Negotiation and Dispute Resolution (NDR) Admissions Writing Exercise

Part I

If I was in a position where I felt my job and credibility were threatened and I lashed out at a colleague I would intuitively approach the situation by attempting to discuss my feelings and perspective with the colleague. My gut reaction would be one of anger and regret if I allowed myself to lose control and cause a scene. As a result, if I were given the luxury of orchestrating my next encounter with this young college I would first approach him with an apology when he is free. Next, I would ask him if it is possible for us to meet together with our manager to discuss what happened and attempt to mediate the situation. I would discuss my intentions with my manager and keep him or her in the loop. While my first inclination is to have a one-on-one discussion with him, I feel it would not be beneficial because he has proven to be a bit insensitive. In addition, I would like to have documentation related to my interaction with him so that there is no room for inaccuracy. Having a third party present will provide a witness to our communication and act as a mediator if necessary.

It would be my hope to express my viewpoint that I feel disrespected by some of the comments he makes and hope to understand his perspective. My goal would be to come to a mutual resolution where we are both able to work together effectively in the future. I will go into the meeting with an open mind so that I can attempt to understand his perspective and his true intention for our work relationship. It may be that he feels he has to prove his capabilities because he is new to the team, and may be overcompensating for this feeling of inadequacy. Orchestrating a mediation session that is not officially recorded by human resources will provide us with the structure to talk about our issues, and the freedom to express ourselves without negative human resource consequences. My opening sentence would be, “I apologize for losing my temper the other day, I would like to talk to you and figure out a way we can work together”. I would then proceed to explain my perspective and allow him to provide his own view of the work dynamic.

Part II

Aside from trusting my instincts, which could be wrong, it is also beneficial to check my approach against a more informed method of resolving the problem. Typical sources of workplace conflict include poor communication, different values, different interests, scarce resources, personality clashes, and poor performance (H.R, n.d). In this scenario, the conflict arises from different interests, scarce resources, and personality clashes. These are the main impediments and challenges for a successful resolution to this situation. The colleague is interested in moving up in the company and making professional impressions, even if it is at the expense of others. In addition, high-level positions are scarce, making competition for those roles very stiff. In addition, this scenario reveals is a very clear personality clash that will require my colleague and me to understand and accept each other’s approach to problem solving and conflict management. Through research, I have found that there are multiple frameworks and models that provide comprehensive understanding of the situation. The dual concern theory argues that high concern for self, accompanied by low concern for others results in forcing behaviors, while low concern for self and high concern for others results in yielding behaviors (Wall & Callister, 1995). In this same theory framework, low concern for one’s self and others leads to avoidance, and high concern for one’s self and others leads to problem solving (Dreu, 2001). As a result, it is clear that the foundation of respect and high regard for one another will be necessary for my colleague and me to resolve our conflict.

Both theoretical and empirical models of interpersonal relationship conflict focus on resolution through engagement and avoidance behaviors. However, third-party sense-making is also an effective resolution model that relies on third-party encounters to support mediation when interests are incompatible (Volkema, Farquhar, Bergmann, 1996). This theory is most appropriately applied to the given scenario and supports my instinctive decision to address our conflict in the presence of a third party. This framework will be applied by establishing emotional, cognitive and behavioral sense-making elements that will be worked through during the meeting in order establish an understanding of one another as well as how to move forward (Pruitt & Carnevale, 1992). Keeping the dual concern theory in mind, I will show respect and high regard for my colleague in order to establish the best changes in resolution and problem solving. Incorporating this mindset while applying the “third party sense-making” approach will aid us in resolving our conflicts of interest and personality.

Conclusion

After reflecting on this scenario and evaluating the research surrounding workplace conflicts and resolution frameworks, I would like to maintain the practical approach I proposed for addressing the situation. My intuition and instinct to address my colleague with a third party are supported by research which suggests that a third party mediator plays a beneficial and integral role in conflict resolution attempts within the workplace. I will incorporate this theory when I speak to my colleague in an effort to establish a resolution that we can both be happy with. This will include a workspace where we both feel respected and valued, as well as a communication strategy that seeks to address both of our needs and interests. While our personalities will still be distinct and dissimilar, establishing problem solving and resolution methods will allow us to maintain an effective working relationship.

References

Carnevale, P., & Pruitt, D. (1992). Negotiation and mediation. Annual Review of Psychology. 2.43:531. Retrieved from http://division.aomonline.org/cm/Award-Winning-Papers/1998-MIA-Carnevale.pdf

Dreu, C., Evers, A., Beersma, B., Kluwer, E., & Nauta, A. (2001). A theory based measure of conflict management strategies in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 22, 645-668. Retrieved from http://orgwise.ca/sites/osi.ocasi.org.stage/files/resources/A%20Theory-Based%20Measure%20of%20Conflict%20Management%20Strategies%20in%20the%20Workplace.pdf

Human Resources, (H.R) (n.d).Resolving workplace conflict. University of Colorado. Retrieved from http://hr.colorado.edu/fsap/healthtips/Pages/Resolving-Workplace-Conflict.aspx

Volkema, R., Farquhar, K., & Bergmann, T. (1996). Third-party sense-making in interpersonal conflicts at work: A theoretical framework. doi: 10.1177/001872679604901104 Human Relations. 49(11), 1437-1454. Retrieved from http://hum.sagepub.com/content/49/11/1437.short

Wall, J., & Callister, R. (1995). Conflict and Its Management. Journal of Management. 21, 515. DOI: 10.1177/014920639502100306. Retrieved from http://jom.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/21/3/515