final workplace

WORKPLACE CONFLICT: A CASE STUDY 1

Introduction

Depending on the workplace environment, worker conflict can occur frequently leading to

violent disputes which were the case with the woodwork factory. The workers have

substantial cultural and religious disparities resulted in major conversation problems. The

management dilemma is the increasing number of worker conflict cases leading to a

decrease in production and worker morale.

In addition, there are ethical concerns on employing immigrant workers at the factory. While

the workers are paid the standard hourly rate, most of them lack the necessary legal

documentation to ascertain their migrant status and lack the necessary skills that would

guarantee job advancements but are effective at manual labor. The management is aware

that the workers need the jobs to sustain their families which would face challenges if the

workers are dismissed.

This report evaluates the causes of the worker conflict in order to identify the leading cause

of conflict at the factory. It is only after establishing the causes of conflict that conclusions

can be drawn from the case study allowing for the proposition of appropriate

recommendations. Primary data will be acquired through structured interviews that will be

administered to all workers and the theoretical context will be based secondary sources,

primarily journals and academic textbooks. It is hypothesized that the main cause of conflict

among the factory workers is poor communication which is attributed to the differences in

religious and academic backgrounds.


Purpose of research

This essay is trying to prove, what are some of the strategies used by companies when

looking for Conflict Resolution when they face is the combination of daily work with the

interaction between people. Describes in greater depth, which depends on solving these

problems, I will mention some of the recommended strategies, the importance of using them

to improve employee productivity, how is the implementation of the same, the potential

advantages and disadvantages

Literature Review

De Dreu and Weingart (2003), describe workplace conflict as form of hostility that occurs

within the human resource of an organization. The incidence of conflict in a healthy

organizational culture is infrequent which is why the conflict at the factory is a cause for

concern. Workplace conflicts are estimated to decrease the performance of the management

by 25% by diverting attention, time and resources from the core business to conflict

management and resolutions (Liu, Spector & Shi, 2007).

Management Dilemma

As is evidenced at the factory, workplace conflict is a significant managerial impediment

which can lead to the total collapse of an organization.. According to De Dreu and Weingart

(2003), the main causes of workplace conflict are:

Poor communication,

Contradictory values,


Opposing interests,

Insufficient resources,

Differences in personalities, as well as

Non-performance.

In addition, de Wit, Greer, & Jehn (2012) identify three common types of workplace conflict

namely:

Task conflict,

Interpersonal conflict

Procedural conflict

The authors distinguish task conflict as a disagreement between workers or workers and

management.

Interpersonal conflict is defined as the disagreement between the individualities of workers.

Procedural conflict is identified as the disagreement between workers and management on

the procedures taken to complete a task.

In the discussion of social conflict Rahim (2011), delineates four fundamental conditions that

precipitate conflict, that is:

Alliance of individuals into organized groups,

Interaction and communication within the groups,


Internal hierarchy within the group members,

A common grievance or agenda between the group members

(Rahim, 2011).

Based on the general assessment of the factory workers, it is evident that poor

communication, contradictory values, opposing interests and differences in personalities are

the prime conflict drivers at the factory. The interests and personal goals of the workers are

also dissimilar and their conflation effectively undermines organizational goals. The workers

from different backgrounds also breeds personality differences as a result of different work

ethics and workplace conduct. According to the preliminary analysis of the factory workforce,

the primary form of conflict at the factory is the interpersonal conflict considering the

workers interact based on their ethnic and cultural backgrounds leading to significant

differences in the personalities.

Plans:

We are going to conduct this research using the technique of “Interview Questions”. Surveys

of personal interviews were used to investigate the responses of respondents and at the

same time, to observe the behavior of respondents, either individually or as a group. The

interview method is preferred by us for a couple of the advantages.

1. High response rates

One of the main reasons why researchers achieve good response rates through this method

is face-to-face interview survey nature. Unlike the administration of questionnaires, people


are more likely to answer questions live easily on the subject (eg, a product), simply because

they can actually see, touch, feel or try the product.

2. Interviews longer tolerable

If you want to analyze the respondents' answers, you may do so through a focus on the

personal interview. Open questions are more tolerated by interviews, due to the fact that

respondents would be more convenient to express their long answers orally in writing.

3. Better Behavioral Observation

Market researchers can benefit from the personal interview survey because it presents a

greater opportunity to observe the attitude and behavior of respondents / consumers to a

product.

Scales and Benchmarks

A decision scales and Qualification Benchmarks should be made with respect to the scoring

system or rating scale to be used in the interview. The rating scale can be as simple as

"acceptable" or "unacceptable", or may be a point scale based on three, four, or five levels.

