Organizational Conflict and Organizational Performance

Marjorie P. Garcia

Instructor, Mariano Marcos State University  

PhD Development Management Student, Divine Word College of Laoag

Abstract

Conflict is found everywhere. Conflicts are part of human nature. Organizational conflict can affect organizational performance. The good news is that conflict can be extremely productive and useful for companies, organizations and individuals. Though conflict is often viewed as negative, it is capable of increasing organizational innovativeness and productivity, thereby improving organizational performance. In addition, conflicts build the spirit of teamwork and cooperation among the employees of an organization and conflict management skills can be learned. When conflicts are properly managed in organizations, it will lead to the attainment and achievement of organizational goals and objectives. Even the most extreme conflicts can be resolved through bonding, dialogue and negotiation.

Keywords: conflict; conflict management; organization; organizational performance

 

Introduction

When people work and interact together, things do not always turn the way people want it to be. There are always misunderstandings and things do not always go smoothly. Indeed, conflict is an inevitable element of relationships in organizations. Conflict is a natural occurrence in all businesses, may it be a small organization or a big corporation. What makes them only different is how management views and addresses conflicts in their respective organizations.

Conflict can be viewed as either negative or positive. According to Fiumano (2012), the word ‘conflict’ connotes something bad. Indeed, managers and management theorists have traditionally viewed conflict as a problem to be avoided. When people think of conflict, they think of two people or groups of people in a heated argument. But as the workplace shapes itself to recognize and be more accepting of diversity and differing opinions and as companies write their diversity policies, they change the way they view conflict. Instead, organizations embrace it as something to be valued instead of something to be afraid of.

 Conflict is not at all bad. People have come to recognize that though conflict can be a major problem, certain kind of conflict may be beneficial. Well-managed conflict can bring enormous benefits to people and companies. In fact, conflict management is often one of the biggest drivers of change. If properly handled, it can help people to be more innovative, create stronger bonds, build effective teams, establish strong working relationship and eventually improve individual as well as organizational performance. The key is to openly face an issue and negotiate a win-win outcome.

Organizational Conflict

Organizations are networks of interpersonal relationships designed to reach an objective and accomplish goals. They transform inputs into the desired end-goals by putting together technologies, procedures and people. The management system is responsible for the coordination of these resources to reach the goals.

To be a part of an organization or to do business is to be in conflict. Conflict is built into organizational life. According to Adomi and Anie (2005) conflict is a fact of life in any organization as long as people compete for jobs, resources, power, recognition and security. In addition, dealing with conflicts is a great challenge to management. It is important to view conflict not a negative but positive way.

 

Conflict is defined as a disagreement, a battle or to be at odds. In essence, conflict is a differing of opinions, point of views or ideas. Conflict occurs when two or more people see things from different perspectives, given their education, background, upbringing, knowledge of the issue, beliefs, time of day, mood, etc. (Fuimano,2012).

Moreover, Plunkett, et al (2005) defined conflict as a disagreement between two or more organizational members or teams. Conflict occurs because people do not always agree – on goals, issues, perceptions, and the like – and because people inevitably compete.

 

In addition, Kohlrieser (2007) described conflict as a manifestation of difference between two or more persons or groups characterized by tension, disagreement, emotion or polarization, where bonding is broken or lacking. Griffin (1997) stated that conflict manifests itself in a variety of ways: people may compete with one another, glare at one another, shout, or withdraw.

According to Leung and Tjosvold (1998) conflict has traditionally been defined as opposing interests involving scarce resources, goal divergence and frustration. Conflict is often to occur in mixed-motive relationships where persons have competitive and cooperative interests (Walton and McKersie, 1965). The competitive elements create the conflict (Plunkett et al, 2005) and the cooperative elements create the incentives to bargain to reach an agreement.

Although, conflict is often defined as disagreements brought about by incompatible goals and interests, conflict may occur even when people have highly compatible goals. When people’s actions are incompatible, conflict exists, even when their desired end-states are compatible.

Organizational Performance

Every organization is concerned with its organizational performance. Dodd (2003) as cited by Ongori (2009) stated that businesses nowadays are operating in a turbulent environment where organisations are searching for measures that will allow them to improve their performance and competitiveness. Thus, it is very important for organizations to look and find what promotes and impedes good organizational performance.

Organizational performance cannot be achieved only by implementing the right strategies and with the right technologies but also by improving organizational climate. Conducive organizational environment is one factor that can boost organizational performance. Maintaining conducive organizational climate is one of the main job of the top management. One source of negative environment is conflict. Managing conflict for a better result is important.   

