Chapter 13 - Cross Culture Conflict

Chapter 13 is all about different types of conflicts. I think one of the most important conflicts that constantly arise, is the cross culture conflict. Cross culture conflict can really make or break a deal, and these deals are often very crucial if they are international in the first place. It is very important to learn how a culture deals with business before engaging them.

I once read an article on how different American contract signings are from Japanese ones. American contract signings would usually consist of a company representative that has the authority to sign a contract and the specialist of the department which will be affected the most by the contract signing. Japanese contract signings would usually have a large team of maybe ten company representatives. Unlike American culture, a contract signing in Japan can take well over a week of constant meetings, negotiation, and simply getting to know one another. While in American culture, contract signings are usually brief, and centered around profit margins as opposed to positive business relationships.

If one were to do international business without knowing the culture of the country they are intending to do business with, conflict, that could have been easily avoided, would indefinitely surface.

What is Functional Conflict?

It is important to understand functional verses dysfunctional conflict. The text discusses the difference between the two and provides several examples. Certain types of conflict support the goals of the organization and are seen as constructive. This is functional conflict whereas dysfunctional conflict negatively impacts the atmosphere or performance of the organization. When engaged in functional conflict, negotiation is often necessary which promotes a win- win strategy. This is advantageous and can improve the image of the company.

This section is a reminder that we must evaluate the circumstances and pick our conflict wisely. By approaching conflict with the correct attitude, it is possible to improve conditions are keep the business in line with their objectives. Dysfunctional conflict can sometimes appear beneficial at the moment, but can hold unintended consequences.

Conflict-Handling Style

Managing conflict and negotiation is the title of Chapter 13. Within this chapter different types of conflicts and ways to resolve these problems. On the diagram "Five Conflict-Handling Styles" which explains exactly that. The different categories include Integrating, dominating, avoiding, obliging and compromising is placed in the center of the other four. Dominating has a high concern for self. In this style the other party's needs are ignored, it can also be referred to as forcing style. This style is usually used when the decision is an unpopular one, the deadline is near or a crisis has taken place. Obliging or the smoothing style "involves playing down differences while emphasizing commonalities." This is usually used when there are benefits for both sides and encourages cooperation. Avoiding tactic is used as a passive method and is usually used during trivial issues. The last conflict-handling method is integrating which is used to solve problems. In this style the parties confront the issue, identify the problem, weigh out the solutions. This is one of the most successful methods but should not be used to solve problems with opposing value systems. Every issue needs to be solved using a managing style that best fits the problem. Unfortunately there is not written rule on which one to use so it is often best to look at each ones strengths and weaknesses before putting them to use.

Alternative Dispute Resolution

I liked chapter 13 of our book, mainly because conflict is a big part of everyone's life. There is conflict between people, companies, and even countries. The key to unraveling all this conflict? Alternative dispute resolution, of course!

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION!11!1111!
(Image courtesy of scrapetv.com)

No, not war. That's more like 'last resort resolution.' Alternative dispute resolution involves mediation and arbitration. I took a summer class at Dominican in which the subject matter completely revolved around ADR (alternative dispute resolution), and so I want to go into some depth about mediation and arbitration.

Litigation (taking something to court) is really expensive for both sides. Many companies would rather avoid litigation altogether, which is why your health insurance company has an arbitration clause in the contract agreement that you signed in order to receive coverage that bars you from suing them should a doctor leave a scalpel lodged in your head.

First off, mediation can be a godsend, provided you're dealing with another party that's honest and won't screw you over, because they totally can. Mediation involves sitting the two involved parties down to negotiate, sometimes one at a time alternating with group negotiation. In the end, the parties often wind up meeting somewhere in the middle, shaking hands, and everything is all good, right?

Wrong. Mediation is not legally binding. So, you can go to mediation with someone and come to an agreement, but they are in no way bound to follow through on that agreement, because mediation is NOT a legal contract. If the other party is honest and follows through on their word, then GREAT! You've solved the problem! Mediation is great because it allows the two parties to come together and hash out their differences in an environment that lets them make offers and see the other side. It tends to be nonconfrontational, which is a plus when dealing with a someone who's pissed off and just needs to sit down and calmly talk through what they want (or what you want) and come to an agreement.

