Contents
Relative Resource Manager Assessment
Name:
University:
Date:
Tutor:
Relative Resource Manager Assessment
For leaders in multinational companies, interpersonal conflict is not avoidable. Conflict arises due to differences between people due to the opinions or beliefs held. If it is handled in the best way, it does not have to be destructive but constructive and applied to better ends.
Communication has a core function in conflict and in resolving it. There are three methods of solving conflict. The three practical communication methods to resolve conflict are differentiation, fractionation and face saving. Differentiation is the manner through which the people taking part are assisted to state the form of conflict and make clear their positions with each other. Fractionation is where there is the disintegration of big conflicts to smaller ones, which are easy to control. Lastly, face saving involves information that people apply so as to save each other’s image in the process of a conflict. Finally recommendation on how to handle conflict situations is presented for multinational companies. All of these strategies look to the cooperation from the parties taking part. The management of conflict effectively brings about a rigid relationship in the parties taking part and a more workable solution to the issues being faced. This would be made in reference to China and Australia.
Conflict is an avoidable in groups and companies, and it offers a challenge and a chance for every leader. Managing conflict is something that takes place daily for everyone. People differ, and since they do, they have to negotiate with other people regarding their differences. They add that mutual agreement is acquirable if everyone is willing to talk.
Conflict is very uncomfortable and it will constantly be there in leadership; and astonishingly, it brings about positive change. Communication is vital in solving conflict. Conflict is a procedure that is interactive in nature between parties taking part needs effective cohesion (Elsayed-Ekhouly & Buda, 1996, 71-81). Through a better form of communication, leaders and the staff may handle conflict to bring a better resolve outcome. This paper looks into ways that multinational companies are able to handle conflict using varied communication means.
Conflict has been looked into from a number of view points, for example intrapersonal, interpersonal and societal (Chatman & Barsade, 1995, 423-443). Interpersonal conflict is the discord that takes place in people. This is the form of conflict that will be of focus when looking into conflict in a company. According to Wilmot and Hocker (1998, 23-30) he attributes conflict to be a struggle between interdependent people incompatible contrast in belief and objectives. This insists on a number of special points of conflict.
In the presence of leadership, it is termed and expressed using communication. Communication is the process through which individuals apply to show their differences (Borisoff and Victor 1997, 34). Communication similarly offers the setting through which communication is effectively handled or gets worse, bringing about poor outcome.
To get an understanding of conflict, one has to understand communication. When communication happens, it happens on two fronts. One of the levels is attributed as the content dimension while the other one is relationship dimension. Relationship dimension is the participant’s attribution of their interface with each other.
Conflict applies struggles between the multinational companies and the staff that differs with regard to polices and processes. There are varied forms of relational conflict; relational conflict and esteem is the desire for esteem and being noted as a main concern of human. It is with this that one feels wanted and important. The need to have an influence on the surrounding and be perceived as one who merits respect is important. We aim to meet our desires by what we undertake and how we behave, more so in how we behave in the associations that we establish at our work place.
When our desires are not met we tend to get a feeling of relational conflict as they do not see it as we do. A good example is an administrator with his staff who attributes the administrator has not noting his or their special additions to meeting the goals of the company (Rausch, Halfhill, Sherman, and Washbush, 2001, 245). This similarly applies to older staff members who may be upset by new staff members that do not accord them the respect they need considering the wisdom that comes with the period. The younger staff members too may desire to be noted for their innovative methods in solving issues though may not be recognized by other workers. Every persons need requires satisfaction. If the allocation of respect is accorded in portions, for instance two effective employees are commended while another one is not; it tends to lead to conflict.
There is similarly relational conflict in regards to the issues of control. The struggles on matters of control are significant in interpersonal conflict. Everyone wants to have an effect on other people and the instances that encompass them (Erez, 1992, 43-64). Being in control makes we believe we are competent. But when we get or see other people blocking us or restricting out control interpersonal conflict arises.