The manager, then, needs to identify the positive and negative aspects of conflict. Dysfunctional (negative) conflict limits the organization’s ability to achieve its objectives while functional (positive) conflict supports the objectives of the organization (Griffin, 1997). Dysfunctional conflict leads to poor or low performance whereas functional conflict can improve the organization’s performance. People can be motivated to improve performance by competition – a kind of conflict – if they think their way is better that someone else’s.

In addition, as long as conflict is being handled in a cordial and constructive manner, it serving a useful purpose in the organization thus, improves performance. On the other hand, when working relationships are being disrupted and the conflict has reached destructive levels, it has likely become dysfunctional creating poor performance and needs to be addressed.

Griffin (1997) claims that if there is absolutely no conflict in the group or organization, its members become complacent and apathetic. As a result, group or organizational performance may subsequently begin to suffer. A moderate level of conflict among group or organizational members, on the other hand, can spark motivation, creativity, innovation, and initiative and raise performance.  Too much conflict, though, can produce such undesirable results as hostility and lack of cooperation, which lower performance. The key for managers is to find and maintain the optimal amount of conflict that fosters performance. Of course, what constitutes optimal conflict varies with both the situation and the people involved.

The Effect of Conflict to Organizations

Not all conflicts are bad and not all conflicts are good. Conflict is a powerful force in organizations and has both positive and negative consequences to the organization. Most people view conflict as a negative force for the success of the organization or in reaching common goals. Conflict can create negative impacts to a group but may also lead to positive effects.

Recent researches have demonstrated that conflict help managers confront reality and create new solutions to tough problems. When conflict is well-managed, it breathes life and energy into people’s relationships and makes people more productive. Conflict is also necessary for true involvement, empowerment and democracy. It allows people to voice their concerns and opinions and create solutions responsive to several points of view. The result is, they become more united and committed.

Well-managed conflict also develops people’s individuality. By this, people become more fulfilled and capable. Conflict also creates a channel to form and express people’s needs, opinions and positions. Through conflict, people also feel unique and independent as well as connected to others.

           Conflict stimulates involvement in the discussion, builds group cohesion and also improves quality of decisions (Henry, 2009). In addition, conflict in the organization builds cooperation among the employees, encourages organizational innovativeness and improves quality decisions in resolving conflicts (Hotepo, et al, 2010). When people are in conflict, it allows people to bring out their concerns which lead to discussion of the issues which in the end creates a better decision. After all the conflict, having people working in unity and harmony creates a better company.

Conflicts can also be destructive especially if it consumes individual members’ energies in dealing with the conflict instead of concentrating on other productive activities of the organization. Conflict interferes with group process and group members may become unwilling to work with members of the group. If conflicts are not resolved properly, it might affect the organization adversely in terms of poor performance, lack of cooperation, wasting of resources and productivity (Hotepo, et al, 2010). Furthermore, unresolved conflicts tend to grow into bigger conflicts (Knippen and Green, 1999), the more it grows, the greater the problems are and the more severe they become.

The potential value of conflict also points to the challenges to manage it well. The consequences of conflict – strong relationships, individuality and productivity – are also needed for it. However, this positive conflict view must be tempered with the understanding that it is the appropriate, skilled management of conflict, not the conflict itself, that contributes to organizational success. Learning to manage conflict is a wise investment for individuals and organizations preparing for the uncertain future.

 

Conclusion

             Every day, and everywhere people argue, debate and develop solutions to many issues which arise in the course of doing business. People learn to use their conflicts to keep abreast of changes and reach their goals. However, people must learn to maintain harmonious relationships and discuss issues openly, respectfully and rationally to make their conflicts productive. Therefore, it is the duty of the management and the employees to develop ways on how to promote cohesiveness in organizations and if possible, conflicts should be resolved at their stage to enhance organizational performance.

 

References:

Adomi, E.E. and S.O. Anie. Conflict Management in Nigerian University Libraries. J. Library Manage., 27 (8). Pages 520-530.

Fuimano, Julie. 2012. A New Perspective…Conflict

Griffin, Ricky W. 1997. Fundamentals of Management: Core Concepts and Applications. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Henry, Ongori. 2009. Organisational Conflict and Its Effect to Organisational Performance. Research Journal of Business Management 2 (1).  Academic Journals Inc. Pages 16-24.