"It is difficult to define more than five levels can be significantly and consistently evaluated.

The most critical of the rating scale element is the number of levels you have, but how these

levels are defined" (Valadez 1987:. 8). 10 Rating scales should be defined by the reference

points for each question. Benchmarks answers to questions that are linked to the rating scale

are suggested. The benchmarks provide a framework for assessing the responses of

candidates objectively and consistently. Generally, there should be at least three proposed

answers for each question: a superior, satisfactory and a satisfactory answer. For example,


with a rating scale of five points, develop benchmarks for five points (superior response),

three points (satisfactory response) and a point (unsatisfactory response). To develop

benchmarks, with the guidance in Table 4, ask SMEs to create responses that suit the

different levels of the rating scale. If the questions were used in interviews previously, SMEs

can use real answers they have heard of candidates

Data

The literature review establishes a framework through which worker conflict

can be systematically evaluated. This was facilitated by a structured interview which

was administered among all the workers . The interview questions were designed to

capture information on the main sources of conflict among the plant employees and

were therefore designed as: (a) 1-7 general demographics, (b) 8 regularity of conflict,

and (c) 9 causes of conflict (See Appendix). Due to the language barrier, it was

anticipated that the interview would be challenging but a majority of the workers

understood and could communicate in elementary English. Only 3 workers required

the intervention of a fellow employee to act as a translator which allowed for a clearer

recording of their responses.

Results

The results on the analysis of the responses of the structured interviews

revealed that there are several factors that incline the workers at the factory towards

conflict. Preliminary analysis of the responses reveals that the workers at the plant

have significant disparities in their ethnic, religious and language backgrounds.


Figure 1: Factory worker religious background

Of the 146 factory workers, most have Muslim (56) and Hindu (42)

backgrounds, while 28 workers are Christians. 20 workers also have other religious

backgrounds mainly Jains, Sikhs and Taos. The religious and cultural differences of

the workers are particularly evidenced by the nationality of the workers.

Figure 2: Factory workers distribution by nationality


All of the factory workers are from foreign countries and according to their

responses to the interview; the workers are mainly from 9 countries. As shown in

Figure 2, most of the workers originate from Libya, India and Syria as well as

countries like Nepal, Nigeria, Egypt and Iraq, underscoring the prominence of Islamic

and Hindi cultures within the factory’s workforce.

Figure 3: Primary communication language of the factory workers


Figure 3 further shows that most of workers prefer communicate in their first

languages and therefore Arabic and Hindi are the most prominent languages at the

factory. Only a minority of the workers communicate in English resulting in

significant language barriers at the factory between both employee interactions as well

as management and employee interactions.

The workers are primarily grouped by the 3 religious majorities, leading to

differences in their belief systems. For example Muslims have strict deity principles

which they adhere to by praying 5 times a day which often leads to scheduling

conflicts with non-Muslim workers. This has also led to the resentment of the Muslim

workers by the non-Muslims who perceive them to interfere with their progression of

tasks since they have to take prayer breaks.

Figure 4: Education level of the factory Workers


Most of the plant workers have secondary education while 8 workers having

college education and 12 workers lack education. As a result, most of the workers

depend on the factory as their primary source of income effectively hinging their

professional goals at the factory.

Figure 5: Relationship status of factory workers


Figure 6: Number of dependents for the factory workers

Since most of the workers are single, they do not have familial commitments

but further analysis reveals that only 16 workers lack any dependents. Since 44% of

workers have familial commitments and 63% have over 2 dependents, then the

personal goals of a majority of the workers is to provide for their dependents. A

majority of workers therefore compete with their colleagues to advance their

professional and personal goals leading to conflict since there are limited internal slots

for promotions based on the academic level of most of the workers. In addition, the

differences in culture and education lead to diverse work ethics and workplace

behavior among the workers. Considering 68 workers have rudimentary or no

education, it is likely that these workers have different workplace norms from the 78

higher skilled workers with higher skill levels resulting in personality differences.

Figure 7: Regularity of conflict as reported by factory workers


Of all the workers at the factory, only 6 workers indicated they have never

faced conflict at the factory. Among the 140 workers who faced conflict, most

reported the cause of conflict as poor communication while others indicated disregard

of duty as well as misconduct as the leading cause of conflict at the factory. Task

replication incidents along with personal differences were also reported by the

workers. 6 workers also reported that worker competition and ineffective management

as sources of conflict which were classify under the ‘other’ category.

