Introduction
Welcome to the Quest. To be an effective HR manager requires certain characteristics. Here you will be measured on how well you use HR strategies to resolve disputes in your organization. Good luck.
Your organization needs you.
Task
Workplace conflict is inevitable as the pressures of getting the job done creates tension between co-workers, supervisors and management. In fact supervisors spend around 25% of their time resolving workplace disputes. Conflict in the workplace results from a variety of causes, and can be positive if it is part of the team’s culture to seek better outcomes, however it must be well managed to reduce the risk of it escalating into a dispute.Disputes can relate to unreal expectations, unclear roles and responsibilities, different or unclear goals, organisation structure, interpersonal including bullying and harassment and performance issues.
CASE 1
Background
- The problem arose with the appointment of a new Operations Manager and the conflict that arose with her personal assistant (PA) who had been in the position to the previous three managers over a period of 10 years. The manager although an experienced executive had not supervised staff before and was anxious to ensure her appointment resulted in significant improvement in the output of the workgroup.
- The Dispute
- The PA put in a formal complaint against the manager stating her management style was impersonal, dictatorial and featured poor communication and mood swings. At a joint meeting to discuss the dispute with the General Manager the Operations Manager broke down and left work on stress leave.
- The Facts
- The PA and the work team were used to running their own race and with the rapid turnover of managers had not had to worry about being accountable for their actions. Some of the work practices such as long lunches and ‘smokos’ were clearly unsatisfactory and needed fixing. The new manager however had not approached the task of supervision well and tended to send emails and retreat to her office with the door closed rather than deal with the issues.
-
The Process
- The Operations Manager was on stress leave for two months and had been receiving treatment throughout that time. The treatment had been effective and was declared as fit to return to work. The workers compensation insurer and the company agreed that if the workplace issues were not resolved prior to the return to work it was likely that further problems would arise and the costs would be significant.The mediator met with both parties separately in confidence to help them identify all the issues, their concerns and how they saw the way of moving forward. It was clear that communication had been very poor and both parties had interpreted each other’s behaviour personally.The private meetings indicated that there was support for change from both the manager and the PA. The dispute did not start out as personal but as communication deteriorated it did become a contest between both parties.The mediator arranged a joint meeting to discuss the issues and develop strategies to allow a successful return to work and a positive ongoing working relationship. It was clear from the opening statements that the manager had misinterpreted the behaviour of the PA as disruptive and an intentional approach to dominate work practices. The PA indicated that the change in management style had been interpreted as an intention to establish a case to have her dismissed.During this session the manager was able to explain her uncertainty in taking over the position and how difficult she found the casual approach of the staff to the way they worked. She also explained her expectation of work practices and timeliness in taking lunch and other brakes. The PA was able to explain that she really valued the job and thought she was helping the manager feel at home by being so casual. For the first time in their working relationship all the cards were put on the table and although sensitive issues were discussed, they were at last communicating.Both the parties were keen to resolve the issues. The manager acknowledged that she needed to communicate directly with staff and have an open door policy except when she needed to concentrate on a particular project that required dedicated concentration. The PA accepted that there needed to be changes in the work practices and suggested a meeting with all the staff to explain what was expected and how best to implement the changes.
The role of the mediator throughout this process was to assist the parties to understand why the conflict had arisen and to identify options to create a professional workplace. The key outcome was to keep the communication lines open, and to continue to build trust between the parties as it was in both their interests to build a better workplace.
The whole process took several hours and required a private meeting with both parties to finalise the options. By the end of the mediation both parties were speaking openly to each other and it was clear to the mediator that they would be able to work together and solve problems as they arise.
The Mediated Outcome: The parties signed an agreement to address the communication issues and a detailed list of changes to existing practices was outlined for both parties with times for completion identified. The manager agreed to start back at work on the following day.
CASE 2
- The Operations Manager was on stress leave for two months and had been receiving treatment throughout that time. The treatment had been effective and was declared as fit to return to work. The workers compensation insurer and the company agreed that if the workplace issues were not resolved prior to the return to work it was likely that further problems would arise and the costs would be significant.The mediator met with both parties separately in confidence to help them identify all the issues, their concerns and how they saw the way of moving forward. It was clear that communication had been very poor and both parties had interpreted each other’s behaviour personally.The private meetings indicated that there was support for change from both the manager and the PA. The dispute did not start out as personal but as communication deteriorated it did become a contest between both parties.The mediator arranged a joint meeting to discuss the issues and develop strategies to allow a successful return to work and a positive ongoing working relationship. It was clear from the opening statements that the manager had misinterpreted the behaviour of the PA as disruptive and an intentional approach to dominate work practices. The PA indicated that the change in management style had been interpreted as an intention to establish a case to have her dismissed.During this session the manager was able to explain her uncertainty in taking over the position and how difficult she found the casual approach of the staff to the way they worked. She also explained her expectation of work practices and timeliness in taking lunch and other brakes. The PA was able to explain that she really valued the job and thought she was helping the manager feel at home by being so casual. For the first time in their working relationship all the cards were put on the table and although sensitive issues were discussed, they were at last communicating.Both the parties were keen to resolve the issues. The manager acknowledged that she needed to communicate directly with staff and have an open door policy except when she needed to concentrate on a particular project that required dedicated concentration. The PA accepted that there needed to be changes in the work practices and suggested a meeting with all the staff to explain what was expected and how best to implement the changes.