Hotepo, O.M., A. S. Asokere, A. Abdul-Azeez and S. A. Ajemunigbohun, Empirical Study of the Effect of Conflict on Organizational Performance in Nigeria. Business and Economics Journal, Volume 2010: BEJ-15.

Kohlrieser, George. June 2007. Six Essential Skills for Managing Conflict. Perspective for Managers Journal. No. 149.

Knippen, J.T. and T.B. Green. 1999. Handling Conflicts. J Workplace Learning, 11(1). Pages 27-32.

Leung, Kwok and D. Tjosvold. 1998. Conflict Management in the Asia Pacific: Assumptions and Approaches in Diverse Cultures. Singapore: John Wiley and Sons (Asia) Ltd.

Plunkett, Warren R., R. F. Attrer and G. S. Allen. 2005. Management: Meeting and Exceeding  Costumer Expectations. International Student Edition. USA: Thomson South-Western.

Walton, R. and R. B. Mc Kersie. 1965. A Behavioral Theory of Labor Negotiations. New York: Mc Graw-Hill.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The influence of society over the life of a person

                                           NIMFA C. CATBAGAN

                                      Divine Word College of Laoag

The key to the mysteries of human nature is to be found in society.

Anonymous

Abstract

No one can discount the role of society in the development of every human being, because as soon as an individual is born, he or she becomes automatically part of the society. Every person’s thinking and lifestyle reflects the society which furnishes the person with the conditions of existence and development which he or she needs. The human person cannot achieve his fullness alone, but only through receiving certain goods in various forms essential to him from society. Although many would counter that the individual person does not dissolve into society, rather he or she retains his unique and independent individuality and makes his contribution to the social whole.  In other words, “just as society itself shapes human beings, so human beings shape society”. Such contention clearly depicts the important role of society in a person’s life and the person’s innate ability  to perceive and give meaning to his or her own life himself or herself ,  which serves as the focal point of the discussions  in this paper.

Keywords

 Society, person, life, perspectives, influence,  role, challenge, original  person

Introduction

   “The human person is and ought to be the principle, the subject, and the object of every social organization”.  Such statement captures the essence of the relationship between society and the life of a person. Similarly, according to a pleasant simile from a source written by an author who chose not to be identified, “society carries the individual as a river carries a boat”, which could really be true but as per further elaboration, it is indeed in certain instances, and not exactly the case because  “an individual does not float with the river, rather, he or she is the turbulently flowing river itself”.  It can therefore be implied that the events of a person’s social life do not come about by themselves, instead they are made, just as stated by the same source,   “historical events are not charted in advance by superhuman forces, but rather they are made by people”. It is within these perspectives, that society’s influence over a person’s life can be viewed although generalization cannot be made solely from these ramifications (Spirkin, A. n.d.)                                    The society molds the person which can be manifested in the claim of some philosophers  that, the key to the mysteries of human nature is to be found in  society, which implies that what a person is and would become,  depends a lot on what the society could offer and how well it is lived by the person. Hence, it can also be stated that every human being is a person’s embodiment of social relations, a product of the existing social system.  Undoubtedly, a person bears the clear imprint of the life of society as a whole, but as to the extent to which is manifested vary from person to person.   

The Meaning of Life from Different Perspectives

            Even when looking at the same object, people may not always notice the same thing, as everyone has his or her own way of looking at things, occurrences or events.  This commonplace observation can be interpreted that every person possesses something that is strictly his or her own, one that sets him or her apart from others.  In other words, “people are not alike, and will never be alike, considering the fact that every human being is indeed a unique individual.  One could be a “look-alike” of someone else, as identical twins do, but there will always be distinguishing marks that enables one to pinpoint who is and who is not. This contention provides the premise that people tend to view life in varied ways upon which individual perspectives are developed.                                                                                                                       

          Viewing life from different perspectives is like placing oneself in different settings or different milieu. This reality can be traced to man’s gift of wisdom, a gift which enables two people to look at the same thing, the same scenario from entirely different angles revealing that every person can claim that there is something in him or her that  is entirely his or her own.    It is this uniqueness or person’s individuality that brings dynamism in a society.                                                                                                       

          As what an old wise monk claims, “one of the key secrets of life is to change oneself and the world changes around you,”  in other words, changing one’s focus about life would change life itself. Hence, whether the world can be more exciting or become so simple for someone, it would really be up to her or him. One’s whole personal world can be turned upside down and inside out and look at things differently from others.   Life therefore can take on countless meanings and implications for every person.                      For most people, life is perceived as some sort of a linear process. Something is started,  it is done and ultimately finished. Thus, it can be so disastrous if the universe did not really work as expected.  If for instance, the universe worked in parallel instead of series, or if everything would happen at the same time, it would really be extremely difficult to handle,  more so when one fails to create a perception of what he or she would like reality to be.                                                                                                           