Arbitration, on the other hand, CAN be legally binding, and is almost like a mock court, only slightly more impartial. The two parties come together with a third person called the arbitrator (not to be confused with the ARBITER from Halo), and they sit down and plead their case with all available information. The arbitrator hears both sides, and then renders a legally binding judgment in favor of one of the parties, effectively ending the dispute.

In the class at Dominican University, we role-played both systems of negotiation. We found that arbitration can have a better outcome for the party that wins the judgment, but the relationship between the parties afterward is often strained or even cut off entirely. Mediation, on the other hand, is a give-and-take endeavor where both parties make some concessions, usually to keep whatever relationship (professional or otherwise) largely intact. Mediation is less confrontational and more open, while arbitration is simply a right/wrong scenario.

Back to my statement about your healthcare provider. Think about this: you cannot sue Kaiser Permanente if you are a member. You HAVE to go to arbitration. The company does this to avoid costly malpractice suits that can severely damage their reputation and balance sheet. Some companies require their employees to sign such arbitration (or mediation) contracts as well as a condition of employment, due to the costs of litigation and the relative fairness of arbitration.

There are more ways than just suing someone to get a settlement. These ways are designed to keep the court out of it and the decision largely private. With sensitive matters, it pays to go with alternative dispute resolution.

Dysfunctional vs. Functional Conflict

As a member of an organization, no matter how high in pay ladder you are, conflict comes about. The two types of conflict Chapter 13 chooses to segregate are functional and dysfunctional conflict. Functional conflict is defined as "from an interactionist perspective conflict can be responsive and innovative aiding in creativity and viability. Determine if conflict achieves goals or undermines them" (Mastering Human Relations). The book's definition is a little different; Chapter 13 describes functional conflict as if it "serves organizational interests" and dysfunctional conflict as something that "threatens the organizations interest" (375).
Chapter 13 also focuses on the different types of conflict one may see in the workplace. One type, is psychological conflict. Psychological conflict is the type of conflict that can take place withing a worker "and no one would even know about it" (Mastering Human Relations). Some may argue (fans of Freud), that humans are dealing with psychological conflict every day. Another type of conflict is social conflict, which is also known as an "interpersonal conflict" (Mastering Human Relations). Some examples include one person against another, two people against another worker, or even one group versus another group. These type of conflicts involve more time to deal with, however they are more obvious to read compared to psychological conflicts.
Chapter 13 discusses interesting ways to define, view, and approach conflicts, and was very interesting to read.

Mastering Human Relations 3rd Edition, A Falikowski, 2002. Pearson Education

Chapter 13

Chapter 13 talked about conflict resolution. Employees and managers must work together in their environment in order to have a successful business. Company’s often send employees on a retreat to help build a better company. Our coach sent us to go paintballing to work on our communication skills, teamwork and bonding. If you think paintballing is just shooting it’s not, you have to be in constant communication with your team and to work together to kill the other team. After paintballing you could defiantly tell that there was a better team camaraderie. They’re lots of websites that offer ideas and exercises for team building activities.
http://www.businessballs.com/teambuildinggames.htm

Conflict

Conflict resolution is key to success in any organization. It is up to each individual employee and manager to effectively resolve problems that arise between co-workers. Special methods must be employed to promote constructive rather than destructive conflict. When conflict gets in the way of effective decision making, it is destructive to the organization's goals, and when conflict is constructive, providing for new insights, critiques, and ideas, it helps the organization to achieve it's goals. When too much destructive conflict ensues, it is up to the manager to promote constructive conflict by employing a dialectic or devil's advocate method, in which a person or a group of individuals is designated the task of criticism and questioning of the decision making process. This method provides for alternative ideas and ultimately, more creative solutions to conflicts. All sides of every issue are explored when using these methods to promote constructive conflict.

The Relational Leadership Model argues that leadership is defined by the relationships we have with those around us. If conflict is highly prevalent in our relationships, it will certainly have an effect on our capability to influence others. The book recommends certain behaviors to build cross-cultural relationships on pg. 383. I believe these behaviors can be applied to any situation, including people of one's own culture. An effective leader can promote these behaviors to build the relationships he/she has, and therefore promoting constructive conflict resolution.

Kreitner, Robert. Organizational Behavior. 9th ed. Vol. 1. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin, 2010.

