Organizational Conflicts and Building Coalitions
Conflict within the organization is an every day reality as no one individual will have the same opinion or style. The differences found amongst people in the workplace has required perceptions to change when it comes to leading a team and implementing strategy. One’s attitude must be flexible and tolerant of change and conflict. Conflict must be an accepted factor or otherwise the organization will not survive. In many ways, leaders and management look at conflict as a positive.
Because conflict taking time and effort to resolve, it also allows for critical thinking and opening the path for new ideas and solutions. This works to the company’s advantage over the long run as it continues to think outside the box or get do away with the box entirely. This leads to innovation. The attitude toward knowledge has evolved because more than one type is needed in order to implement a new idea. This changes the needs of workers and organizations as diffusion of innovation takes place as many different points of view are considered.
While the idea that conflict can be a positive, leaders must also keep in mind the other side of the spectrum or the negative. While conflict can lead to innovation, it can also open up the employee to too many opportunities, which can influence their creativity and productivity. It produces a whole new reality that employees may not be prepared to handle. Product diversification could mean failure. Technology, while it is wondrous and makes jobs easier, can also be dangerous. With telecommunications, a new breed of crime has been created with identity theft and corporate brand protection becoming important.
Technology can be disastrous if put in the wrong hands. With innovations come new inventions that make our lives easier but also have a higher risk when used. This is the nature of the realm of possibility. This can backfire as it can also destroy and impose new rules of conduct upon communities. As much as many like the idea of innovation, for those scared of change, it is difficult to embrace fully. This leads to further conflict or counter movements to conserve what is left because the longer a conflict goes unresolved, the harder it is fix.
This like a lack of communication can lead to a break in the cycle for the organization. Still organizational conflict and change is about the future. However, as more products and services are produced and distributed throughout the world, debate continues regarding leaders’ obligation to take on more social responsibility. To change the way business is conducted, we may need to establish new operational styles that set new expectations for both today’s work force and corporate accountability.
Looking at a corporation like Johnson and Johnson, one realizes within a team everyone has a function to meet production quotas and the harmony produced translates into efficiency. Total Quality Management (TQM) is still evident as companies push to analyze productivity as it reflects success, profit, as the numbers still remain the bottom line. Change means introducing new players to the reality, which one takes the risk, could lead to further conflict or creation.
This means the possibility of interacting with outsiders or traveling in other countries for opportunities. One such situation can arise when an American company sets up shop in England. How will the locals react to such international involvement and on what levels will this be tolerated? How much will gained by so much change or resulting conflict? It is the ability to accept the new reality of today’s workplace that makes an organization competitive. A company like Johnson and Johnson faces many challenges in the future due to this new reality.
