+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

Post a rough outline, (bullet and/or short narrative) of your literature review in order to obtain feedback from your colleagues regarding any sections of the literature you may not have thought of. Be sure to cover the salient points of the literature review (do not include the conceptualization part of the Conflict Resolution: Part 2 – Literature Review and Conceptualization Assignment). Base this discussion upon the Conflict Resolution: Part 2 – Literature Review and Conceptualization Assignment.

Although your feedback from classmates’ reply posts will occur after you turn in the Conflict Resolution: Part 2 – Literature Review and Conceptualization Assignment, the overall feedback from the reply posts will assist you in honing your thoughts for the final two assignments.

1
Conflict Resolution: Part 1 – Problem Description
Student’s Name
University Name
Course Name
Professor’s Name
Due Date
2
Conflict Resolution: Part 1 – Problem Description
A group can be a group of individuals, a social unit, or a collection of persons who share
beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that are important to them. Most of the time, intergroup ties are
essential to accomplishing a certain aim or purpose. Disagreements might arise when two or
more groups work together to execute a project. There will always be disagreements in the
workplace. Conflicts between coworkers, supervisors, subordinates, clients, vendors, and
regulatory organizations and agencies (Bornstein, 2003). There are many reasons for workplace
conflict, such as harassment of younger employees by senior employees or a disagreement over a
bad performance assessment.
Customers’ dissatisfaction with a service or belief that a salesman has misled them can
also lead to conflict. Senior managers use their position to intimidate their subordinates, which
can lead to workplace conflict. Efforts to resolve disagreement must be made to find a solution
that works for all sides and is mutually agreeable. When a company can focus on its goals and
objectives, it will be more successful. Conflicts may be both productive and harmful
simultaneously (Bornstein, 2003). A firm’s ability to achieve its goals and objectives can be
severely harmed by confrontations and encounters that lead to destructive conflict.
I am aware of a circumstance when supervisors and their subordinates were embroiled in
a disagreement. Their superiors were bullying them, so they pushed back forcefully against their
autocratic bosses. The senior employees struggled to meet the managers’ lofty expectations
because they had set them so high. The workers could not meet the goals they had been given,
which led to a confrontation that they could not avoid. Due to a clash of personalities, it was
difficult for the supervisors and subordinates to find a solution. Managers were certain they must
meet the goals they had set at any cost. But the younger team members lacked the competence
3
and resources to complete their work on time. As a result of the ensuing tense and ultimately
catastrophic battle, the company’s performance suffered.
Detailed Background and Manifestations
The major source of intergroup conflict in the corporation was the problem of differing
interests (Bornstein, 2003). To meet their overly high-profit targets, the company’s leadership
ignored that they had a limited number of employees to carry out the duties necessary to
accomplish them. In addition, the firm was unable to deliver the required resources. The junior
staff claimed they could not meet the goals on time due to the current workforce and resources.
The confrontation was sparked by this discrepancy of interests between the two sides. The
dispute is being fueled by disparities in power and shared values. Managers utilized their
position of authority to compel their employees to work toward the company’s goals. Managers
forced their subordinates to work excessive hours for little or no pay. That was seen as an
oppressive tactic by the oppressed group.
These employees protested unfair working and remuneration arrangements, resulting in
friction with the company’s senior management. Conflicts between groups can be exacerbated by
a lack of resources and incentives, which makes the disparity between the goals of each group
more evident. Disagreements among groups can be exacerbated by differences in how they
perceive time and status and by the differing aims and purposes of different groups. Rearranging
the personnel at a company and adding new facilities and services can be upsetting and lead to
conflict.
Intergroup conflict can be exacerbated by the intrinsic characteristics and social history of
some members of a particular group. However, these characteristics and histories do not always
create the conflicts themselves. Conflicts within groups have a ripple effect that may be seen
4
within the group, between groups, and even outside the group (Cuhadar & Dayton, 2011). A
group’s members are under intense pressure to uphold the group’s standards. A lot of effort is put
in by members of the same group and those opposed to the other organizations. The ability to
communicate effectively inside a company is critical at all levels. Failure to communicate
effectively between these groups can have disastrous effects on an organization.
Additionally, the management’s aggressive tactics and controlling attitude exacerbated
the disagreement. Managers were concerned about the well-being of their subordinates.
Managers sought to exert control over their subordinates without regard for their employees’
