Reducing Organizational Conflict
This is an excerpt from the paper...
This study investigated a strategy designed to reduce the level of organizational conflict associated with the selection of individuals to be included in an organizational management development program. In this context, it was hypothesized that the application of the assessment center concept, as a means of selection personnel for management development programs, would minimize organizational conflict development associated with this organizational function. In testing the hypothesis, the level of dissatisfaction among the members of an organizational sub unit which had been subjected to assessment center evalua tion was compared with that in another organizational sub unit wherein a different process was used in performance evaluation. The hypothesis was accepted. Thus, it was concluded that the use of an assessment center for performance evaluation, as opposed to some other evaluation process, would lead to lower levels of organizational conflict development with respect to the selection of individuals for participation in management development programs. Some 20 odd years ago, Paul Lawrence (1969, 4), at the Harvard Business School, said that one of the most "baffling and recalcitrant of the problems which . . . executives face is employee resistance to change." Resistance to change is a form of organizational conflict. In the late 1950s, James March, and Herbert Simon (1958), in their classic, Organizations, identifi
. . .
nizations.
12
Performance evaluations build a history of an individual's organizational life, and this history follows the individual throughout the length of a career. It is important, therefore, for the individual as well as the organizations that the per formance appraisal process be accurate and reliable.
Gortner (1989) stated that an effective performance evalu ation instrument or process must be objective, valid, and reli able. Objectivity in performance evaluation means that the instrument or process must provide an evaluator with a means of measuring performance criteria which does not require a subjec tive act on the part of the evaluator. Validity in a perfor mance evaluation instrument or process means that the instru ment (or procedure) really measures that which it is intended to measure. True validity is difficult to obtain in any evalu ation instrument or process designed to evaluate human activi ties; however, the task is made infinitely less difficult, if the definition of that which is to be measured is simplified. As an example, if a school system administration is satisfied to simply equate teacher performance with the ability of the teacher to prepare an acceptable lesson plan, then, a valid measurem
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Liverpool Wilson, Noe Kirsch, Kimberly Quinn, Donaldson Scannell, Rumph Shannahan, Peripherals Corporation, Herbert Simon, , McCall Lombardo, Gerstein Reisman, performance evaluation, quinn 1990, management development, kimberly quinn 1990, kimberly quinn, instrument process, assessment center, organizational conflict, personnel performance, evaluation instrument, development programs, management development program, evaluation instrument process, personnel performance evaluation, quinn 1990 model,
Approximate Word count = 6445
Approximate Pages = 26 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Reducing Organizational Conflict
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
