Paper of People in Organization

Process, People, and Conflict Management In Organizations

Prepared by
Name : Made Irinna Dwi Putri
NIM : 29113383
Class : ENTRE 6






Master of Business Administration
Institute of Technology Bandung
Jakarta
2014

Process, People, and Conflict Management In Organizations
In this journal, the authors argue the method of analyzing conflict management
focuses too heavily on the managerial interest in administrative efficiency and productivity
rather than on the needs of individuals and organization.
For many years, the conflict on management have been influenced by Blake and
Moutons with their theory Managerial Grid to managing conflict in organization and the
theory show us to be concern on the balances between productions against managing the
people. So many studies focus on the dual concern perpective along with the bias toward
managerial concern, and the output is that the conflict management relies on the demands of
production and authority.
The journal tell us so many different approach to managing organizational conflict.
From Webber tell us about that the business organization are best understood and
bureaucracy, or we have to designed administrative apparatus to control the organization. The
impact of conflict management is very huge such as organization productive capacities, and
we can see clearly the impact on terms of legal liability, adverse publicty, and social
outcomes give negative impact to the company or organization. So the conflict management
should focus on the concern for the people while disregarding, the concern of productivity.
The journal attempt to reconcile conceptions of Authority, Legitimacy, and Bureaucracy. So
Weber concluded that bureaucracy is driven by types of rational action that are, at bottom,
incompatible with one another.
The journal give some suggestion of approach to managing conflict that is based on
the Weber Insights and show how those ideas can be build into affective technique to create
trust, concern, and empathy in the structure of organization. So the journal show us to remove
the productivity concern and change it with organizational justice and legitimacy, and the
justice is all about universal and determines rules, while legitimacy is grounded on
employees willingness to accept the system and the application.
Conflict Management Without Management
Conflict Management is the practice of recognizing and dealing with disputes in a
rational, balanced and effective way. Conflict management implemented within a business
environment usually involves effective communication, problem resolving abilities and good
negotiating skills to restore the focus to the company's overall goals.
( http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/conflict-management.html#ixzz36l0ht5YL )
Braverman (1974) saw Taylorism as the defining system of management under
industrial capitalism. He noted that it had already been extended from simple to complex
production processes, and to white-collar work as well. Indeed, drawing on his own
experience of office work, Braverman gave examples of how this had already taken place.
Key punch operators, for example, worked with computers and data, but did so in the most
demeaning way. Data was prepared according to someone else's system, speed was at a
premium, and the element of skill was deliberately reduced to a minimum. Harry Braverman,
the characteristic form of managerialism was the system of scientific management.
Scientific Management is a theory of management that analyzes and synthesizes
workflows. Its main objective is improving economic efficiency, especially labor
productivity. It was one of the earliest attempts to apply science to the engineering of
processes and to management.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_management)
Braverman stood on the side of the worker against the manager, and wrote for the
worker, and as such deserves reading today. If his account was also flawed, and crucially
failed to consider in detail how workers could fight back, this is only because Braverman was
a product of his time. From his political allies he drew the conclusion that social machinery,
Bureaucracies and states, were of greater significance than ordinary people.
From this journal, there is dual concern perspective for managing conflict fit pricely
into the landscape conflict and instrumental conflict, from the other theory that we can see is
such as Blake and Mouton Collabirative theory, in the real case it is hard to be adapted
because there is no advantageous point that we can share to the employee. In this dual
concern approach still didnt think about the employee perspective interest in the conflict
outcomes, because there is an assumption in the employee that the conflict will be managed
with respect to its consequences rather than its causes. In this thing, tell us that management
should be primarly focus on the consequences of conflict and make the decision or policy on
those potentially consequences. It is better than you have to focus on the sources of the
conflict within the organizational bureaucracy. So the theory of dual concern aim to both
efficiency on the production and effectiveness on the people.
In 1994 there is a research by Williams that show us there is three effect of
managerial problems and maintaining a managerial advantage through dual concern models
for managing conflict. The first one is there is a bias for managerial concern has a narrowing
on the controlling choice, and the organization is always try to avoid the optimal decision
making process about their daily conflict, by narrowing of choice occurs when the potential
solution are reduced. And by the controlling choice, organization is create a framework to
blame the challenger in the conflict process. If the challenger doesnt choose what
management want, than management can blame the challenger for making wrong choice or
decision.
The second one is a preoccupation with managerial problems and maintaining a
managerial advantage is not consistent with an interpersonal ethical perspective. If the
managerial conflict is approach without am ethical perpective in daily conflict interactions,
organizational aggresions can become the norm of the actions. The insisting on managerial
advantage can give more effect on behaviors deceit, theres no commitment, abandonment,
and disrespect on the part of the organization toward the employee.
The last is a preoccupation with a managerial problems and interest generates
competitiveness within a framework of conflict management. There is always a sets up
competition among the employee which have an bad impact to the company such as in a
zero-sum situation. Zero-sum situation foster anethic of competitive individualism, which
divides individuals into winners and losers. If there is a competitive in the employee it will
bring the competitive environment to whole the organization that are need to excel over
others, to stand out against the performance of others, and to distinguish one self by seeing
others fail, and the success ther requires that someone else must fail or lose. And the impact
of these environment is bigger and it will be more negative to the company and the employee,
and the negative consequences are distrust, lower self-esteem, neglected friendship
relationships, and health problem.
Moreover, a competitive models inhibits the information of self-development and
learning because its reliance om extrinsic rewards is a menas of signaling success. The
research is identify such as condition as factor of contributing to the escalation of workplace
conflict and a preoccupation with managerial problems and maintaining a managerial
