conflict resolution methods

7/31/2019 Conflict Resolution Methods

1/35

Conflict Resolution Methods

There are many ways people deal with conflict:

-- Give in and accept the changes someone wants.

-- Do nothing; hoping the problem will go away.

-- Avoid the person or the situation.

-- Pretend the problem does not bother you when it really does.

-- Go to a higher authority.

-- Go to court or arbitration.

-- Fight and argue.

-- Talk things out with the other person (in private or with a mediator).

Here are some steps one could follow to resolve a conflict:

If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault, between thee and himalone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. (Matt. 18:15)

1. Talk to the Other Party. Surprisingly, many people complain of impossible difficultiesabout their problem without ever once trying to talk with the person who could solve theproblem. Two disagreeing parties should first try to make an honest effort to discuss theirpoints of view and work things out on their own. Be calm and respectful. Keep an open mindand be willing to listen. If you cannot talk face-to-face or by telephone, write a letter. Keep itshort and to the point, and above all, be polite. SeeHow to Talk Things Outto know more

about talking to the other party.

2. Try Mediation. If your efforts to talk things out fail, you may request mediation servicethrough the Center for Conflict Resolution. We will attempt to mediate by discussing theproblem with both sides and, if necessary, by bringing the parties together in a mediation
http://ccr.byu.edu/how_to_talk_things_out.cfmhttp://ccr.byu.edu/how_to_talk_things_out.cfmhttp://ccr.byu.edu/how_to_talk_things_out.cfmhttp://ccr.byu.edu/how_to_talk_things_out.cfm


2/35

conference. The mediator remains neutral and impartial and helps the parties work out whatthey think would be the best solution.

3. Arbitration or Court. When disputing parties fail to reach a settlement through mediation,they may carry it on through our arbitration process or the public judicial system. Arbitrationis a private adjudicatory process similar to a court of law. The decisions are legallybinding. The disputants give up the power to create their own solution and place control oftheir problem in the hands of a neutral third-party, called an arbitrator. Therefore, arbitrationor court should be the last resort to settle a dispute. When seeking adjudication of the dispute,the parties must choose either arbitration or court; they cannot do both. (SeeArbitration.)

https://ccr.byu.edu/content/conflict-resolution-methods

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints | BYU Hawaii | BYU Idaho | BYU Jerusalem Center | BYU Salt Lake Center | LDS

Business College | Provo MTCBrigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, (801) 422-4636, Address/Directions. Copyright 2010.

All Rights Reserved.

http://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/c

onflict.html

Conflict Management

What is on this page?

1. What do organisations use conflict management for?2. Important things to know about "conflict" and "conflict management"

- The differences between "competition" and "conflict"- Common causes of conflict- Conflict between individuals- Conflict between groups of people- Conflict within a group of people

3. How to identify signs and stages of conflict

- "Disputes of right" and "disputes of interest"- Stages of conflict- Signs of conflict between individuals- Signs of conflict between groups of people
http://ccr.byu.edu/content/what-arbitrationhttp://ccr.byu.edu/content/what-arbitrationhttp://ccr.byu.edu/content/what-arbitrationhttps://ccr.byu.edu/content/conflict-resolution-methodshttps://ccr.byu.edu/content/conflict-resolution-methodshttp://lds.org/http://byuh.edu/http://byui.edu/http://ce.byu.edu/jchttp://ce.byu.edu/slhttp://www.ldsbc.edu/http://www.ldsbc.edu/http://www.mtc.byu.edu/http://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.htmlhttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.htmlhttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#whathttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#whathttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#importanthttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#importanthttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#howhttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#howhttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#howhttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#importanthttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.html#whathttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.htmlhttp://www.etu.org.za/toolbox/docs/building/conflict.htmlhttp://www.mtc.byu.edu/http://www.ldsbc.edu/http://www.ldsbc.edu/http://ce.byu.edu/slhttp://ce.byu.edu/jchttp://byui.edu/http://byuh.edu/http://lds.org/https://ccr.byu.edu/content/conflict-resolution-methodshttp://ccr.byu.edu/content/what-arbitration


3/35


4/35

scarcity of resources (finance, equipment, facilities, etc)

different attitudes, values or perceptions

disagreements about needs, goals, priorities and interests

poor communication

poor or inadequate organisational structure

lack of teamwork

lack of clarity in roles and responsibilities

Conflict between individual

People have differing styles of communication, ambitions, political or religious views and different culturalbackgrounds. In our diverse society, the possibility of these differences leading to conflict betweenindividuals is always there, and we must be alert to preventing and resolving situations where conflictarises.

Conflict between groups of people

Whenever people form groups, they tend to emphasise the things that make their group "better than" or

"different from" other groups. This happens in the fields of sport, culture, religion and the workplace andcan sometimes change from healthy competition to destructive conflict.

Conflict within a group of people

Even within one organisation or team, conflict can arise from the individual differences or ambitionsmentioned earlier; or from rivalry between sub-groups or factions. All leaders and members of theorganisation need to be alert to group dynamics that can spill over into conflict.

3. How to identify signs and stages of conflict

"Disputes of right" and "disputes of interest"

Especially in the workplace, two main types of disputes have been noted (although these two types mayalso happen in other situations). These are:

"disputes of right", where people or groups are entitled by law, by contract, by previousagreement or by established practice to certain rights. Disputes of right will focus on conflictissues such as employment contracts, legally enforceable matters or unilateral changes inaccepted or customary practices. A dispute of rights is, therefore, usually settled by legal decisionor arbitration and not by negotiation.

"disputes of interest", where the conflict may be a matter of opinion, such as where a person orgroup is entitled to some resources or privileges (such as access to property, better workingconditions, etc). Because there is no established law or right, a dispute of interest will usually besolved through collective bargaining or negotiation.