Interpersonal conflict arises when people’s desire for management is inconsistent with another individual’s desire for control. In certain instance, every one of us looks for varied levels of control. Others desire to have a better deal while other people desire a limited portion of it. This may vary with time. Others at times desire to have control while at other times there is the need for others to take control. The relational conflict comes about in control matters comes about when there is conflict with the desire for control at a particular time and the desire for control for another person at the same time both either high or limited. As the desire for control arises, the communication in the people taking part may deteriorate and challenging as every individual attempts to acquire control or limit the other person’s control.
Relational conflict with regard to issues of affiliation is another major source of relational conflict. Each and every one of us desires to have that feeling of being part of a relationship. When one gets the feeling that their feeling of closeness is not met, there arises a feeling of frustration and conflict ensues. This is variable in other while other desires to be less involved.
Relational conflict is it based on esteem, control or affiliation is rarely evident. Considering the delicate attribute if these conflicts, they are not simple to note or handle. Even when noted, these conflicts are assumed as they are complex for a number of people to communicate in the open that they desire to be noted, control or affiliate. With regard to communication, relational matters are connected to content matters; they may come about when the stated issues ate discussed. Communication is vital in managing varied conflicts in multinational companies (Ouchi, 1977). The leaders who are in a position to retain the channels of communication open will have a better opportunity of understanding the beliefs, values and desires of others.
4. How Relational Conflict Happens
Ybema & Byun (2009) insists that culture variation affects communication between individuals with varied identity. In this section, internal communication of the company involves two sections: the management and employee tendencies. The management aspect of the multinational company is superior to the employee tendencies. Usually due to gaps with the positions, conflicts similarly take place in sending messages and information (Kraut, Fish, Root and Chalfonte 1993, 287– 314). Communication is a manner that is applied in a company to assist coworkers in sending information. Companies make use of communication model and make them operative in meeting the objectives of the company.
Table of Contents
4.1. Management model
The culture impacts the model of management. A number of researchers have insisted on the significance of culture in management (Williams et al, 1998; Ambos and Schlegelmilch, 2008, 189-206). Williams et al (1998) looks into the varied ways that managers solve conflicts in companies. Chinese managers depend on evading model while the Australians prefer him competing model just as the US. Morden (1995) states that the mode of control applied are affected by the culture outcome in centralized or decentralized. Moreover, an operative management model makes possible communication and the sending of information.
The Chinese have varied stand points regarding leadership with regard to norms in Australia (Martinson & Westwood, 1997; Williams, et al, 1998, 729-748). Consequently, a unique in-section is present in the company and bureaucratic controls are applied sparingly. Chinese managers are known for listening to their employees or applying the group’s opinion (Martinson & Westwood, 1997). Hence, in China vital choices are reached by managers in regard to the persons skills (De Cieri & Dowling, 1997, 21-42; Poon, Evangelista, & Albaum, 2005, 34-47). It is common for the Chinese leaders that have the capability and know-how to decide the goals of a company.
Australia and some African countries have their belief laid in the individual and a valid ability to safeguard their assets. The belief is well connected in Australia and some Africa states. With regard to Martinson and Westwood (1997), in organizations in Australia, any decision made does not rely on its leaders, rather on impersonal rules with a definite objective.
4.2. Staff behavior
The staff is a vital component of the company. They issue a company with their knowledge and skills. Education offers vital in the advancement tendencies and is seen as an important value of an employee, the skills will result to disproportion in wages and how they are attributed (Juhn, Murphy & Pierce, 1993). Wage is a vital motivation in addition to one’s perception of an individual. Educational status that is positively connected to skills will decide the wages and how the leaders attribute the employee. This is reflected in how they undertake their work leading to the perception. In multinational companies, language is another vital element that is taken into fact. There is a great connection between language and culture of an organization (Jiang, 2000; Welch, and Welch, 2008, 339-360). They affect each other interactively. Culture is engross with the language used and will affect the manner that people demonstrate and acquire information.