Komives, Susan R. Et al. Exploring Leadership. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. San Francisco: 2007.

Chapter 13

Chapter 13 was about the conflicts that may arise in the workplace. One part of the chapter that caught my attention was about managing conflict. There were many different ways to be able to manage conflict. One of them that really caught my eye was the Alternative Dispute Resolution, or ADR. There were several ways that ADR could be implemented, but the main core of it resolving conflicts through mediation or negotiation. It is different per company—and it depends on the company’s policies. Some include peer review, mediation, conciliation, and facilitation.


What is interesting to me, though, is the fact that though conflict rises among different places, the way that it is handled is different. One of the articles that I researched on was about how conflict was solved in Nepal. It was interesting to me how here in the United States, we focus our attention more on fairness and equality. This was not the case in Nepal. “More than anything else, the existing sociopolitical system determines the outcome of disputes.” (Upreti) The author then goes on further and explains, “Only the power and elites benefit from the current system.” (Upreti) It basically meant that who was to come out victorious in a conflict is usually determined by the one with more power and money. To me this was surprising and it’s really sad to hear.

Source:
Upreti, Bishnu Raj. "Resource Conflicts and and Conflict Resolution in Nepal." Mountain Research and Development (2004): 60-66.

Is the conflict a commonplace or a taboo into the company? At all the levels?

The phenomenon is commonplace as humans. Working together is rubbing unlike others. Conflict is inherent in the ability we have to adapt. It also depends on the mode of management rules or institutionalized by the company, the practice of communication and dialogue. The conflict may move up one level to another if the manager does not handle the situation or whether it is involved. At the top of the hierarchy, the frozen conflicts are numerous. At this level of responsibility, do not let the problems seem. There is great difficulty in saying things. And from a company with 50 people and 2,000 people, levels of complexity and stakes are also different, hence different management conflicts. On a personal level, the risk is it an emotional one. In the case of a dispute with a person, it may not be comfortable, to lose confidence in it, start making mistakes. It's a vicious circle and the person feels increasingly isolated. It is therefore the same consequences as in a case of harassment. For now, there is a decrease in performance and efficiency. The energies are put into opposition from people in the conflict. But on a company level it has to be clarified and not to be a taboo. People can speak about conflicts they’re facing or they’re feeling for the good of the company.

How comfortable would you be working in this sort of confrontational environnement? p376

At Google's, they use the functional conflict, which serves the company's interests. This is a way of management. Maybe because people have been working there for awhile; thus, they know very well each other, and are not afraid of what the other think. 

I could not work in such an atmosphere. For me, the conflict is something to avoid, and not to look for. This does not able me to work better nor to be more creative. This is more an ambiance that afraids me: I a mafraid to say what I think, because of what the other people will think of me. The conflict is a situation that totally stops me to express myself. I do not feel free to say what I want, because I think that people are too angry to listen carefully to what I mean. So I prefer keeping quiet. 

Even in everyday life, I avoid conflict, because I prefer doing concessions and agree with what people say not to make them angry. 

Chapter 13: The Dialect Method

The CEO of EMC, Joseph M Tucci, advocates that “Good leaders always leave room for debate and different opinions.” This is a necessary belief that individuals who want to become great and successful leaders have to follow. In order for an individual to be influential, he or she must be willing to understand and to listen to the opinions of others, even if others opinions are very different. The dialect method is defined as the calling for managers to foster a structured debate of opposing viewpoints to better understand an issue prior to making a decision. As mentioned in the text book, court systems in the United States and elsewhere such as large corporations rely on directly opposing points of view for determining guilt or innocence.

Judges cannot make fair decisions when it comes to sentencing an individual without the opinions of the others such as the jury. Sam S. Souryal discusses in her article the corruption in U.S. prison institutions due to the lack of different opinions of the jury which lead to poor decisions made by the judge. Therefore, she proposes effective methods such as the dialect method to deter its continuance. She knows through this method there will be more universal norms of fairness, dignity, and humanity. This article concludes by presenting a few practical propositions to better assist judges when given sentences to future possible prisoners. As demonstrated, shared opinions are essential especially when the quality of life of another individual depends on it.