Stages of conflict

The handling of conflict requires awareness of its various developmental stages. If leaders in the situationcan identify the conflict issue and how far it has developed, they can sometimes solve it before itbecomes much more serious. Typical stages include:


5/35

where potential for conflict exists - in other words where people recognise that lack of resources,diversity of language or culture may possible result in conflict if people are not sensitive to thediversity.

latent conflict where a competitive situation could easily spill over into conflict - e.g. at a politicalrally or in the workplace where there are obvious differences between groups of people.

open conflict - which can be triggered by an incident and suddenly become real conflict.

aftermath conflict - the situation where a particular problem may have been resolved but thepotential for conflict still exists. In fact the potential may be even greater than before, if oneperson or group perceives itself as being involved in a win-loose situation.

Signs of conflict between individuals

In the organisation leaders and members should be alert to signs of conflict between colleagues, so thatthey can be proactive in reducing or resolving the conflict by getting to the root of the issue. Typical signsmay include:

colleagues not speaking to each other or ignoring each other

contradicting and bad-mouthing one another

deliberately undermining or not co-operating with each other, to the downfall of the team

Signs of conflict between groups of people

Similarly, leaders and members can identify latent conflict between groups of people in the organisationor the community and plan action before the conflict becomes open and destructive:

cliques or factions meeting to discuss issues separately, when they affect the whole organisation

one group being left out of organising an event which should include everybody

groups using threatening slogans or symbols to show that their group is right and the others arewrong

4. How to build teamwork and co-operation (and so minimise thepossibility of conflict)

Teamwork and co-operation are essential in an organisation which aims to be effective and efficient, andnot likely to be divided by conflicting factions. The best teamwork usually comes from having a sharedvision or goal, so that leaders and members are all committed to the same objectives and understandtheir roles in achieving those objectives. Important behaviours in achieving teamwork and minimisingpotential conflict include a commitment by team members to:

share information by keeping people in the group up-to-date with current issues

express positive expectations about each other

empower each other - publicly crediting colleagues who have performed well and encouragingeach other to achieve results

team-build - by promoting good morale and protecting the group's reputation with outsiders resolve potential conflict - by bringing differences of opinion into the open and facilitating

resolution of conflicts

5. How to manage and resolve conflict situations


6/35

Collective bargaining

Especially in workplace situations, it is necessary to have agreed mechanisms in place for groups ofpeople who may be antagonistic (e.g. management and workers) to collectively discuss and resolveissues. This process is often called "collective bargaining", because representatives of each group cometogether with a mandate to work out a solution collectively. Experience has shown that this is far better

than avoidance or withdrawal, and puts democratic processes in place to achieve "integrative problemsolving", where people or groups who must find ways of co-operating in the same organisation, do sowithin their own agreed rules and procedures.

Conciliation

The dictionary defines conciliation as "the act of procuring good will or inducing a friendly feeling". SouthAfrican labour relations legislation provides for the process of conciliation in the workplace, wherebygroups who are in conflict and who have failed to reach agreement, can come together once again toattempt to settle their differences. This is usually attempted before the more serious step of a strike byworkers or a lock-out by management is taken; and it has been found useful to involve a facilitator in theconciliation process. Similarly, any other organisation (e.g. sports club, youth group or communityorganisation) could try conciliation as a first step.

The difference between negotiation, mediation, and arbitration

Three methods of resolving situations that have reached the stage of open conflict are often used bymany different organisations. It is important to understand these methods, so that people can decidewhich methods will work best for them in their specific conflict situation:

Negotiation: this is the process where mandated representatives of groups in a conflict situationmeet together in order to resolve their differences and to reach agreement. It is a deliberateprocess, conducted by representatives of groups, designed to reconcile differences and to reachagreements by consensus. The outcome is often dependent on the power relationship betweenthe groups. Negotiations often involve compromise - one group may win one of their demands

and give in on another. In workplaces Unions and management representative usually suenegotiations to solve conflicts. Political and community groups also often use this method.

Mediation: when negotiations fail or get stuck, parties often call in and independent mediator.This person or group will try to facilitate settlement of the conflict. The mediator plays an activepart in the process, advises both or all groups, acts as intermediary and suggests possiblesolutions. In contrast to arbitration (see below) mediators act only in an advisory capacity - theyhave no decision-making powers and cannot impose a settlement on the conflicting parties.Skilled mediators are able to gain trust and confidence from the conflicting groups or individuals.

Arbitration: means the appointment of an independent person to act as an adjudicator (or judge)in a dispute, to decide on the terms of a settlement. Both parties in a conflict have to agree aboutwho the arbitrator should be, and that the decision of the arbitrator will be binding on them all.Arbitration differs from mediation and negotiation in that it does not promote the continuation ofcollective bargaining: the arbitrator listens to and investigates the demands and counter-demands

and takes over the role of decision-maker. People or organisations can agree on having either asingle arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators whom they respect and whose decision they will acceptas final, in order to resolve the conflict.

How to be an effective mediator

An effective mediator needs certain skills in order to achieve credibility and results:

preferably a proven record of success in mediation or negotiation


7/35


8/35

Trust and respect for chairperson (i.e. the mediator) and the mediating team (if more that oneperson)

Should there be translation and who should do it?

Is the venue secure and neutral?

Do the chairs and tables have to be re-arranged?

Size and leadership of delegations.

Should observers be allowed? Agreeing to behave in a polite and disciplined way.

No blaming, verbal abuse or shouting.

No physical intimidation (e.g. pointing) and violence.

No presence and carrying of weapons.

Should smoking, drinking and eating be allowed?

No other distracting behaviour, e.g. caucussing while the other side is speaking.

How long should sessions be?

Equal time for each side to speak and who should speak first.

Opportunity to caucus and consult when necessary.

How should the mediation be minuted?

What parts of the discussion should be confidential?

How should the agreement be reported back to members?

Should the outcome of the mediation be publicised and how?

http://www.okbar.org/public/brochures/confbroc.htmoklahoma bar asssociation

Methods for Resolving Conflicts and Disputes

RESOLVING CONFLICTS AND DISPUTES

In today's complex society we all deal with conflict in our daily lives - at home, work,

school, in personal and business relations. Most of us would prefer to have our

conflicts resolved fairly without violence or animosity. We would like our differences

settled at the least cost and stress to ourselves, families, jobs or businesses.

What Are Your Options: We are all familiar with the most traditional dispute

resolution process of our civil justice system - litigation and trial with a judge or jury

deciding who is right or wrong - where someone wins and someone loses.