There is need for empowerment in the company so as to motivate the staff and acquire efficiency. Empowerment in a company brings about high results and performance in addition to satisfaction of the staff (Labinaca, Gray & Brass, 2000; Kirkman & Rosen, 1999).
Due to the variation in the cultures between the Chinese and Australian companies, the emotional contrast to the employees varies. The Australian employees evoke passion of Chinese staff by requiring an initiative while at work. Chinese managers are of the belief that with a centralized power, the employees are able to go according to the instruction hence more effective. The Australians rely on the groups to acquire wisdom (Richardson and Smith, 2007, 479-501). In life that is high of pressure meet their self-worthiness by developing their initiatives contrastingly, high pressure life oriented states, the individuals struggle follow the instruction of the managers so as to keep their job.
5. Communication Strategies for Conflict Resolution
5.1. Differentiation
Differentiation is the act that takes place in the early stages of conflict; they are useful in that it assist participants to describe the form of conflict and expound their situation with each other. It is necessary to conflict resolution in the sense that it creates the nature and factors of the conflict. To handle conflict in a multinational company, it needs intelligence, time and endurance. A procedural process f mediation and diplomacy has to take place. The main intention of differentiation is to allow for the conflicting parties on the discussion table in a manner that the outcome is a mutual change and agreed while looking into factors of commonalities (Labianca, Gray and Brass, 2000, 235-257). Differentiation needs that the people enlighten and expound on their position, regularly looking into their differences and not what they have in common. It is vital to working through a conflict (Putnam, 2010; Kolb and Putnam, 1992, 311-324). Differentiation shows a hard time in conflict procedure as it is bound to bring about a spill of conflict as opposed to making it settle. It is at this time that fears heighten as the conflict may not be handled. Moreover, differentiation is hard since it personalizes the conflict and avails their emotions in individuals that they solely bring about the conflict (Folger, Poole, & Stutman, 1993).
The aspect of differentiation is that is explains the conflict. It assists the conflicting groups to know how they vary on matters being taking to consideration. Being conversant with these contrasts is vital for conflict resolution as it centers on the conflict, allocates consideration for the conflicting group’s interests in the matters that are in conflict, and at the core of it, depersonalizes the conflict. This is in line with Fisher and Ury’s (1981) form of negotiation, differentiation is a method of putting apart the groups from the problem.
5.2. Fractionation
Fractionation is the method of breaking down huge conflicts into minute elements (Fisher, 1971). Just as in differentiation, fractionation normally takes place in the fore-phases of the conflict resolution procedure. It is a procedure that takes place intentionally where the people taking part decide to limit a big conflict to smaller ones and then handle a single part of the conflict. This process is composed of importance. First of all, fractionation limits the conflict by integration to a small and easier conflict. It is vital for people to get an understanding that the conflict they are handling is a collection of unstructured complexities, but it is a composition that involves precise and defined complexities. Secondly, it directs consideration to the conflict. Through limiting the big conflicts, people allocate transparency and explanation as opposed to trying and solve a great sum of problem all at a go. Thirdly, the reduction of the size of the conflict is useful in limiting the emotional concentration of the disagreement. Small conflicts involve a limited sense of emotional capacity. Lastly, fractionation is useful in aiding a much improved working relationship with the people involved in the conflict. In accepting to handle the decreased sense of the conflict, the people agree to engage in efforts that are meant to solve the problem.
As a consequence of fractionating a conflict between the employee and leader leads a much improved relationship and confirmed their desire to solve the issues in the times ahead. Fractionation is hence a vital conflict resolution strategy in situations where several issues bring about one implication. This call s for handling the issues into minute elements results to the appreciation of each other and more importantly solving the problem.
5.3. Face Saving
The third skill that would help a leader in resolving a conflict is the saving of face. Face saving is attributed to be communication efforts meant to start or keep an image with regard to some form of threat (Folger et al., 1993) messages that save face assist people to know how they want to be attributed by other people. The main aim of saving face is to safeguard the image of one.
