Conflict Analysis: Tools and Models

Introduction 

At present, conflicts in organizations are inevitable. They may arise between the employees, supervisors, and subordinates. Alternatively, they can happen between the workers and the external stakeholders such as the suppliers, customers, and the regulatory agencies. Additionally, there are two broad categories of conflicts in the workplace. First, there are the situations where people’s decisions, ideas, or deeds that are linked to the job are being opposed. The second type of conflict is the one in which people do not get along, which is also referred to as a personality clash. A conflict of ideas may be productive in case the involved parties are ready to seek solutions together ( Spector & Bruk-Lee, 2012) . As a result, there is the generation of better workplace practices as well as positive changes. On the other hand, the personality conflicts are seldom productive. This is because they lead to situations such as low productivity among the workers and increased absenteeism. At a personal level, the conflict is both unpleasant and stressful. This paper is going to focus on a workplace conflict that happened in an organization that I was working for two years ago. It will use the various conflict analysis models and theories to evaluate the dynamics of the conflict effectively, hence making it possible to have a better understanding of the conflict. 

A description of the conflict in the workplace 

The conflict to be considered involved my coworkers and me in the marketing department. In this department, we were tasked with various responsibilities. First, it was our duty to always link the clients to the products and the services that were offered by the organization. In this case, it was our duty to track and predict what the clients preferred in their products and services. Secondly, it was our duty to deal with promotions. We were involved in the conducting of promotional activities, for instance, public relations for the business. Additionally, we assisted the members of the sales department with the various sales forces and offering of public relations support for the various products that were launched. Thirdly, we were tasked with business development. In this case, our department worked closely with the sales department in the development of various business strategies that were aimed at making sure that the company remained competitive. For example, we were involved in the identification of new markets for the products and services or the discovery of the needs that the current clients had for modified versions of the organization’s products and services. For each of the duties, several tasks were involved, and our department manager had each assigned respective tasks to each person. In the first few days, all the activities were running smoothly. However, it got to a point in which I felt that I was being discriminated. In this case, I started feeling that the tasks that I had been assigned were quite menial. On the other hand, I felt that my coworkers were handling the more ‘complicated matters.’ In addition, I also started harboring resentment against my coworkers and department manager to the extent that when, for instance, I was requested to perform a specific task, I would engage in outright verbal conflicts. After some time, these instances of conflicts had some negative impacts. For example, they resulted in low productivity among the workers in the department. In this case, the consistent verbal conflicts led to wastage of time as well as resources of the organization. Rather than focusing on the achievement of the intended objectives, we were always engaged on the divisive matters. 

The analysis of the conflict using the conflict analysis tools and models 

Conflict analysis is the logical study of the dynamics that are involved in any conflict. Hence, the model is aimed at prioritizing the range of matters which should be addressed, establishing the impacts of the conflict, and establishing the major causes and contributing factors of conflict to ensure that there is the determination of the most suitable responses. Several tools and models will be used in the analysis of the conflict. 

The wheel of conflict 

One method that can be used to analyze the conflict is the Wheel of Conflict. This is a model that is inclusive of five elements. They include emotions, structure, emotions, history, communication, and values. Considering the element of structure, it is important to evaluate the manner in which the dynamics of the participants are enhancing the conflict. With regard to emotions, it is considered that they should be disregarded, but when out of control, they can easily result in disputes ( Powell & DiMaggio, 2012) . Considering the element of history, the relationship, as well as previous experiences between the people involved in a conflict, may result in people or parties making of assumptions about each other. Hence, there is the development of a negative bias before engaging a person in a conflict. In communication, there is the consideration of the choices of the words which are used, the manner in which they are said, and the various nonverbal cues and elements. Lastly, with reference to values, it is noted that different people possess varying wants, goals, and needs. Hence, assuming the needs of other people has the ability to result in negative responses. 

With regard to the workplace conflict identified, the dynamics that led to the creation of the conflict was the fact that the department did not use appropriate criteria during the allocation of the tasks that were required to be accomplished. It is for this reason that some of the tasks appeared to be ‘menial’ while the rest of them seemed a bit ‘complicated’ or ‘challenging.’ Considering the emotions that were involved, it is evident that I was both angry and frustrated due to the feeling of being ‘ inferior. ’ Additionally, I ignored these emotions, hence leading to the creation of the conflict. Using the communication aspect, it is noted that the choices of the words that were used were not appropriate for the situation. The use of these words was one of the factors that led to the situation of always engaging in the divisive matters instead of focusing on the tasks that were at hand. Lastly, using the element of values, it is evident that people possess different goals, needs, and wants. In my case, I wanted to carry out tasks that were more challenging just in the same manner as my coworkers. In other words, this means that my manager did not think of my needs in the workplace, hence leading to the conflict. 