There are really many more options available to you for problem solving and

resolving disputes. Negotiation, mediation and arbitration - often called ADR or in

alternative dispute resolution - are the most well-known.

Whether you are involved in a family or neighborhood dispute or a lawsuit involving

thousands of dollars, these processes should be considered. They are often the more
http://www.okbar.org/public/brochures/confbroc.htmhttp://www.okbar.org/public/brochures/confbroc.htmhttp://www.okbar.org/public/brochures/confbroc.htm


9/35

appropriate methods of dispute resolution and can result in a fair, just, reasonable

answer for both you and the other party -- a win-win solution.

Settlement and compromise have long been favored in the legal system. In fact, most

cases that are filed in a court do settle. Only 5% of all cases filed go to trial. TheseADR procedures are excellent options for you in dealing with controversy, allowing

you to reach resolution earlier and with less expense than traditional litigation. In fact,

many courts require parties to consider some form of ADR before going to trial.

When communications break down, differences increase and conflicts arise. Knowing

generally what all your options are, when they are used and how they can help you

goes a long way toward getting your dispute resolved and giving you a satisfactory

result. The following processes describe ways you can resolve disputes.

NEGOTIATION

Definition: Negotiation is the most basic means of settling our differences. It is back-

and-forth communication between the parties to the conflict with the goal of trying to

find a solution.

The Process: You may negotiate directly with the other person. You may hire an

attorney to negotiate directly with the other side on your behalf. There are no specific

procedures to follow - you can determine your own - but it works best if all parties

agree to remain calm and not talk at the same time. Depending on your situation, you

can negotiate in the board room of a big company, in an office or even in your own

living room.

Negotiation allows you to participate directly in decisions that affect you. In the most

successful negotiations, you are trying to get what is best for you while considering

the needs and interests of the other side. A negotiated agreement can become a

contract and be enforceable.

When and How Negotiation Is Used: Most people negotiate every day - with

children about doing homework, with a neighbor about the location of a fence, with a

boss about a raise, or with a business about buying their product. In some

circumstances you may want the help of a lawyer to help you negotiate a fair deal.

Negotiation is certainly the first method of choice for problem solving and trying to

reach a mutually acceptable agreement. If no agreement is reached, you may pursue


10/35

any of the other options suggested here. This process can be appropriately used at any

stage of the conflict - before a lawsuit is filed, while a lawsuit is in progress, at the

conclusion of a trial, even before or after an appeal is filed.

Characteristics of Negotiation:

Voluntary Private and confidential Quick and inexpensive Informal and unstructured Parties control the process Parties make their own decisions and reach their own agreements (no third

party decision maker) Negotiated agreements can be enforceable

Can result in a win-win solution

MEDIATION

Definition: Mediation is a voluntary process in which an impartial person (the

mediator) helps with communication and promotes reconciliation between the parties

which will allow them to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. Mediation often is

the the next step if negotiation proves unsuccessful.

The Process: The mediator manages the process and helps facilitate negotiationbetween the parties. A mediator does not make a decision nor force an agreement. The

parties directly participate and are responsible for negotiating their own settlement or

agreement.

At the beginning of the mediation session, the mediator will describe the process and

the ground rules. The parties or their attorneys have an opportunity to explain their

view of the dispute. Mediation helps each side better understand the other's point of

view. Sometimes the mediator will meet separately with each side. Separate

"caucusing" can help address emotional and factual issues as well as allow time forreceiving legal advice from your attorney. Mediations are generally held in the office

of the mediator or other agreed location.

Agreements can be creative. You could reach a solution that might not be available

from a court of law. For example, if you owe someone money but don't have the cash,

rather than be sued and get a judgment against you, settlement options could include


11/35

trading something you have for something the other wants.

If an agreement is reached, it will generally be reduced to writing. Most people uphold

a mediated agreement because they were a part of making it. It can become a contract

and be enforceable. If there is no agreement, you have not lost any of your rights andyou can pursue other options such as arbitration or going to trial.

When and How Mediation Is Used: When you and the other person are unable to

negotiate a resolution to your dispute by yourselves, you may seek the assistance of a

mediator who will help you and the other party explore ways of resolving your

differences. You may choose to go to mediation with or without a lawyer depending

upon the type of problem you have. You may always consult with an attorney prior to

finalizing an agreement to be sure that you have made fully informed decisions and

that all your rights are protected. Sometimes mediators will suggest that you do this.Mediation can be used in most conflicts ranging from disputes between consumers

and merchants, landlords and tenants, employers and employees, family members in

such areas as divorce, child custody and visitation rights, eldercare and probate, as

well as simple or complex business disputes or personal injury matters. Mediation can

also be used at any stage of the conflict such as facilitating settlements of a pending

lawsuit.

Attorneys and other professionals provide private mediation for a fee. If you have an

attorney, you can work together to select a mediator of your choice. You may want a

mediator who is knowledgeable about the subject matter of your dispute. You may

wish to use a for-fee mediator in the first instance or if Early Settlement mediation has

not resulted in a resolution of your dispute. You may also find mediators or mediation

services listed in the telephone directory or available on lists provided by some courts

or private professional organizations. When selecting a mediator, you should always

check their credentials and get references. Mediators qualified under the District Court

Mediation Act meet statutory standards of training and experience.

Who Provides This Service: Public mediation services are available through Early

Settlement Centers - 12 regional centers statewide. This program provides the services

of volunteer mediators, trained and certified to mediate in the Administrative Office

of the Oklahoma Supreme Court. Mediators in this system are assigned to mediate

your dispute by the various program administrators. They are available at minimal or

no charge to help you resolve conflicts, often without the assistance of an attorney or

the need to go to court. Call (405) 521-6677 for the phone number and location of the


12/35


13/35

The result can be binding if all parties have previously agreed to be bound by the

decision. In that case, the right to appeal the arbitrator's decision is very limited. An

arbitrator's award can be reduced to judgment in a court and thus be enforceable. In

non-binding arbitration, a decision may become final if all parties agree to accept it or

it may serve to help you evaluate the case and be a starting point for settlement talks.

