CASE STUDY

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

Qasim Farooq

01-111072-231

BBA 6-F

Remarks:

SUBMITTED TO: SIR MANZOOR IQBAL

A CASE STUDY IN CONFLICT Thomas Boyle and Randy White Jennifer is a woman in her mid-thirties who is responsible for staging and scheduling events for a corporation in Fresno, California. She has been effective in her relationships with the public and with vendors for the events; however, she has not followed internal rules on booking families as carefully as she should have. Isaac, a mid-level manager in his forties, is responsible for the care, maintenance and supervision of the facilities. Hes tired of Jennifers failure to give him proper notification for scheduled events. He has a chip on his shoulder and means to take a stand. Jennifer came to him with an event that needs to use one of the buildings that Isaac is responsible for; however, she missed the required two-week notification by one day, and Isaac said, "No, too late. You needed to get that to me yesterday in order to make it happen on time." He was very abrupt and even rude in his manner and made it clear that Jennifer had stretched the rules for the last time. Jennifer returned to her office and thrashed about for awhile, spilling her story to all the clerical staff. She finally complained to her supervisor, Dave that Isaac was not supportive of the office goals and refused to talk to her. "Hes inflexible, and doesnt understand that, when we are dealing with the public, we have to work with their timetable as well." Dave listened, and went to his boss, the division manager, Albert, who is Isaacs boss as well. Dave communicated that Isaac has "consistently" used a nonsupportive style in his job, and that "it is high time that something is done about it." Albert listened carefully to the account that Dave brought him, and then sat with Jennifer to get her account. One further problem complicates the issue. It emerges that Dave has had a long-standing feud with Isaac over a number of issues involving facilities and lack of support for the things Dave and his people are trying to do to enhance the program that the office offers. He sees Isaac as far too controlling, and he takes this opportunity to fuel the dispute with a "historical perspective" in which he cites all of the times that Isaac has not come through as he should have. Its not a long list, but there appears at first glance to be a pattern of non-support from Isaac towards Dave and his people. By this time, Jennifer was fairly self-righteous and had enlivened the story of Isaacs rude behavior and failure to be supportive. The office clerical staff had heard the story several times by then and were muttering to themselves about Isaac "going off the deep end" and "thinking he runs the whole program." Finally, Albert met with Isaac, and before saying anything about what he has heard, he elicited Isaacs version of what occurred in the dispute with Jennifer. Isaac talks of the "several times" that Jennifer had not made the deadline. On further questioning, it turns

out there were two other occasions. Isaac was tired of her not complying with simple rules, and so decided to make an issue of this one and "teach her a lesson that will cost her something with the public that she deals with." Isaac knew that Jennifer had made the commitment for the program and that she will be embarrassed publicly if it failed to come off. Now hes angry that the whole office is talking about it, and that top management is now involved. As a man who is committed to being a "Christian in the marketplace," Albert feels responsible to apply biblical principles in resolving this dispute. Which specific principles from the Bible should guide him? And, when he understands the principles, what should he say and do with Dave, Jennifer, and Isaac? Heres what happened After listening to Isaac, Albert shared his vision of employee relationships. He talked first about the "development of employees" and that as manager types, "we are all teachers and trainers of people." There comes a time when employees have what he calls "teachable moments" where you can get someones attention in a very positive way and make the learning stick longer than one could accomplish by merely punishing them for an episodic failure of action. Albert talked of Jennifer and her willingness to do good work, but agreed that she lacked appreciation for some of the necessary details to make it all work together. He asked Isaac if he could think of a way to have handled this that would have taken advantage of the "teachable moment" in a positive way. Isaac thought about it, and after a moment or two he agreed that maybe his approach had not really had the results he desired. Maybe he could have helped her understand the consequences for assuming too much latitude in scheduling, in terms of the chance for double booking and losing customers. But, he still noted that using a more positive approach would have meant missing an opportunity to make a fool out of Jennifer in the eyes of the office! Not sure what to with this, Albert replied that the office is also thinking that Isaac is "off on his own" and "not willing to work with people unless it is on his terms and by his rules." This surprised Isaac, and he said, "But no one has said that to me!" Albert replied, "Oh, theyve said it all right, only not with their words. Youve just failed to see and hear the message theyve been sending you." Albert suggested that all four of the people involved meet to hash it out. When they got together that afternoon, they began to see that this was not a very complex issue. Albert made the point that a lot of energy had gone into this conflict needlessly. In the first place, it didnt need to happen. Jennifer could have made the deadline with a little more effort. Secondly, if the deadline was missed, Isaac could have found positive ways to teach Jennifer about the need for meeting deadlines. Thirdly, gossip amongst the clerical staff had created "more heat than light" in the conflict, and it would have been better for Jennifer not to have complained so publicly. Further, Dave could have used the principles of "developing employees" even at a management level and dealt with the conflict directly with Isaac, without involving Albert at all. Finally, Albert shared that the issue here was how to create a climate where people help each other succeed at their jobs,

knowing that in the end, everyone benefits. Everyone agreed, and the consensus was that this experience was going to help them be a better team in the future.

My Analysis of the conflict: According to me the way Dave handled the situation is totally wrong. He wasnt a neutral person and was very supportive to Jennifer because of his own issues with Isaac. So if he could have handled this situation better, then this conflict could have been minimized. Secondly Jennifer should solve this problem with Isaac by herself because it wasnt a big issue and they could have come to certain agreement by themselves. The way Albert approached this situation is a good way and he gave right opinion and he was a neutral person too. The environment of the offices wasnt very good because everyone was trying to get involve. If there were certain rules and regulations then everyone should have follow them no matter if its Jennifer or someone else. So there should be strict policy thats what is think the office is lacking. The attitude of Isaac and Jennifer as well as Dave wasnt positive and they werent supportive to each other. There also need to be balance of power and no one should have unnecessary power. Isaac could have minimize the conflict by acting little friendly and understanding that some conflict could have occurred. On the other hand Jennifer should obey the rules and could have approach Isaac before the final deadline. As Albert mentions lot of time have been wasted due to this needless conflict so there need to be more harmony among the employees of the corporation as more staff involve which give more heat to this issue. I think this conflict could have avoided if Isaac handled the situation better by giving Jennifer a last warning and inform her about the rules. Possible Solutions: There can other certain solution solutions which can minimize conflict which are: Isaac could have avoid the conflict by giving Jennifer final warning about the issue and tell her that next time he will not accept anything after the deadline because he didnt give her single warning before that so she wasnt fully aware of Isaacs issue with her. Jennifer could have inform Isaac early about the situation and tell him that there can be certain situations where she also need to follow her customers time and conditions in order not to lose them. The company should have rules which is supportive for everyone and should help everyones work. Isaac and Jennifer also need to work together with a give and take policy and they both should support each other in their work and Jennifer shouldnt go to Dave but he wasnt neutral and instead if she has any problem she should report to a person who is neutral to both. There should be a person to whom they both report on monthly basis in order to avoid any conflict and if they have any problem with each other they should report to that person and not anyone else. The big bosses like Albert should not be involved in such type of situation unless it becomes more serious.

The tactic use by Isaac wasnt right to teach a lesson to Jennifer because it can harm company too, because by this way the company can lose their customers so he could have adapt to more positive strategy. The corporation can also introduce some training lessons for their employee in whom they can teach them how to handle different kind of personality and issues.