The conflict tree model 

This is a visual tool that is used in the enhancement of a better understanding of the prioritized conflict in terms of the causes and the effects. In other words, the model is aimed at evoking discussions regarding conflict, getting to an agreement on the major problem, and understanding the relationships that exist between the causes and the effects. It should also be noted that in this model, conflict is usually compared to a tree that has roots, branches, and the trunks. The first aspect to consider is the roots. In this case, they are considered to be the causes of all the conflicts. Though they are normally under the surface and hence invisible, they are the anchor, as well as the sources of life, for the tree ( Senge, 2014). Further, it is considered that several reasons can enhance the prevalence of conflict. For example, it may be caused by the unequal access to the necessary resources, bad governance, poverty, and the ethnic prejudices and divides. The second aspect to consider is the trunk. This is the point at which all the roots have converged, and as a result, there is difficulty in distinguishing the relationship between the trunk and the specific string of the roots. Lastly, there are the branches, fruits, and leaves. They represent the group of conflicts that are emerging from the trunk. In other words, they are the impacts of the conflict at hand. After some time, the trees and the fruits may fall into the soil and grow into other trees that are different from the original tree. This is a situation that shows how conflicts can be complicated. Considering the already highlighted conflict, the roots and trunk of the conflict was the idea of feeling discriminated during the process of task allocation. Further, considering the branches, leaves, and fruits, it is noted that the conflict had some impacts. For instance, I engaged in verbal conflicts with my coworkers and managers. As a result of these confrontations, there was time wastage and subsequent low productivity among the workers in the department. 

The ABC Triangle 

This is a model that is founded on the premise that conflicts possess three major elements. They include the attitudes of the actors who are involved, their behavior, and the contradiction. The contradiction, which is the conflict, is normally defined by the actors who are involved in terms of the incompatible goals or values that exist between them. These three elements are interlinked, and any of them can be the beginning point for the development of conflict. The inconsistency of goals, for instance, over a territory, can result in cases of hostile attitudes, and later, it may result in hostile behavior ( Goetsch & Davis, 2014) . Likewise, a case of hostile behavior can result in hostile attitudes and the creation of incompatible goals. Initially, the simple proposition that conflict has the ability to begin at any of the three points becomes more complicated when people take into account what behaviors, attitudes, and contradictions are, and the manner in which they are interlinked. Considering the conflict that I had, it is evident that goals were incompatible. For example, as previously highlighted, I intended to work on tasks that did not appear to be ‘menial’ in nature. As a result of the incompatibility of goals, I found myself frustrated up to a point where I raised my voice at my department manager and coworkers. It is also possible to view the situation from the idea that hostile behaviors between actors may result in behavior that creates an incompatibility of goals. In this case, my hostile behavior indicated that I was not happy with what I was doing. Additionally, it shows that I was not achieving my goals, which was to work in a ‘ complex ’ environment. 

The Onion Model 

The onion model is established on the notion that the layers of any conflict are normally similar to that of an onion. In this case, several dynamics should be considered. However, the dynamics that are present on the surface are the only ones which are visible up to the point where people begin peeling the layers to establish what is at the core. The model is aimed at enhancing a clear understanding of the positions that are held by the conflicting parties, their real interests, and their needs. In other words, it is a means of differentiating what the parties say they want and what they really need and want. Positions are what individuals say they want in the conflict. Interests refer to what the individuals want, and the factors that encourage them. The outer layer is a representation of the positions that people allow people to see as well as hear. With reference to the identified conflict, the first aspects to be considered are the position and interest. In this case, I wanted to get the chance to work on tasks that were challenging. The motivation for this was due to the belief that I was always doing the ‘menial tasks,’ hence enhancing the need to have other tasks that were challenging. 

Conflict mapping 

This is a strategy that focuses on the actors as well as their relationships. It is understood that when a conflict comes up, there is the production of considerable confusion. Further, the interactions that exist between the conflicting parties change, at times suddenly and abruptly. One element of a conflict mapping is the conflict context. In this case, there is the gathering of data concerning the history of the conflict and its organizational and physical setting. It is considered that conflict does not originate from a vacuum. In addition, a single conflict may be nested within another. The second element of conflict mapping is the parties. In this case, parties differ with the directness of involvement in the conflict. Further, the primary parties are the ones who oppose each other, use fighting behavior, and possess a direct stake in the conflict’s outcome. The third element of the model is the causes and consequences of the conflict. In this case, it is not usually easy to differentiate the cause of a conflict from the consequence. In fact, in the situation where conflict comes up, the cause and consequence seem to blend ( Thompson, 2017) . The fourth element is the goals and interests. In this case, goals are normally the acknowledged objectives of the parties in the specific conflicts. On the contrary, interests are what motivates the parties and what they actually need to achieve. Referring to the highlighted the conflict at hand, the context of the conflict was in the allocation of tasks among the workers in the department. With reference to the elements of parties, it is evident that I was the primary party. In this case, I opposed other people and went to the extent of using fighting behavior. With regard to the goals and interests of the situation, it can be said that my specific demand was to be assigned the roles that were more challenging than the ones that I was previously handling. 