How and When Arbitration Is Used: A common use of arbitration is in the area of

labor disputes - between fire fighters and the city in wage disputes, for example. You

will usually be represented by an attorney in an arbitration.

Many contracts have clauses which require that disputes arising out of that contract be

arbitrated. You may have seen such a provision when you applied for a credit card or

opened a retirement account or other account with a stock broker. You may want to

explore using this process if you and the other side agree that the problem needs tohave someone make a decision but you do not want the expense of going through the

court process. If you agree to arbitrate or sign a contract with an arbitration clause,

you should understand that the arbitrator may make the final decision and that you

may be waiving your right to a trial in court.

Who Provides This Service: Many attorneys, other professionals or professional

associations offer their services as arbitrators. Typically your attorney will select the

arbitrator based upon the particular type of the dispute. In complex and highly

technical cases, often an arbitrator who is knowledgeable in that field is chosen.Usually fees are charged.

Some courts offer court-sponsored, non-binding arbitration and have specific

procedural rules to follow.

Characteristics of Arbitration:

Can be used voluntarily Private (unless the limited court appeal is made) Maybe less formal and structured than going to court, depending on applicable

arbitration rules Usually quicker and less expensive than going to court, Depending on

applicable arbitration rules Each party will have the opportunity to present evidence and make arguments May have a right to choose an arbitrator with specialized expertise A decision will be made by the arbitrator which may resolve the dispute and be


14/35

final Arbitrator's award can be enforced in a court If non-binding, you still have the right to a trial

LITIGATION (Going To Court)

Definition: Litigation is the use of the courts and civil justice system to resolve legal

controversies.

The Process: Litigation is begun by filing a lawsuit in a court. Specific rules of

procedure, discovery and presentation of evidence must be followed. The attorney for

the other side will want to take your deposition to learn more about the facts as you

see them and your position in the case. There can be a number of court appearances

by you and/or your lawyer. If the parties cannot agree how to settle the case, either the

judge or a jury will decide the dispute for you through a trial.

A trial is a formal judicial proceeding allowing full examination and determination of

all the issues between the parties with each side presenting its case to either a jury or a

judge. The decision is made by applying the facts of the case to the applicable law.

That verdict or decision can conclude the litigation process and be enforceable;

however, if appropriate, the loser can appeal the decision to a higher court. In some

cases, the losing party may have to pay the costs of the law suit and may have to pay

the other party's attorney fees.

How and When Litigation Is Used: Our American civil justice system is one of the

best in the world. Our Constitution gives us the right to a fair trial. If you want your

day in court with a judge or jury of your peers deciding the outcome, then the pursuit

of litigation and trial of the case is for you.

You may be in a municipal court, state district court or a federal court depending on

the type of dispute you have and where your attorney files your case or where you get

sued. State court trial judges are elected on a non-partisan ballot, though vacancies are

filled through an appointment process from highly qualified applicants. The districtcourts also appoint special judges, who handle certain kinds of cases, such as small

claims and divorces. These judges are selected by the District judges from qualified

applicants. Federal district judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by

the U.S. Senate. Federal magistrates are selected by the Federal district judges. In all

courts, cases are randomly assigned to the various judges. You have no choice


15/35

concerning which judge will hear your case. Juries are randomly selected from a jury

wheel of licensed drivers within each state judicial district and, in the case of federal

court juries, from a jury wheel of registered voters and drivers license holders.

If you cannot settle your differences through negotiation, mediation, arbitration orsome other means, then you should pursue litigation through the courts with your

lawyer.

Characteristics of Litigation:

Involuntary - a defendant must participate (no choice) Formal and structured rules of evidence and procedure Each party has the opportunity to present its evidence and argument and cross-

examine the other side - there are procedural safeguards Public - court proceedings and records are open The decision is based on the law The decision can be final and binding Right of appeal exists Losing party may pay costs

Some Other Dispute Resolution Procedures and Where You May Find Them:

If you have a problem with a new car, you may find automobile arbitrationthrough the Better Business Bureau to be a solution for you. The manufacturerof your car may also have a process of resolving disputes.

If you are involved in agriculture and have a farmer-creditor controversy, theAgricultural Mediation Program through Oklahoma State University and theOklahoma Department of Agriculture may be helpful to you.

Victim-offender mediation which can result in restitution to the victim isavailable through the Oklahoma Department of Corrections.

Other state and federal agencies sometimes offer settlement options in additionto their regular administrative procedures. For example, mediation of workers'compensation claims is now available.

If you do go to court, in addition to court-sponsored mediation or other ADRprograms, you may find more procedures that encourage settlement or canresolve the dispute. Your attorney can tell you about the processes available inthe court in which your case is pending.

Appellate courts, such as our state Supreme Court and the federal Tenth CircuitCourt of Appeals, have settlement conference opportunities.

Don't forget Small Claims Court where a judge can decide your dispute -


16/35

usually without a lawyer - if your claim is valued under $6,000. EarlySettlement mediation is often available here to offer settlement assistance firstso you may not need to go before the judge.

Managing meetings and reaching consensus within any kind of organization orgroup can often be achieved through the assistance of a trained facilitator.Facilitators are available through various non-profit support centers and serviceleagues or other community organizations.

School Peer Mediation - Peaceful Resolutions for Oklahoma Schools (PROS),a project of the Oklahoma Bar Association/Law-related Education Departmentand Early Settlement, is training students to mediate their own disputes.

Effective communication and conflict resolution skills classes may be availablein your community by contacting the Law-related Education Department at theOklahoma Bar Association thanks to a partnership with Leadership Oklahoma.

The OBA Alternative Dispute Resolution Section may be a resource to identify

additional options.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELECTING THE APPROPRIATE DISPUTE

RESOLUTION METHOD

The method you use to resolve your dispute will depend upon your personal needs and

the nature of your particular dispute. You may want to consult with an attorney to help

diagnose which process or combination of processes best serves your objectives for

your particular situation.