In the case of a conflict, which is attributed to be in most cases threatening, participants might be fear how they are viewed by others. This is in regard to the positions they have acquired. This fear for self may not yield the much needed conflict resolution as it changes the center of the conflict, face-saving issues make people to handle the self-perception that others have. This is as they are connected to the conflict.
Face saving efforts can impact conflict resolution. In a China and Australia marketing company for technological parts, several interruptions take place when the workers go on strike citing poor wages and working conditions; working overtime and compulsory handling of units that are short of employees. This brought about a series of abuses and personal attacks between the workers and their leaders. First negotiations held were taken over by attempts to set up a negotiation on the two conflicting sides targeted on saving the image with the public. This involved that what they were doing was wrong with the circumstances in place. Consequently, these images and matters whether correct or not, as opposed to the main issues of wages and working over time, became the focus of the conflict resolution process. If the two groups had not taken into consideration not threatening each other and directing abuses, the conflict would have been solved quite sooner.
The most preferable method of resolving conflict is differentiation. It is here that the participants set on the table their concerns, expound on what they position, state the reasoning behind what their stand and recognize the brutality of the positions taken (Folger, Poole & Stutman, 1993; Maydan 1995, 158). The significance of differentiation in the organization is stated clearly by Deutshe (1973, p17) that states with no differentiation the chance of solving a problem, where the parties taking part are completely satisfied, is a missed process.
Differentiation involves sharing information and seeking; sharing involves stating the opinion on the issue in question while seeking of information involves getting the stand point of the other party. The sharing of information offers every party the access to the partner’s stand and trend in the conflict. Research states that the sharing of information in the process of a conflict heightens the possibility of acquiring a workable solution which acquires the desires and aims of every party. The sharing of information is operative for defensive, offensive and cooperative reasons (Putnam & Jones, 1982). The staff would work effortlessly in according information to acquire an offensive or defensive benefit. However the sharing of information is a cooperative process as the parties are able to get an understanding of each other’s stand (Pondy 1992, 257-262). IBM in China would hence successful apply this technique in its staff and leaders for effective conflict resolution. As this takes fact of the big size of the staff and the high possibility of conflict arising.
Differentiation calls for compromise of the two parties. This aspect of compromise is noticeable in Asian and Australia countries, though the Asians show a better preference of compromise. Australians are hence similar in compromise and collaboration showing more individualistic tendencies while in China they are varied in compromising and avoiding showing more collectivism.
In multinational companies in the effort of resolving a conflict should allow for the two parties to have a mutual understanding with regard to learning and adaptation n in the management sense. When the company does not share similar opinions as the other company which acquire from influence of varied national culture where the company works in, issues are bound to rise. In this paper, the two parties involved that are faced by contrast in operations and opinions as well as beliefs face disagreements. Efforts to resolve this conflict is through effective communication with the parties.
The variation in culture and operations with regard to Chinese company Dell and Australian company is quite big. The best method to resolve conflict should be selected so as to acquire the best way to resolve conflict. Conflict in multinational companies is hence unavoidable in the staff, top leadership and companies. It offers a chance for the skilled leaders and staff to practice their skills in making the business operations to run as a usual. The best model of conflict resolution with regard to communication to be applied is reliant on the location and people involved and every party plays a vital in this process.
Ambos, B. and Schlegelmilch, B. “Innovation in Multinational Firms: Does Cultural Fit Enhance Performance?”. Management International Review, 48(2), pp. 189-206, 2008. Print.
Borisoff, D., and D. A. Victor. Conflict management: A communication skills approach, 2nd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1997. Print.
Chatman, J. A. & Barsade, S. G. Personality, organizational culture and cooperation: Evidence from business simulation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40: 423-443, 1995. Print.
De Cieri, H. & Dowling, P. J. Strategic International human resource management: An Asian- Pacific perspective. Management International Review, 37 (1) (Special Issue): 21-42, 1997. Print.
