Assignment Task
Conflict is inevitable and prevalent in our world. We experience conflict in our personal, working, and social lives and various global conflicts (Deutsch, 1994). While it is essential to acknowledge the existence of conflict, we must be ready to manage and resolve conflicts to survive and flourish in modern society (Deutsch, 1994). This report will analyse an instance of conflict in my professional life through the theoretical lenses of conflict resolution frameworks, reflecting throughout what the frameworks have highlighted to me, which was previously missed. Following this, I will critique the frameworks to gauge if they apply practically and any limitations I foresee.
The Conflict
The conflict scenario I’ll analyse in this paper involves two product managers within a company. Manager 1, who I will call John for this report, was a product manager for the highest-grossing product line within the company. Manager 2, who I will call Steve for this report, was the business manager for the lowest-grossing products within the company. Both managers were tasked with intensive and extreme sales targets by the upper management. While exclusive to each other, the products that both managers represented were interdependent, requiring both managers to work together on various deals.
The customer cost pressures and the demanding sales targets created an environment where both managers found themselves in constant conflict with each other. The basis of this conflict was centred around sales targets, profits margins and revenues generated by each of the respective products. This conflict escalated beyond the specific deals being worked on by the managers and became present in broader business meetings and internal processes. John was seen using his influence to sideline Steve from various meetings with upper management. Steve also retaliated by escalating formal complaints about John to upper levels of management. This conflict escalated beyond the two individuals and started to involve their respective teams, thus impacting the company’s overall culture.
Theoretical Frameworks
Applying a theoretical lens to the conflict between John and Steve allows us to identify the conflict as a task-based conflict. Shonk (2022) states that task-based conflict originates from disputes regarding the allocation of resources and differences of opinions on procedures/policies. Both John and Steve were battling to ensure their products were given equal exposure and opportunity to generate revenue for the company. While the positions of both John and Steve were opposites in the task-based conflict, the underlying interests were to achieve career growth and recognition from their superiors. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory describes the desire for career growth and recognition from bosses, highlighting that both individuals wanted to feel belonging and security in their roles and the feeling of resource scarcity causing the conflict (Jerome, 2013).
In this scenario, it was evident that the conflict escalated drastically, which can be attributed to the competitive nature of the conflict. Deutsch (1973) has described this competitive approach as integral to destructive conflict. Exploring this further, we can see other aspects of destructive conflict within this scenario as well, such as the desire to only win the conflict by both John and Steve and the elements of circular and incremental magnification of the issues causing the dispute to escalate further. Conversely, many aspects of productive conflict were missing, which would be desirable for both individuals and the organisation, such as creative thinking and cooperative problem-solving.
Reviewing the course of conflict using the theoretical lens also provided some perspective on the stopgap measures the organisation should have put in place. The Individuals had a social relationship where they both wanted to exert their power/dominance over the other. Additionally, both individuals felt that the dominant issues of conflict infringed upon their socio-economic position and self-esteem. The organisation would have intervened and changed the course of conflict through third-party resolution in the form of the line managers of both individuals. The third-party intervention could have helped both individuals identify the similarity of their interests and utilise this similarity to highlight the importance of a cooperative approach to deals allowing for sustained overall success for the company.
Critical Analysis of Theory
Step
1. Select and explore theory or framework (prior to write up) Using the academic readings* provided in Weeks 1-2 (or other academic resources identified from your wider reading), identify a theory or framework for analysis. You should study the theory or framework closely reading and reflecting on the meaning of the theory and what social or human phenomena it seeks to explain. This may require you to read more widely on the topic. For example you should note what other authors have said about the theory or framework including any criticisms you may find. *Academic readings may include a peer reviewed journal, a book/chapter, or business periodicals such as Harvard Business Review. Review the following resources for research: Library Essentials video* for using Multisearch, Databases, and Google Scholar The Library reading* for guides on finding and accessing resource Research guide for business and economics Selecting an appropriate theoretical framework see p. 17 in Osanloo, A., & Grant, C. (2016). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your “house”. Administrative issues journal: connecting education, practice, and research 4(2): 12-26. *from the Global MBA Onboarding course > Lesson 3: Set yourself up for success.
2. Problem: Create case study Identify a negotiation or conflict case (preferably from your own experience) and write a succinct summary of the case. The summary should cover details about the context, the parties and their interests, the key issues, and any confounding or complicating factors or ‘critical incidents’. Ideally this should be a “live” case, i.e. something taking place at the time of your writing and not yet resolved. Note: students writing about real people or situations should disguise the identities of the people or companies involved by assigning pseudonyms instead of using real names.
3. Analysis: Applied theory Apply the chosen theory (as per Step 1) or framework to the case and note any new perspectives or insights that emerge when you look at the case through the ‘lens’ of the framework or the theory: What elements came into sharper focus for you? What did you notice about the case that you hadn’t previously been aware of? Were there any new revelations that came to light such as options to resolve the conflict or ways to finalise the negotiation when you looked at the case through this new ‘lens’?
4. Conclusion: Critical review Having applied the theory or framework to a case, write your conclusions about the utility of the theory or the framework: What are the strengths and weaknesses of this framework or theory? In what context is this theory or framework most relevant? How might this theory, framework or idea be further developed? How practical is the theory/framework? What are the limitations of the framework, for example, does it only seem to apply in a limited context?