Considerations Include:

whether you want the dispute to be resolved privately and confidentially or in apublic court setting;

whether you want an informal setting and a more flexible process or one that ismore formal and has specific rules to follow;

whether you want to have control over the outcome or you need someone else,a person with expertise (an arbitrator), or a person with authority (a judge), tomake the decision;

whether the time necessary to reach a final decision is important to you; whether the costs involved in pursuing a particular method are a factor; whether the parties intend to maintain a relationship; whether your dispute should be decided on questions of law, resolved with

business principles or a solution found through other fair, yet practical, means; whether the process or its outcome is binding and easily enforceable


17/35

There will always be times when a courtroom trial is called for. Often, however, you

are better served by one of the other alternative dispute resolution processes described

in this brochure. Hopefully, this information about the available choices will help you

select the dispute resolution technique best suited to your individual needs. With a

better understanding of the considerations that can help you choose the mostappropriate method, your conflicts can be more successfully managed and your

disputes more satisfactorily resolved.

Reviewed December 2006

-======

http://www.gppac.net/documents/pbp/part1/2_reconc.htm

The Meaning of Reconciliation

By Hizkias Assefa*

Compared to conflict handling mechanisms such as negotiation, mediation,adjudication, and arbitration, the approach called reconciliation is perhaps the least

well understood. Its meaning, processes, and application have not been clearlyarticulated or developed. A place to start understanding what it entails might be bytrying to distinguish it from the other approaches used in peacemaking and peace-

building.

If we were to look at the degree of mutual participation by the conflict parties in thesearch for solutions to the problems underlying their conflict we could place theseapproaches in a spectrum as follows. (See Figure 1)

At the left end of the spectrum, we find approaches where mutual participation isminimal. The use of force by one of the parties to impose a solution would be anexample of a mechanism that would be placed at this end of the spectrum. Further tothe right of the spectrum, we could place mechanisms such as adjudication. Here athird party, instead of an adversary, imposes a solution to the conflict. However, themutual participation of the parties in the choice of the solution is comparatively higherhere than in the first. In the adjudication process, at least the parties have anopportunity to present their cases, to be heard, and submit their arguments for whytheir preferred solution should be the basis upon which the decision is made.Nonetheless, the choice of the solution is made by a third party, and the decision isbacked by force (enforced) which ensures that the losing party complies.
http://www.gppac.net/documents/pbp/part1/2_reconc.htmhttp://www.gppac.net/documents/pbp/part1/2_reconc.htmhttp://www.gppac.net/documents/pbp/part1/2_reconc.htm


18/35


19/35

adversaries relationships from that of resentment and hostility to friendship andharmony. Of course, for this to happen, both parties must be equally invested andparticipate intensively in the resolution process.2

Before we move on to examine the insights that emerge from this spectrum, it will

clarify our thinking if we quickly glance at one more issue of definitions anddistinctions.

The conflict handling mechanisms illustrated in the spectrum can be categorized intothree groups which we will call conflict management, conflict resolution, and conflictprevention approaches. Conflict management approaches generally tend to focus moreon mitigating or controlling the destructive consequences that emanate from a givenconflict than on finding solutions to the underlying issues causing it. On the otherhand, conflict resolution approaches aim at going beyond mitigation of consequencesand attempt to resolve the substantive and relational root-causes so that the conflict

comes to an end. While conflict management and resolution are reactive, they comeinto motion once conflict has surfaced, conflict prevention tries to anticipate thedestructive aspects of the conflict before they arise and attempts to take positivemeasures to prevent them from occurring.

Most of the mechanisms identified on the left hand of the spectrumare conflict management approaches. The use of military force fordeterrence or in peace-keeping (separating the conflict parties fromeach other so that they do not keep inflicting harm on each other)are typical conflict management strategies. To the extent thatadjudication, arbitration, and bargaining negotiations do notbecome avenues to solve the underlying issues of the conflict, and

in most instances they do not, they become mere stop-gap conflict managementmeasures. But if they provide an opportunity to work out not only differences onsubstantive issues but also negative relationships, they can become conflict resolutionmechanisms.

Observations

We notice that as we move from the left to the right on the spectrum, i.e., as the

participation of all the parties in the search for solution increases, the likelihood ofachieving a mutually satisfactory and durable solution also increases. We know thatsolutions imposed by force will only last until the vanquished is able to mustersufficient force to reverse the situation. Solutions imposed by adjudication andarbitration, unless somehow the loser gives up, can always be frustrated by the lattersendless appeals or lack of cooperation in the implementation process. If, however, theparties are engaged earnestly in the search for the solutions and are able to find

Justice is a

necessary but

not sufficient

condition for

reconciliation.


20/35

resolutions that could satisfy the needs and interests of all involved, there could be nobetter guarantee for the durability of the settlements. It would be in the interest ofevery one to see to it that they are fully enforced. This is what we believe problem-solving negotiations, mediation, and reconciliation can do.

What is noteworthy however is that as we move from the left to the right end of thespectrum, although the likelihood of effectiveness and durability of the solutionsincreases, our knowledge and understanding of the approaches to be utilized becomesketchy, less developed and unsystematic. Our knowledge and methodology ofconflict management approaches (the mechanisms on the left hand side of thespectrum) such as the use of force, adjudication, or arbitration are quite advanced.They are highly developed disciplines within institutions that command high respectand resources devoted to training and practice. Military and police science,jurisprudence and legal studies, as well as the entire military and police academies,law schools, ministries of defence and justice, police departments, courts, prisonsystems, are examples of these disciplines and institutions that advance the practice ofthese approaches. In contrast, conflict resolution approaches such as problem-solvingnegotiation and mediation are less developed and institutions and resources devoted totheir training, advancement and practice are meager. Whatever is in place is voluntaryand ad-hoc. Then, when we come to reconciliation, let alone establish procedures andinstitutions charged with the application of the concept, there is not even muchunderstanding of what it means, especially, among social scientists. Religious peopleand theologians are a bit better equipped to discuss the concept. But even there, thereis a great gap between articulation and translation of the ideas into practice.

Healing and Reconciliation

Despite the lack of knowledge about how to operationalize reconciliation, there ishowever no question about the tremendous need for it. In fact, it could be said that theneed in todays world is much greater than at any other time in the past.