Source: Souryal, Sam S. "Deterring Corruption by Prison Personnel: A Principle-Based Perspective." Prison Journal 89.1 (2009): 21-45. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 3 Apr. 2010.

Conflict Resolution

Humans are not perfect. In companies, it is essential that team members are able to work together on a positive manner in order to complete their specific tasks. If one team fails to accomplish their project, then their poor effort effects the effort of other teams and can effect the overall productivity of a firm. According to the article I read, managers often spend up to 30% of their time simply trying to resolve conflicts in the workplace. 30%! That's a lot of time that could be used to better the organization of a company, generate new ideas, new products, or bonding with their employees. In an ideal world, every employee would be able to keep focused on the big picture or at least their goals as a part of an important team and be able to put any differences aside for the sake of the company. Open communication is key to overcoming differences within a team. People should feel comfortable in voicing any concerns or ideas to their fellow team members, instead of letting their anger or confusion build to the breaking point and let their emotions affect the quality of their individual work, bringing down the quality of the team's combined work. In our class teams, we try to make sure everyone's voice is heard and make sure that we know what is going on in each member's life that could potentially cause them stress and to not be able to fully participate in the completion of an assignment. For example, when assigning roles to each member, we not only looked at each person's strengths and weaknesses, we also evaluated what outside activities (like basketball practice or class loads) would vie for their time. In this way, we were assigned roles we could not only do well, but also roles that would cause us the least amount of stress or conflict. The article I read reiterated a lot of what the book said in Ch. 13 and the steps in dissolving a conflict. Here are the steps:

"• Take a step back: Consider all of the
elements involved in the problem, and
come up with possible solutions. • Address the situation: Meet with the parties involved in a nonconfrontation- al setting, and get an idea of both sides
of the situation. • Listen: During the meeting, be sure to
listen not only to what the parties are saying but also to the emotions behind their words.
• Take a “snapshot” of the situation: Summarize what you learned from both sides, and be sure your perception matches what actually happened.
• Explore options: Discuss options for a resolution. Encourage the parties to
work together to come up with ideas
that are beneficial to both. • Assess the options, and determine a
solution: Make sure the ideas are fea- sible and attainable, and then steer the discussion toward the option that would best benefit everyone involved. Encourage the parties to come to a consensus on one of the solutions.
• Build up the relationship: Emphasize the benefits of the outcome the group decided on and your availability for fu- ture discussion. " (Elisa Becze)


Source:
Becze, Elisa. "Deal Effectively With Conflict in the Workplace." ONS Connect 24.2 (2009): 26. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 2 Apr. 2010.

Chapter 13

In the book, programmed conflict is defined as “conflict that raises different opinions regardless of the personal feelings of the managers.” (Kinicki, et al, 2010) Two forms of programmed conflict that the book describes are the devil’s advocate and the dialectic method. The devil’s advocate is a situation where one person is assigned to critique alternative solutions in order to promote critical thinking and testing of the proposed solutions. I noticed that a lot of teachers utilize this technique when facilitating class discussions so that students engage in more critical thinking. The dialectic method is a debate of different viewpoints so that all sides of the proposed solutions are considered. The only drawback of the dialectic method is that it focuses on ‘winning the debate’ rather than finding the most suiting solution. An example of this is my Science and Society class from freshmen year where we were assigned roles to debate either for or against a certain issue, such as, allowing stem cell research. This activity allowed the class to hear both sides before voting which side they agreed with.

In the article by Tom Gerety, he distinguished between advocates and the devil’s advocates. Advocates teach what they themselves believe in while devil’s advocates teaches against either what they believe in or what they think their students believe in. Gerety says that teachers often play the devil’s advocate because they don’t want their students to be too easily convinced before examining all sides of the issues. An important quote in the article was "I would not lead you into the promised land if I could because if I could lead you in someone else could lead you out." (Gerety, 1999) This quote makes senses because if you’re easily convinced to side one way, you are also able to be easily convinced to sway another way. Engaging in activities that involve the devil’s advocate allows people to be less fickle in decision making and helps them to develop analytical skills. In situations like buying a car or a house, utilizing the devil’s advocate can help to minimize bad decisions.

Works Cited:
GERETY, TOM. "The Moral Teacher: Advocate or Devil's Advocate?." Liberal Education 85.1 (1999): 34. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 30 Mar. 2010.