NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Functional Conflict in Organizational Behavior In researching the functionality of conflict in organizational behavior, one finds that there is a proliferation of material concerning dysfunctional conflict in organizational behavior, but very little on any positive aspects. Even though Dave Collins started out in declaring that conflict need not be considered as dysfunctional, he went on to investigate only the various theories of dysfunctional conflict. (Collins, David 1998) Collins even pointed out that Edwards argued that conflict is built into the structure of employment and that it might be central to the analysis of change, (Edwards, Richard 1979), but Collins then went on to describe how the various research has described the dysfunctional nature of conflict and how to assess it, manage it and even prevent it, but the book totally ignored the functionality of conflict in organizational behavior. In fact, in researching this topic, it was discovered that there is little written about the functionality of conflict in organizational behavior, while much is written on conflict resolution (Di Bretherton and Jackie Bornstein 2001), conflict escalation as a cultural problem (Wenning, Mary 2001), conflict management (Ury W, Brett J, Goldberg S 1988) and conflict assessment (Jerri Killian, William J. Pammer Jr. ; Marcel Dekker, 2003). in the Handbook of Conflict Management. Mary Wenning stated that As individuals and as groups, human beings are not well equipped to deal with important differences among themselves or others, and they often engage in behaviors that make the situation worse. (Wenning, Mary 2001); (Jerri Killian, William J.
Pammer Jr. ; Marcel Dekker, 2003). Within the same compendium, Lisa B. Bingham and Tina Nabatchi outlined a complete system design for conflict management. (Jerri Killian, William J. Pammer Jr. ; Marcel Dekker, 2003). Dispute system design is a phrase coined by Professors Ury, Brett, and Goldberg (Professors Ury, Brett, and Goldberg 1988) to reflect an organization's effort to identify and improve the way it manages conflict. This relatively recent concept represents an exciting and dramatic step in conflict management research.
Most research in conflict management has centered upon the idea that conflict is inherently dysfunctional. Kevin Baum stated in his original work and section of this same handbook that, A major implication of these findings is that group processes of conflict are largely a function of perception, and differences in perception are either enhanced or reduced by organizational structure. Most interestingly is that the group and structure processes of conflict are well within the control of the creative administrator. This whole book and the references it quoted all centered upon conflict as something to be identified and eliminated, rather than something to be used positively for organizational benefits. In Organizational Behavior: Foundations, Theories, and Analyses, John Miner, said that Conflict is neither good nor bad; it is simply a matter of difference. Three ways of dealing with conflict exist: domination, compromise, and integration.
Domination is immediately effective, but not always successful in the long run. Compromise requires that each side give up something so that the activity interrupted by the conflict may continue. (Miner, John B. 2002). In New Patterns of Management (Likert, 1961), The Human Organization (Likert, 1967), and New Ways of Managing Conflict (Likert & Likert, 1976). Likert also deals with conflict as a destructive element.
These books were supplemented by a number of journal articles, all dealing with conflict as detrimental. A number of other books were found dealing with conflict in organizations, but they also dealt with it as a problem, rather than a tool. Afzalur Rahim defeated somewhat in his analysis, This is a narrow conceptualization of conflict and is not very useful for research purposes. He saw it, rather, as a dynamic process, but still did not characterize it as positive. Therefore, in the absence of any definitive research on conflict as a positive element in organizational behavior, I decided to look at this subject solely from a logical analytical point of view, depending mostly upon ideas gained from the research, but also on ideas formulated while questioning the findings of the research... To do this, I first had to decide what the definition of conflict is in accepted common business use.
In checking out a number of different dictionaries, there was actually no concensus for a workable definition of organizational conflict, and certainly no definition for Functional organizational conflict. The standard definition of conflict seems to be that it is a difference of opinion, sometimes leading to destructive emotions and behavior. Sometimes is the operative word here. That conflict is a difference of opinion states the cause, and this is why so much literature is devoted to conflict as a dysfunctional element, detrimental to the smooth working of organizations. However, that word sometimes shows us that it is not the idea of conflicting opinions that causes problems, but in how individuals and groups react to them. In looking at group behavior, it was found that when everybody is in agreement there is little chance for any change to take place, since everyone agrees on the status quo.
Now, from my experience, and that of many people who have influenced me, in person or by their writing or actions, organizations which do not change eventually meet their demise. Note some of the national organizations of history, such as the Ancient Roman Empire. Change is necessary for any group to stay in harmony with its environment, since it is a given that the environment will undergo more or less constant change. So, while we may value internal organizational harmony for many reasons, if there is never any disagreement, never any conflict, then what mechanism will be used to foster change?
If one subscribes to the idea that organizations must change with their environments, then any mechanism which fosters or facilitates that process must be seen as positive and valued as such. Therefore, organizational conflict should also be seen as a positive force within the organization for fostering that necessary change. The question which follow, of course, is how do we differentiate between positive and functional organizational conflict and negative or dysfunctional organizational conflict. The answer is that the difference lies in the motivation for the conflict, and in the reaction of the group as a result. Negative or dysfunctional conflict is, essentially, egocentric, or group-centric that is, based upon the narrow needs of one individual or one particular group in isolation and indifference, or even diametrically in opposition to the needs of others. This includes the needs of the other parallel groups or the needs of the organization as a whole.