One reason is that conflict management strategies are not adequate to deal with thekinds of contemporary conflicts raging in many parts of the world. Especially sincethe end of the Cold War, civil wars have replaced interstate wars as the mostpredominant large scale social conflicts. To a certain extent, in interstate conflictsstrategies aimed merely at separating the conflicting parties might suffice. Even if theunderlying issues of the conflict are not resolved, the separation could help avoid therecurrence of the conflict. Because states tend to isolate themselves from each otherby their national boundaries, the task of separating them by peace-keeping forces isrelatively easier.


21/35

However, in civil war situations the relationships between the protagonists is muchmore intimate and complex. In most cases, the parties share the same geographic areaand even community, there might be strong economic interdependence between them,they usually have all sorts of social ties among each other including intermarriages. Inthese instances it is quite difficult to separate the protagonists since the boundaries

between them are very difficult to draw. Even if it is possible to do it for a short while,it is not feasible to think of conflict management strategies such as separation as longterm solutions. For that matter, even decisions imposed by adjudication or other suchprocesses will not be solutions since the winning party cannot expect to enjoy itsvictory without facing the consequences of the losers wrath. Therefore, in civil warsituations conflict management strategies are not adequate. One has to move towardsconflict resolution and reconciliation processes where not only the underlying issuesto the conflicts are resolved to everyones satisfaction but also the antagonisticattitudes and relationships between the adversaries are transformed from negative topositive.

Moreover, even in interstaterelations, we are increasinglyrealizing that the components ofthe modern international systemare no more the 19th centuryautarchic states. The globe isshrinking and the fates of peoplesof the world are becoming moreand more inextricably intertwined.Thus, it would be increasinglydifficult to expect unilateralapproaches to handling conflictssuch as imposition of solutions byforce as viable approaches. In aninterdependent and closely interconnected world even those that are supposedly weakcan have their own way of subverting or undermining the imposed order. Therefore,those groups must somehow be enabled to participate in the search for solutions intheir conflicts even with the more powerful actors. In fact, the democratic values that

the current international order is trying to promote as a universal value in all societiesof the world necessitates movement more and more towards integrative negotiation,mediation and reconciliation as the predominant ways of dealing with conflict insteadof unilateral measures that entail the use of coercion.

What Does Reconciliation Entail?

Reconciliation as a conflict handling mechanism entails the following core elements:

Tuareg leaders on their way to the Mali Flame of Peace

ceremony, 1996. Photo: Henny van der Graaf.


22/35

a) Honest acknowledgment of the harm/injury each party has inflicted on the other;

b) Sincere regrets and remorse for the injury done:

c) Readiness to apologize for ones role in inflicting the injury;

d) Readiness of the conflicting parties to let go of the anger and bitterness caused bythe conflict and the injury;

e) Commitment by the offender not to repeat the injury;

f) Sincere effort to redress past grievances that caused the conflict and compensate thedamage caused to the extent possible;

g) Entering into a new mutually enriching relationship.

Reconciliation then refers to this new relationship that emerges as a consequence ofthese processes. What most people refer to as healing is the mending of deep

emotional wounds (generated by the conflict) that follow the reconciliation process.

A very important aspect of the process of reconciliation and one that distinguishes itfrom all the other conflict handling mechanisms is its methodology. In most of theconflict handling mechanisms such as adjudication, arbitration, and for that mattereven negotiation and mediation the method used for establishing responsibility for theconflict or its consequences is adversarial. In these processes, the parties present their

grievances and make a case for the adversarys fault or responsibility, therebydemanding that it should be the latter that should make amends. Each party begins bydefending its own behaviour and denying its own guilt or responsibility until theopponent proves it to his or her satisfaction or to the satisfaction of outside observers,be they judges or mediators. In such a process, ones behaviour is always explained asa reaction to the behaviour of the adversary. The typical pattern of the interaction is: I

did this to you because you did such and such a thing to me! The aim is to get theadversary to change his or her future conduct by proving the persons guilt. Of course,the expectation is that both parties will change each other in this way and willeventually transform their relationship from negative to positive.

Despite the lackof knowledge

about how to

operationalize

reconciliation,


23/35


24/35

precedes reconciliation. However, this argument presents a false dichotomy. Anattempt at reconciliation without addressing the injustice in the situation is indeed amockery and belittling the suffering of the victim. There cannot be reconciliationwithout justice. Justice and equity are at the core of reconciliation. The centralquestion in reconciliation is not whether justice is done, but rather how one goes about

doing it in ways that can also promote future harmonious and positive relationshipbetween parties that have to live with each other whether they like it or not. Justice isa necessary but not sufficient condition for reconciliation. Reconciliation takes theconcern for justice a step further and is preoccupied with how to rebuild a morelivable, and psychologically healthy environment between former enemies where thevicious cycle of hate, deep suspicion, resentment, and revenge does not continue tofester.

For this reason, the methodology used to arrive at justice in the reconciliation processis different from that used to arrive at justice in the conventional (juridical) approach.The aim of the latter processes (particularly of the criminal justice process) isprimarily to identify guilt and administer the punishment that the law requires withlittle attention to healing the bitterness and resentment that exist between the parties inthe conflict. Identifying ways in which offenders are assisted to redress the materialand emotional damage they have inflicted through self-reflection, acknowledgment ofresponsibility, remorse, and compensation would be an important step towardsestablishing an environment of reconciliation. The approach known as restorativejustice as opposed to retributive justice brings us closer to the point where justice

can be done but at the same time the possibilities for reconciliation are enhanced.3

Applying this concept in some of the catastrophic situations like Rwanda, Yugoslavia,Cambodia or Chile, reconciliation does not mean that the offenders are just pardoned.It means creating a process and an environment where the offenders take theresponsibility to acknowledge their offense and get motivated to change the situationand relationship in a positive and durable manner instead of keep denying their guiltuntil it is proven to them by the juridical process.