Figure 8: Cause of conflict


The results of the analysis show that the occurrence of worker conflict at the

factory is high, mainly as a result of poor communication disregard for duty as well as

worker misconduct. In addition, religious and cultural differences have been fueled by

the use of diverse languages at the factory. Poor communication and the lack of an

official language at the factory are therefore main causes of conflict at the factory and

therefore the management should focus on solutions that mitigate poor

communication.

The most direct approach for management is dismiss all the existing workers

and replace them with more qualified workers in terms of skills and education. This is

expected to reduce the employee conflict and increase productivity due to an

expansion of the skill pool. This approach would however be expensive to execute

given that the management would have to recruit and train the new workers. As a

result, the lead time of existing deliverable would increase and production would


decline and training period which could potentially result in the loss of clients due to

the delayed deliveries.

Alternatively, the management can institute comprehensive conflict

management policies to guide the workers on how to address incidents of conflict.

The objective of this policy would be formalize how conflicts are handled and

increase the level of accountability of each worker in deference to conflict.. This

would decrease the occurrences thereby reducing interpersonal conflict. The policy

should also insist on the communication in English as the exclusive official language

since most of the workers are able to communicate in simple English. Penalties can

then be introduced to discourage workers from using other languages to communicate

and can include financial fines or a day off.

The policy should also offer a clear guideline on how conflicts should be

resolved and the expected conduct of workers during conflict. The policy should

stipulate that the workers should report any conflict to the supervisor who is expected

to impartially solve the conflict and any conflict based on religion or ethnicity will

result in existing a formal warning to the workers involved.

It is also important for the workers to freely interact despite their religious and

ethical differences in order to overcome basic stereotypes. The management can

achieve this by creating common areas for employees such as meal halls where they

can have meals and breaks collectively. In addition, the management should arrange

social functions for the workers for instance form a factory sports team or have

weekend picnics allowing workers to interact with their families in a casual setting.


Such an approach will allow the workers to overcome their stereotyping and prejudice

barriers and perceive each other as individuals. The management should also increase

the breaks allowed for workers during their shifts since according to Gruman and Saks

(2011), workers are more productive with an increase in their rate of rest.

In order to convert residual conflict into healthy competition, the factory

management should implement performance metrics to merit the promotions and the

bonuses offered to the workers. Anitha (2014) shows that the use of performance

metrics increases employee engagement and productivity while also boosting the level

of worker commitment to an organization. This approach is effective with minimal

cost, implying that the factory can immediately implement this new approach with

minimal resistance to these changes by the workers.

Conclusion

This study has revealed that employee conflict at the woodwork factory is

primarily due to poor communication and facilitated by religious and cultural

differences. Unless this problem is effectively mitigated, the level of productivity at

the factory will continue to decline and could lead to financial losses in the event of

extensive violence. The main message that management and other decision makers

can use from this research in order to make informed business decisions is that it is

important to have a healthy workplace culture where employees can easily

communicate among themselves and with the management. If an organization faces

high incidents of employee conflict, it is essential that the management immediately


puts in place structures and policies to reinforce communication and cohesion among

the employees.

The main strength of this study is that it effectively evaluates the workforce at

the factory and uses the requisite tools to identify poor communication as the leading

cause of employee conflict at the woodwork factory. The main weakness of the study

is that resource limitations could not allow for the effective study of how the

management has facilitated the conflict at the factory. Future research should focus on

identifying effective data collection tools that account for the complexity and scope of

the roles management in order to develop a comprehensive analytical framework that

will quantify the impact of management on levels of employee conflict.

References

Anitha, J. (2014). Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on

employee performance. International Journal of Productivity and

Performance Management, 63(3), pp.308 - 323.

De Dreu, C. & Weingart, R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team

performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 88, pp. 741-749.

de Wit, R., Greer, L. & Jehn, A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-

analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), pp. 360-390.

Gruman, A. & Saks, A. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement.

Human Resource Management Review, 21(2), pp.123–136.


Liu, C., Spector, P. & Shi, L. (2007). Cross-National job stress: A quantitative and

qualitative study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(2), pp. 209-239.

Rahim, A. (2011). Managing conflict in organizations (4th ed). New Jersey:

Transaction Publishers.

Ting-Toomey, S. & Chung, L. (2012). Understanding intercultural communication

(2nd ed). New York: Oxford University Press.

Appendix

Structured interview questions

1. Age2. Gender3. Relationship status4. Academic level5. Nationality6. Religion affiliation7. Preferred communication language8. Do you frequently face conflict with fellow workers?9. For what reasons do you mostly experience conflict?

final workplace

Documents