rights. Group bias was also present, with senior employees earning far more than their younger
counterparts (Bornstein, 2003). Negative stereotyping was developed between the two competing
groups due to this. Because of their unequal treatment, the subordinate had an unfavorable
impression of the management. In the firm, this fostered cognitive biases. As a result, each group
began associating the other group with only negative traits, forgetting about the favorable ones.
The harmful dispute between management and lower personnel was resolved using the social,
physiological method.
An objective-and-subjective approach was chosen for this problem because only by
addressing all sides can a lasting settlement be achieved. Using a third party to conduct a detailed
conflict analysis was necessary (Fisher, 2000). Because conflict resolution necessitates both
subjective and structural change, three stages of the resolution were used. Conflict analysis,
confrontation, and conflict management are the three stages of the conflict management process.
Third-party conflict analysis identifies the dispute’s underlying concerns, demands, anxieties, and
values and aims of both sides. As a result, the senior management and the lower-level employees
could establish mutual classifications and confidence. Afterward, the second phase of the conflict
5
took place. The management and junior employees engaged in a productive confrontation in
which they were fully involved with one another and decided to accept a shared solution through
a joint session of problem resolution. It was a team effort in which the employees could air their
issues freely.
The two sides came up with long-term solutions to the self-correcting problem in the long
run. The parties accomplished this by addressing both sides’ human needs and then devising a
system to handle future conflicts while keeping the company’s ultimate aim in mind (Cuhadar &
Dayton, 2011). The disagreement was effectively resolved using this method. Management and
subordinates devised a strategy for resolving problems in the future that included mutual
agreements and alternate methods. Among the alternatives were strategies to address each other’s
concerns and avoid creating policies, goals, or situations that may harm the other side. They also
promised to work daily to help the company achieve its goals (Fisher, 2000). The employees and
elders were able to create trust through the collaborative approach, which established a
fundamental norm.
Managers have vowed to improve their demeanor and treatment of their subordinates.
They pledged to make the most of their time and the firm’s resources to ensure its success. The
two parties resolved to create trust and confidence in each other by establishing a culture of
responsibility and honesty. Barriers to a company’s performance were discovered, including
hesitation from senior management, fear of losing authority, and unappreciated advantages.
“Protesting was not the only option for resolving disputes; The pannel also offered ADR. Last
but not least, the lower-level employees were urged to put their power into action to ensure the
company’s long-term prosperity.
6
The parties participating in intergroup dispute resolution must be able to communicate
effectively with each other. To foster a more productive work environment: it is important to
teach employees how to work together to solve intergroup conflicts. Effective dispute resolution
requires the ability to provide group facilitation. The social-psychological technique of conflict
resolution successfully reconnects the relationship between the senior staff and the junior
employees. Effective communication between the stakeholders allowed the firm to return to
normal operations.
There is no way to eliminate disagreements, but reasonable methods and measures exist
to lessen them. Mediators from within and outside the company must have conflict management
programs and other ADR training (Fisher, 2000). The company’s top executives must be aware
of the causes of intergroup conflict and the impact these disputes have on the business’s success.
To reach these agreements: all stakeholders must be allowed to participate in the process.
Organizational structures should, in general, promote equality for all workforce members. It’s
time to embrace multiculturalism and democratic pluralism since they’ve been shown to lessen
tensions between ethnic groups.
Key Points
A group can be a group of individuals, a social unit, or a collection of persons who share
beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors that are important to them. Most of the time, intergroup ties are
essential to accomplishing a certain aim or purpose. Disagreements might arise when two or
more groups work together to execute a project. Intergroup conflict can be exacerbated by the
intrinsic characteristics and social history of some members of a particular group.
To foster a more productive work environment: it is important to teach employees how to work
together to solve intergroup conflicts.
7
References
Bornstein, G. (2003). Intergroup conflict: Individual, group, and collective interests. Personality
and social psychology review, 7(2), 129-145.
Cuhadar, E., & Dayton, B. (2011). The social psychology of identity and inter-group conflict:
From theory to practice. International Studies Perspectives, 12(3), 273-293.
Fisher, R. (2000). Sources of conflict and methods of conflict resolution. International Peace
and Conflict Resolution, School of International Service, The American University.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

  
error: Content is protected !!