The important thing to note is that to the extent the offenders keep denying their guilt,even if their responsibility is proved juridically and they are punished, the internalchange that needs to take place to change the relationship from destructive toconstructive, from hate to cooperation and harmony may not happen. Particularly ingroup conflicts, the punishment of the offenders alone does not prevent them or theirfollowers and (at times, even their descendants) from continuing to hate and desiringto retaliate against those that punished them or their forefathers. Reconciliation has amuch better chance of stopping the cycle of violence and hatred that sometimestranscends generations than any other conflict handling mechanism. Although flawedin many ways, this is what the experiments with Truth and Reconciliation


25/35

Commission in conflict-ravaged societies are trying to do. In a number of instances,these commissions have been able to go as far as obtaining voluntarilyacknowledgment of guilt by offenders. But they have not gone far enough to get themto demonstrate sincere remorse, or take active steps to compensate and repair therelationship vis a vis their victims. 4

Notes

1 See Roger Fisher and William Ury, Getting to Yes, for the distinction between thebargaining type (distributive) and problem-solving type (integrative) negotiationapproaches.

2 Of course these categories are neither exhaustive nor water-tight. There are manymore mechanisms that mix the various types and fall somewhere in between. Oneexample is a mechanism that has come to be known as med/arb, where the process

starts as mediation with the voluntary and full participation of the parties, but if thatfails in resolving the problem, the solution is determined by a third party, anarbitrator. There are also other non-formal processes such as advocacy by interestgroups, political mobilization at the grass-roots level in order to put pressure onleaders, etc. that can be placed at various points on the spectrum. Advocacy operatesin the adjudication framework although the body to whom the appeal is done might bethe courts of national or international pubic opinion instead of the regular courts oflaw. Political mobilization could be seen as a tactic in the negotiation process inwhich the adversaries are marshaling their forces to improve their bargaining leverageor capacity to be heard and be taken seriously.

3 See Howard Zehr, Changing Lenses, (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press), 1990

4 For a critique of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions and more detailedelaboration of concepts, approaches, and methodologies, and examples see HizkiasAssefa, Process of Expanding and Deepening Engagement, ReconciliationMethodology in Large Scale Social Conflicts (forthcoming).

*Hizkias Assefa is Professor of Conflict Studies, Conflict Transformation Programme,

at Eastern Mennonite University, USA, and a Distinguished Fellow at the Institute of

Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University, USA. He is the founderand co-ordinator of the African Peacebuilding and Reconciliation Network in

Nairobi, Kenya. He works as a mediator and facilitator in civil war situations in many

parts of Africa from his base in Nairobi. He is the author of several books, including

Peace and Reconciliation as a Paradigm: A Philosophy of Peace and Its Implications

on Conflict, Governance and Economic Growth in Africa (Majestic Press, 1993), and


26/35

Process of Expanding and Deepening Engagement: Methodology for Reconciliation

Work in Large Scale Social Conflicts (forthcoming).

http://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/stepsoverview.htm

Conflict Resolution Menu

8 Steps: Overview

The following process is useful for effectively managing conflict in your workplace, inrelationships, or in other situations where you have an interest in seeking a negotiate

solution. These steps won't guarantee an agreement, but they greatly improve thelikelihood that the problems can be understood, solutions explored, and consideratioof the advantages of a negotiated agreement can occur within a relatively constructivenvironment. They provide useful strategies to consider that reduce the impacts ofstress, fears and "surprise" factors involved in dealing with conflict.

1. "Know Thyself" and Take Care of Selfo Understand your "perceptual filters," biases, triggerso Create a personally affirming environment (eat, sleep, exercise)

2. Clarify Personal Needs Threatened by the Disputeo Substantive, Procedural, and Psychological Needso Look at BATNA, WATNA, and MLATNAo Identify "Desired Outcomes" from a Negotiated Process

3. Identify a Safe Place for Negotiationo Appropriate Space for Discussion/ Private and Neutralo Mutual Consent to Negotiate/ Appropriate Timeo Role of Support People (Facilitators, Mediators, Advocates), as neededo Agreement to Ground rules

4. Take a Listening Stance into the Interactiono "Seek first to understand, then to be understood" (Covey)o Use Active Listening skills

5. Assert Your Needs Clearly and Specificallyo Use "I-messages" as tools for clarification
http://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/stepsoverview.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/stepsoverview.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/index.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/index.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step1.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step1.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step2.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step2.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step3.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step3.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step4.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step4.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step5.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step5.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step5.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step4.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step3.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step2.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step1.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/index.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/stepsoverview.htm


27/35

o Build from what you have heard - continue to listen well

6. Approach Problem-Solving with Flexibilityo Identify Issues Clearly and Conciselyo Generate Options (Brainstorm), While Deferring Judgmento Be open to "tangents" and other problem definitionso Clarify Criteria for Decision-Making

7. Manage Impasse with Calm, Patience, and Respecto Clarify Feelingso Focus on Underlying Needs, Interests, and Concernso Take a structured break, as needed

8. Build an Agreement that Workso Review "Hallmarks" of a Good Agreemento Implement and Evaluate - Live and Learn

http://www.wittcom.com/how_to_resolve_conflict.htm

How to Resolve Conflict

If you view conflict as something that shouldn't happen, something that harms relationships, it becomes

negative. And then you avoid it and hope it will go away. But if you see conflict as a fact of life, an

opportunity to strengthen relationships, you have a way of resolving conflict by turning it into

something creative.

Try these "10 Ways to Resolve Conflict."

1. Agree on a mutually acceptable time and place to discuss the conflict.

2. State the problem as you see it and list your concerns.

o Make "I" statements.

o Withhold judgments, accusations, and absolute statements ("always" or "never").

3. Let the other person have his/her say.

o Do not interrupt or contradict.

o Do not allow name-calling, put-downs, threats, obscenities, yelling, or intimidating

behavior.
http://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step6.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step6.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step7.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step7.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step8.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step8.htmhttp://www.wittcom.com/how_to_resolve_conflict.htmhttp://www.wittcom.com/how_to_resolve_conflict.htmhttp://www.wittcom.com/how_to_resolve_conflict.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step8.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step7.htmhttp://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/onlinetraining/resolution/step6.htm


28/35


29/35

7 Tips for Resolving Conflicts Quickly and

PeacefullyWritten byStephen Hopson-85 Comments

Everyone has to deal with difficult people, whether they are argumentative, abusive, stubborn, or

combative. The question is, how can you assert your own rights without creating an unnecessary

incident?

In most cases, angry people are screamingto be heard. They want to be valued, loved, and listened to.