It is this kind of conflict which has dominated literature to this point. However, when one individual or group finds itself in conflict with the rest, but that conflict is based upon the needs of the larger group, or the organization as a whole, then this is a positive and functional conflict within the organization. It is this kind of conflict which pushes leaders to rise to the top within organizations. Their differences of opinion are labeled as innovative ideas or strategic brilliance, even though they are, essentially, conflicting ideas with those who favor the status quo. So how do we measure organizational conflict and determine if it is detrimental or beneficial? The key is to identify both the cause and the central application of the idea.
The cause may be some small thing which does not work for one individual, but, after further examination, it may be determined that the application affects the larger group or even the entire organization. This would be an example of functional organizational conflict. For example: let us suppose that a department manager in a retail outlet for electronics is upset about the bonus system in place within his department. He sees that this is sometimes a cause for conflict among his employees as they compete for bonuses. His solution is to consult his store manager, who investigates the allegations that the bonus system is counterproductive. The manger finds that she is in agreement with the department head, and takes it to the corporate level.
At the corporate level, the reaction is to research this problem across the corporation. The findings show that the bonus system is, indeed, often counterproductive. A meeting is called and the store manager who brought this to the attention of the corporation is invited to participate. The manager suggests that her department manage who brought it to her attention should also participate. After much discussion, the system is revamped to pay two levels of bonuses: one will be based upon the performance of each department and the other will be based upon the overall performance of each retail outlet. Departmental bonuses will be shared by all members of the department based upon their employment status as full time or part time and upon the hours assigned and worked.
The store wide bonuses will be shared by all employees, also based upon their employment status and hours assigned and worked. The change happened because there was internal conflict in one department that was noticed and used for positive change. Another area where functional conflict is a primary positive element is within organizational teams at every level. Conflict provides fodder for discussion. Discussion based upon open the sharing of ideas, even heated discussion as people become quite passionate about their own personal views, is a method for examining all facets of an idea or a given current practice from every possible angle.
In this way, groups can interact and hash out all the possible problems in any practice or proposal, working out all the ramifications and identifying areas which need further examination or attention. Functional teams must have, essentially, the same basic value system, and must have the same goals in mind, but the individual ideas of the members may often be in conflict. However, the conflict is, and remains, separate from the personalities involved, never becoming a personal thing, but remaining an exchange of different ideas. It is in how the group works on the conflict, once it is identified, and how they react to it, that governs whether or not that conflict is functional.
In a well balanced group with a dynamic and intelligent leader, conflict is the mechanism by which the group makes decisions. Without any conflict, there is little examination of the decision, and so it may or may not be the right one, and the consensus is actually based upon ignorance, or a failure to critically examine the idea... An excellent example of functional organizational conflict is that which is built into the Canadian system of government. When an election is won and the leading party is decided, then the party which came in second is identified as Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. It is the job of this party to oppose all proposals of the ruling government as actively and energetically as possible without resorting to a personal level or using tactics aimed as identifiable persons.
In this way, the Canadian government assures that there will always be a devils advocate and that all issues will be well examined from every possible viewpoint. This is functional organizational conflict at a very high level, and corporations could learn a great deal from this example. Works Cited Ana Akemi, et al. "Organizational Conflicts Perceived by Marketing Executives. " Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies (2005) Baum, Kevin. "Assessing Group Conflict Understanding the Line-Staff Relationship in Fire Service. " (2000) Bingham, Lisa B. and Nabatchi, Tina. "Dispute System Design in Organizations. " (2001) Collins, David. Organizational Change: Sociological Perspectives. Routledge, 1998.
Edwards, Richard. Contested Terrain: The Transformation of the Workplace in the Twentieth Century. London: Heinemann, 1979. Ezzamel, Mahmoud, and Hugh Will mott. "Accounting for Teamwork: A Critical Study of Group-Based Systems of Organizational Control. " 43 (1998) Jerri Killian, William J. Pammer Jr. , and Marcel Dekker. Handbook of Conflict Management.
Dayton, Ohio, U. S. A: Wright State University Press, 2003. Likert, Rensis.
New Patterns of Management. New York, New York, U. S. A. : McGraw-Hill, 1961. Likert, Rensis, and Jane G. Likert.
New Ways of Managing Conflict. New York, New York, U. S. A. : McGraw-Hill, 1976. Rahim, M.
Afzalur and Blum, Albert A. Global Perspectives on Organizational Conflict. PRAEGER Westport, Connecticut U. S.
A. 1994
Free research essays on topics related to: status quo, william j, conflict management, mcgraw hill, organizational behavior
Research essay sample on Functional Conflict In Organizational Behavior