The Human needs approach 

In this model, it is considered that conflicts are aimed at disturbing the conditions of human existence as individuals and social collectives. Further, there is the argument that the basic needs are necessary for one to survive. Examples of these needs include the cultural milieu, the natural environment, the political conditions, and the economic conditions that are meant to make sure that human development is attained to the maximum potential ( Cameron & Green, 2015) . In the situation where there is a failure to meet any of the enriching condition results in conflict. Later, the conflict leads to the disturbance of the combined milieu to the extent that there is the hindering of the realization of the full human potential. With reference to the conflict, it can be said that since there was the failure to get what I wanted to do, there was the rise of a conflict. Further, this conflict led to the creation of a disturbance in the department because there was the wastage of both time and resources, which later affected the productivity of all workers. 

Iceberg analysis 

This is a kind of conflict analysis tool that embraces the notion that ‘there is more that meets the eye.’ In this analysis, there is the recognition of the idea that each conflict possesses historical antecedents of the grievances to the parties ( Jones & Jones, 2013) . Further, these factors go ahead and trigger the parties to conflict openly. Relating the conflict to the model, it is noted that the idea of being allocated ‘menial’ tasks in the department was the antecedent of my grievances. Afterward, the grievances triggered open conflicts within the department, which later resulted in negative impacts such as low productivity. 

Conflict Transformation Approach 

This is an approach that focuses on peace and relations between the parties that are in conflict. As a result of the approach being based on relations, it is a argued that the compatible goals result in peace. On the other hand, the incompatible goals result in conflicts ( Goetsch & Davis, 2014) . With reference to the conflict that I experienced, it is noted that there were goal differences. I wanted to carry out tasks that were more challenging as compared to the ones that I was doing. As a result of not being granted this opportunity, I became frustrated, hence creating a conflict in the workplace. 

Conflict Timeline Analysis 

This is a tool that is utilized to trace the roots of a conflict over its evolution through time. Further, the tool prioritizes the assessment of the history of and the different points of view that the parties involved in the conflict possess. In other words, this is a model that is aimed assessing the history of a conflict, which later ensures that there is the establishment of strategies aimed at de-escalating the same conflict. Concerning my case, it is noted that the root cause of the conflict was as a result of dissatisfaction with the tasks that I was doing. Because of this situation, I consistently differed with my coworkers, hence resulting in conflicts. 

Needs- Fears Mapping 

The tool is an actor-oriented clarification tool. For every actor, the interests, issues, needs, fears, and options that relate to every actor are listed. The needs are comprised of the interests, hopes, desires, and values of the involved parties ( Cameron & Green, 2015) . The fears include the concerns, as well as the worries, that the involved parties have. With reference to my case, it is evident that my major need was to work in an environment where I would carry out my assigned tasks effectively. However, after some time, I became concerned since most of the tasks seemed ‘menial’ as compared to the ones that my coworkers were handling. In addition, I might have been worried that I would not get any chance to carry out other tasks in future. These factors resulted in rise in conflicts within the department. 

Conclusion 

In any organization, conflicts are bound to happen. They may happen between workers, managers, and the subordinates. When they come up, they possess negative impacts on individuals and the organization as a whole. Conflict analysis has been used to assess the given case scenario, and as a result, it has become possible to comprehend the dynamics which are involved. Further, for any conflict that arises, it is necessary to use the various conflict theories and models, and by doing so, it becomes possible to find resolutions. 

References 

Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2015).    Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools, and techniques of organizational change . Kogan Page Publishers. 

Goetsch, D. L., & Davis, S. B. (2014).    Quality management for organizational excellence . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. 

Jones, G. R., & Jones, G. R. (2013).    Organizational theory, design, and change . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. 

Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. J. (Eds.). (2012).    The new institutionalism in organizational analysis . University of Chicago Press. 

Senge, P. M. (2014).    The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization . Crown Business. 

Spector, P. E., & Bruk-Lee, V. (2012). Conflict, health, and well-being. In  The psychology of conflict and conflict management in organizations  (pp. 283-304). Psychology Press. 

Thompson, J. D. (2017).  Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory . Routledge.