The case at hand involves a conflict pitting two sides where one is cooperative and the other one competitive. The main problem is that the wrangle involves some of the key players needed in specific critical areas for the deal to move forward. The top management has therefore resorted to the methods of managing differences as a communication strategy to ensure that the deal comes to fruition. First, it remains fundamentally vital to outline the various steps and considerations that one would take in ensuring that the two camps work together for the overall good of the organization. The first step I would take is to define the nature of the differences. Baldwin, Bommer, and Rubin (2012) pointed out that disagreements can originate from differences in facts, goals, values, and methods. The second step I would pick in diagnosing the difference to assess the underlying factors. The differences can occur due to informational, perceptual, and role factors. After assessing the underlying factors, I would leverage on the chosen method which is to manage the differences. Some of the considerations that I would make along the way include to identify the needs of both parties, assess the consequences of their differences, and the implementation of a plan that would result in a long lasting solution.
Managing differences will take a different fashion when used in a competitive or a cooperative culture. A competitive culture promotes competition and individualism. Much emphasis is put on an individual’s performance rather than a collective one. Therefore, in such a culture, the likelihood of conflict or differences remains high because there is the urge to outdo the other. Therefore, heading to a competitive culture, I will first have to understand that the most acceptable solution would be a win-win scenario as the bargaining will center on interests. This means that I will have limited options when crafting the way forward to a solution. The first way would be to identify the needs of both parties. All the options that I will device henceforth will have an element of mutual gain because the competitive nature of the organization has increased the demands for self-gratification. Due to the nature of such a culture, I will require to have a neutral person who will assist me in mitigating any prospects of a blame game that might arise in the process of managing the differences. Most significantly, I must remain empathic and attempt to put myself into the positions of all the warring sides. As such, this will provide me with the much-needed impetus of formulating a sensitive solution.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
However, when dealing with a cooperative culture, things might appear a little bit different. Unlike a competitive culture, a cooperative one centers on the importance of the collective goal. It does not look at individual success but instead focuses on how well the teams work together to solve the organizational needs. As such, it is characterized by helpfulness, friendlessness, and the prospects for obstruction are minimal (Lavie, Haunschild, & Khanna, 2012). Other features that are likely to be seen in this culture include the division of labor, coordination of effort, and orderliness among others. Therefore, in case of differences, just like in the competitive culture, I will begin by identifying the needs of all the parties involved. However, in this case, the options invented will be for the good of the team irrespective of how they impact an individual. I will also ensure that enhance a collaborative approach in solving the problem. Instead of having a neutral person act to prevent the blame game, I will listen to the respective concerns of the various groups and the judge the matter form a collaborative point of view. The implementation of the plan will involve behavioral changes which will require individuals to incorporate cultures that work for the overall good of the organization (Rahim, 2017). Lastly, I will conduct a follow-up session to gauge how the plan works and also find out any consequences that might come along.
As seen from the two cultures, it remains critically clear to note that the method of managing differences differs depending on the philosophy in question. In a competitive environment, approaches and solutions are geared towards satisfying the egoistic interests of each member involved in the conflict. However, in a corporative environment, solutions depend on collaborative considerations where the overall good of the organization is put under focus. The second area where differences were seen is the implementation of the plan. When dealing with a competitive culture, the plan must narrow down to coincide with the individual problems raised across the board. In some instances, it might require more than one plan to ensure that everybody fits in. However, when dealing with a corporative environment, it is much easier because it requires a blanket solution which in many cases can be a change of policy, behavior, or leader among other tenets. Therefore, in conclusion, the organization culture plays a significant role in shaping how managing differences will occur.
References
Baldwin, T., Bommer, B., & Rubin, R. (2012). Managing organizational behavior: What great managers know and do. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Lavie, D., Haunschild, P. R., & Khanna, P. (2012). Organizational differences, relational mechanisms, and alliance performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(13), 1453-1479.
Rahim, M. A. (2017). Managing conflict in organizations. Routledge.
