Share
Explore BrainMass

Apply “systems thinking” to conflict management in an organization

(Note: not an actual assignment. It is a non-graded practical exercise)

In your very own words...detail it in a structured [intro > content > summary]

1. Describe an application of “systems thinking” to conflict management a hypothetical organization, and provide a realistically possible example of a dispute to support your recommendation.

Also...

2. Identify an application of “systems thinking” to conflict management in a hypothetical organization where there is an opportunity for improvement. Describe the application as you perceive to be the best possible process changes. Please use an example of a dispute to support your recommendation.

Solution Preview

Apply "systems thinking" to conflict management in an organization

(Note: not an actual assignment. It is a non-graded practical exercise)

In your very own words...detail it in a structured [intro > content > summary]

1. Describe an application of "systems thinking" to conflict management a hypothetical organization, and provide a realistically possible example of a dispute to support your recommendation.

There was a conflict in the interest of in Glenview Plastic Systems between the Operations and the Marketing. The marketing was interested in sales of plastic strapping that was used in integrated plastic strapping systems that could be sold in bulk and would give the company repeat orders. On the other hand the operations wanted to make the traditional plastic strapping used in manual strapping. The reason was that the technology available with operations did not support the production of plastic strapping that was suitable for machines. In an integrated conflict management system the various parts of the system are not operating in isolation or indifference to one another. Most importantly they are integrated in such a way that the emergent properties are productive: good morale, low absenteeism, little stress, productive expression of emotion.
At Glenview there were extensive discussions and meetings between the marketing managers and the operations. At one level, this means that interest based options-like mediation, and rights based options-like arbitration support one another. The reality is that even when the systemic structure is such that their interaction is not fluid or logical, they do influence one anther. A good example of this is an organization that has an investigation procedure for improving the production process for plastic strapping, and then introduced a mediation program without looking at how this new part will change the existing system. The investigation may be administered by one department and the mediation program by another. At a formal level the connection between the two is not acknowledged. Yet, at a more subtle level they both influenced one another. At Glenview a dispute resolution was not forthcoming.
Another level of integration references the ways in which the Glenview organizational members access the system. Any conflict behavior constitutes an interaction with the conflict management system, and so it follows that whether or not the expected 'access' behavior is exhibited does not determine whether the system is actually being accessed. For example, when a plastic strapping line supervisor complains about the demands of sales to a colleague rather than filing a complaint or using the 'open door' policy, the conflict management system is being accessed. The colleague may listen; give advice and even coach the supervisor on how to ...

$2.19