clear vision of overall objectives and take measures to instill in the work force at all levels a strong sense of identification with, and loyalty to, the organization as a whole, a process which is difficult to maintain under modern conditions of rapid technological change and economic insecurity. Structural conflict, conflict between groups or units in organizations, can be horizontal, between line and staff, different line organizations such as sales and production or it may be vertical, labor versus management or central headquarters versus field organizations. The origins of such c
. . .
stress the importance in managing inter-group conflict of "focusing on the underlying dynamics of the conflict" and the need "to understand the situation as it is seen by the key actors involved" and to influence their "conceptions of the conflict" (pp. 50 and 45). He says that "conflict management is the process of removing cognitive barriers to agreement" and bringing the rival parties to a win-win outcome (Greenhalgh, 1986, p. 50). Blake, Shepard & Mouton say that "if problem-solving is to lead to effective and mutually satisfactory solutions, groups seeking to resolve conflicts must substitute objectivity for considerations based on [group] loyalty and 'win'" (1964, p. 23).
The more traditional approach to conflict management involves dealing with the structural impediments to resolution. Techniques of win-win strategies include measures to improve the understanding of each competing group of the values and outlook of its competitor, training in communications skills and the use of third party conflict resolution specialists, among others.
Another school of thought represented by the transformationalists emphasize the need for fundamental changes in how employees and managers view their inter-group relationships. They seek
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Shepard Mouton, Chevrolet Corvair, Science Quarterly, Bennett Liden, Sanford Trueblood, Ashgrove England, Applied Psychology, John Delorean, Blake Mouton, According Economist, shepard mouton, blake shepard mouton, wright 1979, greenhalgh 1986, blake shepard, intergroup rivalry, intergroup conflict, mouton 1964, structural conflict, top management, school administration, shepard mouton 1964, bracky rosenblum sanford, rosenblum sanford trueblood, ninth grade students,
Approximate Word count = 2439
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)
More Essays on STRUCTURAL CONFLICT
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