         Stephen Hopson, who despite being deaf since birth, became a motivational speaker, author, pilot and an award-winning stockbroker, pointed out many different means of looking at life from different perspectives.  He said that one way is by believing that “it's not what happens to you but how you perceive it that determines how you will deal with the situation”.  Another perspective, is holding on to the thought that “behind every difficult person you meet, there's a lesson to be learned”, and thirdly, is to say, “what can I learn from this ?, instead of saying, “why is this happening to me ?” (http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Stephen_Hopson ).

Similarly, a person can have a different way of looking at life when he or she “trusts that everything in life is temporary and that going through different cycles is part of the process. In other words, “Life will get better if one just have enough faith to get through a situation not happening according to his or her own wish. As many would believe that every individual has a blueprint for his or her life, that there is such a thing as destiny and it is up to an individual to discover what it is. Although this can be contested by those who believe in an ultimate power which directs everything in this world, even a person’s own life, thus no one can really have a control of what and how events would take their course.                                                                                             

 

The power of visualization cannot be ignored in defining life. Every person has the ability to visualize what he would wish to have or do in life, hence, can be painted in a canvas according to the colors and images created and reflecting one’s very  own feelings and aspirations, which are truly one’s own creation.                                                           For others, life is subscribing to the premise that without adversities or challenges, a person will never get to know what a person is truly made of. This perspective of life is anchored on the belief that it is through toughest times that one learns that he or she is capable of accomplishing something, thereby acquiring strength and confidence in the process. Individuals who draw strength from difficulties, failures and weaknesses manifest this view of life.

Another perspective is that of believing that life is a “perpetual training ground”, preparing everyone of what is to come. Experiences, both good and bad, are all meant to train one to be ready to face whatever forthcoming challenges and eventualities. Thus one should never to refrain from learning from whatever experience one gets into.

Similarly a common perspective of life  states that “everything that happens in one’s life and everyone that one meets in this life is for a PURPOSE”.   This is the view  of individuals who say that there are no “accidents” in this life,  rather, everything is meant to happen and why they happen is for a reason. In like manner, that there is always a reason and purpose for everything that one does.  Corollary to this perspective is the contention that everyone does matter, that by just being oneself, an individual could make a difference in small and large ways.  It can therefore be deduced that making the most of life is more of believing in one’s own capabilities or refusing to make comparisons and understanding that one can be as good as another for everyone is at different stages in their lives.  Again this is in view of the fact that every person is unique with special qualities, talents and skills, thus there is and will never be one like the other.

 

The Role of Society in the Life of a Person

         The role of society in a person’s life is well pointed out in Durkheim’s Theory,  which conceives of an individual person as being born into an ongoing social system independent of the individual and determines his behavior or model of thinking which characterizes a given society.  Each person therefore becomes a product of the society.  Said theory is described as a deterministic theory (Travis, 2001).

Moreover, Jacques Maritain as cited by Schall (1998),  avers that, the human person cannot achieve his fullness alone, but only through receiving certain goods essential to him from society, thus, a person’s life is shaped by society itself.  Indeed, society is part and parcel of a person’s life as expressed in the sociological deduction that  the person, by virtue of his dignity, as well as of his needs, requires to be a member of a society.

Social psychologists point out that the wealth and complexity of the individual's social content are conditioned by the diversity of his links with society.  This is why the level of individual development is an indicator of the level of development of society, and vice versa. But they also claim that the individual does not dissolve into society, rather, he or she retains his unique and independent individuality and makes his contribution to the social whole, which implies that just as society itself shapes human beings, so human beings shape society.

The quote, I know that the way of a man is not in himself; it is not in man to direct his steps. (Jeremiah 10:23), clearly implies the need for any person to be connected, or associated whether directly or indirectly to a society defined by a system of laws drawing the line between what is right and what is wrong, what is acceptable and unacceptable to all.

According to an online information hub, there are four major roles of society, that of social responsibility, religious responsibility, financial responsibility and political responsibility. Clearly, the affairs of a person are not formed and regulated only by himself or herself but rather subject to certain social standards which are established  through well-defined process.  This is so because as a person enters into the society, he becomes a part of a whole and like the rest forming the social whole, depends on the complements provided for him to be able to become fully integrated into the system so to speak. Social life therefore imposes upon a person’s life constraints and sacrifices if necessary for him to be truly serving the part he is made to assume in the society. In other words, being inferior to the social whole, a person must serve the common cause of the society (Mida, 2009).