Elsayed-Ekhouly, S. M. & Buda, R. Organizational conflict: a comparative analysis of conflict styles across cultures. International Journal of Conflict Management, 7, 71-81, 1996. Print.
Erez, M. “Interpersonal Communication Systems in Organizations, and their Relationships to Cultural Values, Productivity and Innovation: The Case of Japanese Corporations”. An International Review, 41 (1), PP. 43-64, 1992. Print.
Folger, J. P., Poole, M. S., & Stutman, R. K. Working through conflict: Strategies for relationships, groups, and organizations (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1993. Print.
Jiang, W.Y. “The relationship between culture and language”. Oxford University Press, 54(4), pp. 328-334, 2000. Print.
Juhn, C.; Murphy, K. M. and Pierce, B. “Wage Inequality and the Rise in Returns to Skill”. The Journal of Political Economy, 101(3), pp. 410-442, 1993. Print.
Kirkman, B. L. and Rosen, B. “Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment”. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), pp.58-74, 1999. Print.
Kolb, D., and L. Putnam. The multiple faces of conflict in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior 13: 311-324, 1992. Print.
Kraut, R. E.; Fish, R. S.; Root, R. W. and Chalfonte, B. L. Information communication in organizations: form, function, and technology, in: R.M. Baecker (Ed.), Readings in Groupware and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA, pp. 287– 314, 1993. Print.
Labianca, G.; Gray, B. and Brass, D. “A Grounded Model of Organizational Schema Change during Empowerment”. Organization Science, 11(2), pp. 235-257, 2000. Print.
Martinsons, M. and Westwood, R. “Management information systems in the Chinese business culture: An explanatory theory”. Information & Management, 32(5), pp. 215–228, 1997. Print.
Maydan N. A. Conflict and Organizations: Communicative Processes. New York: SUNY Press, 1995. Print.
Mills, M. K., ed. Alternative dispute resolution in the public sector. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers, 1991. Print
Morden, T. (1995). “International culture and management”. Management Decision, 33(2), pp. 16 – 21, 1995. Print.
Rausch, E.; Halfhill, S.M.; Sherman, H. and Washbush, J.B. “Practical leadership-in- management education for effective strategies in a rapidly changing world”. The Journal of Management Development, 20(3), pp. 245, 2001. Print.
Richardson, R. M. and Smith, S. W. “The influence of high/low-context culture and power distance on choice of communication media: Students’ media choice to communicate with Professors in Japan and America”. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(4), pp. 479-501, 2007. Print.
Pondy, L. R. Reflections on organizational conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior 13: 257- 262, 1992. Print.
Poon, P. S., Evangelista, F. U., & Albaum, G. “A comparative study of the management styles of marketing managers in Australia and the People’s Republic of China”. International Marketing Review, 22(1), pp. 34-47, 2005. Print.
Putnam, L. L. Communication as changing the negotiation game. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 38(4), 325–335, 2010. Print.
Welch, D. and Welch, L. “The Importance of Language in International Knowledge Transfer”. Management International Review, 48(3), pp. 339-360, 2008. Print.
Williams, K.Y.; Morris, M. W.; Leung, K.; Bhatnagar, D.; HU, J.C.; Kondo, M. and Luo, J. L. Culture, Conflict Management, and Underlying Values: Accounting for Differences in Styles of Handling Conflicts among US, Chinese, Indian, and Filipino Managers, Journal of international business studies, 29(4), pp. 729-748, 1998. Print.
Wilmot, W. W., and J. L. Hocker. Interpersonal conflict, 5th ed. Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill, 1998. Print.
Ybema, S. and Byun, H. “Cultivating Culture Differences in Asymmetric Power Relations”. Cross Culture Management, 9 (3), pp. 339-358, 2009. Print.
Jermaine Byrant
Nicole Johnson
OVER
RATING
YEARS