Type of dispute: Workplace conflict due to promotion.
Time from mediation to result: Two half day sessions.
Background: Both Jessica and Alan have been working alongside one another for many years at the local newspaper. As their existing manager leaves the company, Alan is promoted, but still shares an office with the team, of which he used to be a member. Tensions arise when Alan decides to introduce a new policy, which makes little sense to the rest of the team and is likely to increase their already heavy workload.
The challenge: Alan and Jessica have been close friends and professional work colleagues for many years. For this reason the biggest challenge was to identify the “spark” that ignited the disagreement and decipher the most appropriate way of resolving the conflict, so that they could regain their previous friendship.
Objectives:
- Allow each individual to express what is troubling them in a safe manner
- Find a common ground which they can both agree on
- Make a future agreement, rather than dwelling on the past
- Get them working together as a team again
Reason for conflict:
Jessica’s position: Working at the newspaper for the longest period of time, Jessica has seen what initiatives worked well and what tended to cause problems. She was convinced that the new policy would fail, as well as increasing everybody’s individual workload. It was clear that the policy was set by senior management, but Jessica felt that Alan could have demonstrated a firmer opposition to the proposal, as he also believes it would make everybody’s working day more strenuous.
Jessica believes that as a person Alan lacks in confidence and has overcompensated for this by becoming overly strict with a couple of the team members, in an attempt to demonstrate that he is the boss. Aside to this Jessica, also believes that the team meetings are a waste of time, as Alan takes a while to get started and becomes distracted easily. This just adds to the mounting frustrations of the team
Alan’s position: Having not done particularly well at school, Alan has found a job that he really enjoys and suits him. Surprised by the promotion that he receives, it boosted his confidence and he was looking forward to managing the colleagues that he previously worked with.
Due to this, Alan sees a split in the team dynamic. Half of the team continue to treat him in the same as they did before the promotion, which is difficult when challenging the standard of work that is produced. The other half of the team distance themselves from Alan, and he gets the impression that they degrade his performance by saying negative things about him in secret. Jessica becomes more difficult to work with, and Alan thinks she is annoyed that she was not offered the promotion, as she is slightly more experienced and is a longer serving member of the newspaper. Jessica seems to want to sabotage Alan’s attempts to become a successful manager, as she makes small remarks during team meetings, which undermines his authority.
Why mediation? As the two individuals were good friends before the promotion, it was felt that formal procedures may have caused further harm to the relationship. For this reason their line manager decided to pursue mediation as a genuine alternative and the results were extremely positive.
Agreement and settlement: After the individual and joint mediation sessions both individuals came to respect the other’s opinions. Jessica realised that Alan was also opposed to the proposal, but was under managerial orders to implement it regardless. She also agreed that if there were problems in the future, she would talk them through with Alan before things got out of hand, and agreed not to make comments or degrade Alan in the presence of other team members.
Alan acknowledged that he was distracted during meetings and will undertake management courses in an attempt to develop his people management skills. Being a previous member of the team, Alan agreed to distance himself from them on a professional level, but support them as a manager.
Both went back to work without any further problems.
TASK TO DO IN MICROSOFT WORD
1. (a) Briefly explain work place dispute with the help of an example.
(b) Outline one cause of conflict in both the cases.
(c)Compare and contrast the problem in both the case studies.
2. (a)Compare the strengths and weaknesses of managers in both the case studies.
(b) Suggest two management skills to both the managers to handle disputes in the workplace.
(c) Briefly discuss two conflict management styles.
3. Recommend two human resource strategies for each case study that the team members could have used to welcome the new managers.
4. Evaluate the management style in both the cases and its impact on the team members.
5. (a) Explain the interdependence between human resources and other key business functions.
(b) Assess the impact of HR on other business functions with the help of an example.
(c) Discuss the impact of dispute mentioned in the case studies on other business functions (Finance, Operations, and Marketing).
6. (a) Discuss the importance of a mediator in a workplace.
(b) Assess the value of mediator in both the cases.
Process
You may use any resources that may help you to accomplish the tasks given.
You may visit the web resources below to help you in answering the questions.
http://www.wikihow.com/Resolve-a-Conflict-at-Work
http://humanresources.about.com/od/managementtips/a/conflict_solue.htm
http://www.taylorcoulter.com.au/files/Managing_Conflict_in_the_Workplace.pdf
http://leadersinheels.com/career/6-management-styles-and-when-best-to-use-them-the-leaders-tool-kit/
http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/comparing-and-contrasting/
You may use textbook or other related text or handbook for accomplishing the tasks.
You may also use related video resources to accomplish the tasks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVupFiks9Y0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv_2mCN1sAI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKjlGS1hSh0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY5TWVz5ZDU
Now you have got all the necesary resources to get started with the task. Don't delay and start working. Don't forget to disucss with your peers.
You have four lessons to accomplish the quest so let's get started now.
Evaluation
| Assessment | Marks | Your Marks |
| Answers have been completed with a serious attempt | 10 | |
| The use of business terminology is evident | 10 | |
| Grammar and presentation | 5 | |
| Completed by the due date | 5 |
Conclusion
CONGRATULATIONS
You have made it!!!
Now you are ready to become an HR manager with your effective management style and the ability
to resolve workplace disputes. I bet there will be no workplace disputes in your organization.
Good luck.