advantage is a significant contributor to such escalation. Where conflict resolution deals
exclusively with the interest of the employees, employees will respond positively to
managerial efforts.
Process as Formal Rationality
Formal rationality is a direct outgrowth of Webers idea of bureaucracy and refers to
an administrative system overseen by individuals execising power delegated by some
authority, such as first line employee hired by a firms board of directors. The purpose of
formal rationality and its connection with bureaucracy, lies in its disinterested application to
every case, procedural justice just offers insight into how formal rationality can be
implemented in organizational settings.
The organization can ensure that procedures will be perceived as fair and thus
established formal rationality by ensuring 6 things, there are : procedures are consistently
applied across people and over time, procedures are based on accurate information,
mechanism are available to correct negative outcomes, procedures follow commonly
accepted ethical standard, all those affected by the procedures are allowed to voice their
opinion regarding the procedures, and the last is decision maker suppress their biases and
implement procedures in a neutral manner.
Formal rationality is articulated in the organizations rules and policies. Behavioral
precepts guide an employee activities in the workplace and provide a basis for enforcing
compliance with the organizations goals. Some rules, such as proscription against the use of
company equipment for personal purpose, affect productively. But the formal rationality fails
to address the interpersonal dynamics of organizations and the execises of managerial
disrection in particular situation. Conflict management is main component in the
implementation of organizational processes dealing with the human resource, that the
aggression arises because the absence of important key components. The first component is
the ability of people and organization to effectively create bonds that foster collaboration and
inclusiveness, that means that an organization nurturing of the employee enhances the
employees ablity to be flexible with changes in organizational life.
For some example of the role of conflict management in real case, we can see in in
winconsins governor to overturn long-established workers rights from the political power
rather than negotiation. So the effect is employement relationships are becoming contractual,
fragile, and short-lived, and when the economic crisis is exist it would be become the
increases of unemployement rate and widespread corruption. This is big dilemmas that create
the condition for stigmatized reputation, negative perceptions, an erosion of trust and
goodwill and increased aggression for the organization.
In US, the cost of conflict management in the workplace has been calculated at $35,4
billion and a lot of lost worktime. In Fortune 100 magazine research, firms activities
resolving conflict in the organization is calculated 13% of their executives time, or nearly
seven weeks per year, and per-executive with annual cost estimated more than $6 million per-
company for losing the productivity and turnover. According to the Di Martino research in
UK (United Kingdom) that the workplace conflict and aggression is the single biggest risk
employees face, costing more than around $7 billion a year. In the direct research with the
21,500 employee across 16 european Union founded that 1,290 employee are exposed to the
conflict and aggression in the workplace with a n additional 2,000 employees reporting that
they were exposed to intimidation and bullying.
So in this journal show us some viewpoint of managing conflict based on formal and
substantive rationally provides several important benefits to organization by underscoring the
deleterious consequances of competition, cause-effect linear thinking, and separation
associated with a preoccupation with managerials problems and maintaining a managerial
advantage. The first step that we can do is we center on process and justice interaction for
managing interpersonal conflict. Which will therefore elevated divergent voices otherwised
marginalized by a preoccupation with managerial problems and managrials advantage, and it
will concern for interpersonal dealings substantive rationally addressed key realities of
conflict In the workplace by focusing on the relation aspects of conflict. This approach
embraces cooperation as a value consistent with corporates challenges to utilized diversity
and to create more inclusive, caring and compassionate organization. So the it looks like a
perspective allows the employees to understand themselves in relationship to others to
specific orgabizational contexts, settings and themes.
Second step is the approach permits a focus on the revaluation of issues, position,
language, and practice that suppress conflict. These suggestion are consistent based on Pearce
and Cronens research in 1980, and the argument that modern organization need threat-
reducing strategies, integrative decision-making, group-problem solving, and non-defensive
technique for managing conflict. Its a different with the previous perspective of conflict
management, substantive rationally approach provides a framework for viewing
organizational lifes as interconnected and mutually dependent group considers others needs,
and enganged with conflict dialogues to enhance cooperative ventures.
Finally, substantive rationally represents whats Smirich (1983) calls a major shift in
emphasis from managing and controlling to interpreting and knowing. In case of change
emphasis, the adoption of his suggested framework to dealing the conflict allows the
managers to clarify various realities in the organizational setting and to remove distortion in
their understanding of whats going on, in order to contributed to the more informed practice
of the organization. This can be accomplished by using conflict as a means by which
organizational members make sense of their situations.
So the analysis from this journal show us that organization increasingly require
system of conflict management to properly administer disciplinary action, minimize adverse
personnel consequences, avoid ligitation, and provide at least rudimentary organizational
justice. The structure of the journal argument rests on two interlinking concept. The first is
that organizational neccesarily require some level of bureaucracy in order to function and
conflict management meets that requirement through objective, well-defined procedures that
produce hierarchical modes of decision-making culminating in a final and definitive result.
And the Second concept in herrent in effective conflict management is the exercise of
reasoned, justifiable and legitimate discretion.
So from this journal we can create the assumption, that this journal offers a
perspective of conflict management drawn from webers ideas of formal and subtantive
rationality. Employees care about fair treatment in organization and about fair outcomes in
individual cases. Formal rationality offers an objectives and impersonal system
andministering rules to achive managerial objectives, and this rules also give the benefits to
the employee who are assured of procedural safeguards in the application of disciplinary
sanctions. So the system protects against discriminatory, arbitrary decision that will affect the
employee jobs. So the combination of formal and subtantive rationality offers a practical, and
meaningfull way of dealing with conflict from a personal orientation as well as an
organizational one.