Organizational communication, as with any form of interpersonal communication, must be handled with the many tools provided the knowledgeable communicator. He must be aware of the technical issues involved, as well as the several nuances that contribute to (or detract from) successful communication. If I am to solve conflict within my organization, I must implement the optimum strategies and techniques to garner success.
As a department manager for my company, discovering an employee producing at an unacceptable quality level and worse, with allegations of aggressive behavior, I would have to approach the employee with a solid plan of action. It would be necessary to examine the situation thoroughly and decide upon the most effective tactics. I would, of course, ensure that I have sufficient documentation to confirm both the production issues, as well as the co-worker conflicts before planning my resolution of this conflict.
Setting is important for discussing potentially negative content, so it would be important to meet with the employee, Adam, in a very private setting such as my office. I would arrange for the meeting in advance. This imparts to Adam that the subject for discussion is a reasonably serious issue, and so establishes a sense of importance. Adam will come to the meeting knowing that it is of significant import.
Establishing the correct tone for such a meeting is also important; I want Adam to understand the potential gravity of the meeting, but do not want to create a defensive situation for him. Creating a safe environment in which to communicate lessens the chance that a logical discussion becomes for him a personal attack. I want my employee in a state of mind to objectively discuss the problems and not feel he must defend himself from an attack upon his personal self. It is often advisable to begin indirectly, beginning with neutral, general topics to set the employee at ease (Roebuck, 2006, p. 88).
My approach at this juncture would be to reinforce to Adam the importance of the company and its success. Establishing the concept of teamwork will give the discussion a solid point of view from which to operate, emphasizing that we (all of us employed at this organization) all have as a primary goal, the well-being and success of the company. Building on the team analogy, I could continue with the concept that if there is a weak link, if all are not working in concert to the same goal, the organization suffers.
Establishing the correct tone for such a meeting is also important; I want Adam to understand the potential gravity of the meeting, but do not want to create a defensive situation for him. Creating a safe environment in which to communicate lessens the chance that a logical discussion becomes for him a personal attack. I want my employee in a state of mind to objectively discuss the problems and not feel he must defend himself from an attack upon his personal self. It is often advisable to begin indirectly, beginning with neutral, general topics to set the employee at ease (Roebuck, 2006, p. 88).
My approach at this juncture would be to reinforce to Adam the importance of the company and its success. Establishing the concept of teamwork will give the discussion a solid point of view from which to operate, emphasizing that we (all of us employed at this organization) all have as a primary goal, the well-being and success of the company. Building on the team analogy, I could continue with the concept that if there is a weak link, if all are not working in concert to the same goal, the organization suffers.
Here my approach must transition into a more direct one. I do not want Adam to question the gravity of my message. I shall then state the concrete issues that have arisen with regard to his performance, citing specific comments from vendors if possible. I must make it clear to him that there is no ambiguity here, for the natural inclination from my employee will be to deny or rationalize. This is why it is vital to come to such a meeting prepared with us much information, and as many facts as possible.
It is key that Adam be allowed to refute the allegations at this point, as it conveys that this is indeed a two-way conversation, and not a personal attack. He must be made to feel that he has participated fully in the discussion so that he will be better able accept the final resolution. I want him to walk away knowing that he was given a fair opportunity to speak his piece, and provide any defense he might have. Hopefully, his arguments will be valid ones, though traditionally employees in this situation tend to rationalize their actions, or blame others.
At this point, it might be appropriate to ask my employee if there are any stress factors contributing to his recent decline in positive productivity and clashes with vendors. Authors Cahn and Abigail elaborate on the destructive effect of stress. “The stress we are feeling in our lives often erupts into conflict with others” (2007, p. 197). Specifically, distress evolves over a period of time, and results from a feeling of loss of control (p. 198). This line of questioning will open the door for Adam to add any personal issues as variables contributing to the recent decline.