The role of society in a person’s life therefore constitutes the totality of a person, his being a part at the same time an individual whole because such individuality is ultimately transformed into an essential component which society derives to provide for the common good of its members.

 

The Challenge to be an Original Person

As quoted from an article, ”being an original person can be an eccentric person”. But what does it really mean to be an original person ?  People act according to their comfort pocket, so any social interactions is completely original, therefore one will not be talking of one or two million twins that imitate thoughts and behaviors as one strives to move on with their lives.

Just as every person would want to feel and be special, and not become the same monotonous "thing" as everybody else, he or she would assert a uniqueness making him or her stand out and be an entirely different person setting him apart from others, becoming his real self instead of becoming the person because of the influence of conditions from the world outside the domain of his or her own self.

Deciding to be what he or she thinks he or she is can be considered engaged in a pointless pursuit of being an original person, something that may not become a reality considering his or her imperfections despite being endowed with the primordial rights which could be invoked and must be respected by society. Sadly though, such rights coupled with the gifts of intellect, logical reason,  will and freedom, breaking up from the social to have a claim of oneself may prove to be a gargantuan task but really impossible to realize because man has been constituted first as a person, an original creation  of God gifted with the individuality setting him or her apart from the rest, before being part of the human society.

 

Possibility to Live Without Society

For a bigger number of people, the concept of living without society is regarded as an absurd concept since, Aristotle, the great Greek thinker, as cited by Sherzai (2012), pointed out, human beings are by nature social animals. Man lives in a society and within a society where he is bound to be in the so-called chains of relations and dependencies, tied with social responsibilities.  Thus, many argue that it is indeed impossible to live without society which would mean without a code of laws and order. However,  this can be disputed by those who say that man can live without a code of values and norms which governs human society, and that even if man so decides to severe his or her ties with an established institution, like for instance not having any religion,  he or she would maintain some standard of value.                                                      

In his book, “The Social Contract”, Jean-Jacques Rousseau presented the contention, "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains." It is almost unavoidable to live in a society without social interactions and to have established relations. Every necessity, from a very tiny one to the largest one, is attained through the support of the society, which denotes that living without society is and will never be a possibility (eBooks@Adelaidehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/au/).              However, many human beings do not feel this dependence over the society as universal and there are those who, intentionally or unintentionally, strive to leave alone, isolated from social life,  detached  from the society and choose to have a life outside of it instead.  Thereby, he or she loses social interactions and as a result suffers what is known as social isolation which refers to a complete or near-complete lack of contact with society  (Sherzai, 2012).

Conclusion

Admittedly, the influence of society is so vast and essential such that a person’s thinking and lifestyle reflects that society where he or she belongs and this influence is important not only to man’s development, but also to a nation and more so to the entire world. Persons provide the foundation upon which a society would function well and survive, thus every society must have as its members, persons who will act, almost automatically, in the way that particular society requires.  Thus, it is man’s  person which enters into society; and it is  by reason of such individuality that the person is in society as a part where transformation and becoming take its course.

 

References

Hopson, Stephen. 20 Ways of Looking at Life From a Different Perspective, retrieved      November 6, 2011 from http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Stephen_Hopson

 Maritain, Jacques (2010). The Human Person and Society

http://payingattentiontothesky.com/2010/04/01/the-human-person-and-society-%E2%80%93-jacques-maritain/The Jacques Maritain Center, University of Notre Dame.

Mida, Andro (2009). Role of Society - The Key Roles Society Should Play For Social Stability 

             http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Andro_Mida

Sherzai, Dilawai (2012). Can Men Live Without Society? Retrieved from   http://outlookafghanistan.net/topics.php?post_id=5361

Spirkin A. (n.d.) Dialectical Materialism: On the Human Being and Being Human @             http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/spirkin/works/dialectical-            materialism/ch05-       

Travis, M. (2001) http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~ttpbst/me/writing/durkheim.htm    retrieved October 26, 2011.

Rosseau, Jean Jacques. A Discourse Upon the Origin and the Foundation of the        Inequality        Among Mankind http://www.web-books.com/Classics/ON/B1/B1106/000Title.html

Rosseau, Jean-Jacques.  The Social Contract @eBooks@Adelaide          http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/au/