To empower Adam with finding he can still turn things around, I would now implement a scheduled performance evaluation. This will clearly spell out for him the expectations that he must meet if he is to continue with the organization. This allows him to control the situation and his future status. It allows him to recognize that with this dilemma, he has been given an opportunity for redemption. In implementing this performance evaluation schedule, however, I must do so in a very assertive manner; there must be no doubt in Adam’s mind about the ramifications of failure, dismissal.
This strategy is one of collaboration and is ideal as it produces a “win-win” scenario in which each member of the conflict feels he has gained from the exchange. They achieve a mutually satisfying goal (Cahn & Abigail, p. 83). With this approach, Adam has the opportunity to salvage a potentially damaging situation; and I have the opportunity to repair weaknesses within my organization.
Now, the more serious issue of confrontations with employees must be broached. It must be explained to Adam that any form of interpersonal hostility is tantamount to bullying and will not be tolerated. It is a violation of an employee’s personal rights. In fact, a fMRI (functional MRI) study by Kip Williams of Purdue University showed that verbal abuse triggers neuronal pain pathways ( Namie & Namie, 2009, p. 13), so insults literally hurt. Moreover, it can be legally actionable, and as such, the employer can be held equally culpable. His actions put the organization at risk.
To empower Adam with finding he can still turn things around, I would now implement a scheduled performance evaluation. This will clearly spell out for him the expectations that he must meet if he is to continue with the organization. This allows him to control the situation and his future status. It allows him to recognize that with this dilemma, he has been given an opportunity for redemption. In implementing this performance evaluation schedule, however, I must do so in a very assertive manner; there must be no doubt in Adam’s mind about the ramifications of failure, dismissal.
This strategy is one of collaboration and is ideal as it produces a “win-win” scenario in which each member of the conflict feels he has gained from the exchange. They achieve a mutually satisfying goal (Cahn & Abigail, p. 83). With this approach, Adam has the opportunity to salvage a potentially damaging situation; and I have the opportunity to repair weaknesses within my organization.
Now, the more serious issue of confrontations with employees must be broached. It must be explained to Adam that any form of interpersonal hostility is tantamount to bullying and will not be tolerated. It is a violation of an employee’s personal rights. In fact, a fMRI (functional MRI) study by Kip Williams of Purdue University showed that verbal abuse triggers neuronal pain pathways ( Namie & Namie, 2009, p. 13), so insults literally hurt. Moreover, it can be legally actionable, and as such, the employer can be held equally culpable. His actions put the organization at risk.
With regard to this issue, I must take what Ralph White and Ronald Lippitt labeled the autocratic style of leadership. In 1960 they created a continuum of leadership styles from autocratic to democratic and based on a “leader’s assumption about what motivates people to accomplish goals” (Shockley-Zalabak, 2009, p. 220). Within this continuum are variances for differing degrees of passive versus aggressive managerial approaches. Normally, the more mid-range approaches are preferred. However, in a serious situation such as this, I believe the autocratic one appropriate. I would make it extremely clear that any future incident involving hostile, confrontational or aberrant behavior toward another employee of the company would result in immediate dismissal. Further, I would have Adam sign a document stating the conditions agreed to herein regarding the behavior expected of him in the future.
In being aware of the many elements that comprise communication, I will have resolved a conflict in what I believe to be the optimal approach. I will have been sensitive to the other participant in this conflict’s attempted resolution, and applied those tactics I believe to be most apt for the situation. Only time will tell if the conflict will have truly been resolved.
References
Cahn, D. D. & Abigail, R. A. (2007). Managing conflict through communication. Boston: Pearson.
Namie, G. & Namie, R. (2009). The bully at work: What you can do to stop the hurt and reclaim your dignity on the job. Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks, Inc.
Roebuck, D. B. (2006). Improving business communication skills. Upper Saddle River, N. J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Shockley-Zalabak, P. S. (2009). Fundamentals of organizational communication: Knowledge, sensitivity, skills, values. Boston: Pearson.
No comments:
Post a Comment