They want to feel important but arent able to express themselves constructively. With the right attitude,

its possible to get past these insecurities and reach an understanding.

These 7 strategies will help you setting disputes quickly and peacefully for the benefit of everyone

involved:

1. Remain calm. Be still and say nothing. Let the storm run its course. Often times the angry person

wants to provoke you. Arguing is ineffective because it raises barriers. Consider how I handled

thebarbersituation.

2. Let the other person do the talking. He or she will soon grow tired of it. Sometimes thats all they

want. To be heard. To feel important. Everyone wants to feel important. Some people just express it in

ways that are counterproductive.

3. Genuinely consider the other persons point of view. Imagine yourself in his shoes. Never say

youre wrong. In fact, try hard to look for areas of agreement and build on them.

4. Theres power in the words Yes, yes, I see exactly what youre saying. You mean. This

shows the other person you hear him/her. Thats all they usually want to be validated. By agreeing with

them, you gradually break down the other persons anger.

5. If the situation turns verbally abusive, put a stop to it. Firmly but calmly state: Youre very angryright now and youre saying things you dont mean (give them the benefit of the doubt). Im going to

excuse myself. We can talk again after you calm down. Then leave the room or ask them to leave.

6. If you are wrong, quickly admit it and take responsibility.You could say, Youre absolutely right, it

is my fault and here is what Ill do to fix it. Even if youre NOT wrong, at least give them the benefit of the

doubt, I may be wrong, lets look at the facts together. Its hard to argue with that!

These words have tremendous power. Not only does it validate the other persons viewpoint but it also

diffuses the tension. You might be surprised by what happens afterwards. The person could end up

defending you. Youd be amazed how an attacker suddenly becomes an ally.

7. Use the power of visualization.If youre dealing with someone you interact with on a daily basis (like

a boss or co-worker), try to imagine that person as a loving spiritual being. I did this with a boss I had at a

Wall Street bank several years ago. He was an absolute tyrant and gave everyone a hard time. In

retrospect, he was clearly unhappy and insecure.

http://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/organisational-culture-and-employee-

behaviour-1897458.htmlOrganisational Culture And Employee BehaviourPosted: Feb 23, 2010 |Comments: 0 | Views: 3,991
http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/author/stephen-hopson/http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/author/stephen-hopson/http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/author/stephen-hopson/http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/resolving-conflicts-quickly-and-peacefully/#commentshttp://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/resolving-conflicts-quickly-and-peacefully/#commentshttp://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/resolving-conflicts-quickly-and-peacefully/#commentshttp://www.adversityuniversityblog.com/2006/06/08/adversity-at-the-barber-shop/http://www.adversityuniversityblog.com/2006/06/08/adversity-at-the-barber-shop/http://www.adversityuniversityblog.com/2006/06/08/adversity-at-the-barber-shop/http://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/organisational-culture-and-employee-behaviour-1897458.htmlhttp://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/organisational-culture-and-employee-behaviour-1897458.htmlhttp://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/organisational-culture-and-employee-behaviour-1897458.htmlhttp://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/organisational-culture-and-employee-behaviour-1897458.html#commentshttp://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/organisational-culture-and-employee-behaviour-1897458.html#commentshttp://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/organisational-culture-and-employee-behaviour-1897458.htmlhttp://www.articlesbase.com/human-resources-articles/organisational-culture-and-employee-behaviour-1897458.htmlhttp://www.adversityuniversityblog.com/2006/06/08/adversity-at-the-barber-shop/http://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/resolving-conflicts-quickly-and-peacefully/#commentshttp://www.pickthebrain.com/blog/author/stephen-hopson/


30/35

The essay will look at the link between organisational culture and employee behaviour. This will act as the

foundation of the strategies or methods that employers can use to achieve organisational goals. Because

organisational culture is defined as the associated norms of an organisation, while employee behaviour is seen as

the outward expression of an employee's perception of organisational culture, then organisational culture

precedes employee behaviour. Leaders have the ability to influence and manage organisational culture. When this

is done effectively, then employees will express those values positively through their behaviour. The following

qualities will be examined in detail in the essay;

corporate communication

decision making

motivation

other character traits

All the above character traits can be used by leaders to influence organisational culture and

hence employee behaviour. First of all, there will be a need to change corporate communication in order to create

an open and transparent organisational culture. This can be achieved through giving clear communication thus

eliminating here-say among members of the organisation. This enhances the way employees perceive themselves

and will also affect their behaviour (Robbins, 2004)

Decision making within any organisation needs to be done in such a way that it enhances independence.

Employees need to feel that their respective organisations trust them to the point of allowing them to make

decisions within the organisations. Experts have suggested that organisations where there is less bureaucracy in

the process of decision making are generally more efficient. The reason why this occurs is that most employees will

not waste time trying to maintain protocol. Details of how mangers can achieve this will be examined in the essay.

Leaders need to motivate their employees. There are various ways in which this can be achieved; through reward

systems, through allowances, flexible working hours and holiday provisions. Employees can also be motivated by

possessing greater autonomy in the decision making process. Details of how managers can achieve this will be

analysed in the essay. The overall effect of motivation is that it makes workers more energised. This can create a

culture of hard work and will be manifested through employee behaviour. These interlink age will be elaborated

further in the essay. (Dessler, 2001)

The essay will also look at other quality traits that managers can utilise to influence their employees. This can be

achieved through justice and honesty when handling employee cases. Leaders also need to employ participative

character traits in order to affect organisational culture hence employee behaviour. Participation means

collaboration between leaders and employees during the execution of tasks. The validity of this argument will be

further scrutinised in relation to organisational culture. Managers also need to understand their employees and use

motivational tools that relate to their employees character traits. By doing this, employers will enhance a culture of

hard work and this will propagated in employee's behavioural traits.

Introduction

Organisational culture may be defined as the accepted norms and values that are associated with a particular

company. These norms are seen as distinctive to a particular organisation and normally affect the way specific

organisations go about implementing their organisational goals. These norms are also passed on from one group of

the organisation to another. The most fundamental question that managers and other organisational stakeholdersneed to answer is what is the relevance of organisational culture to the way they go about their activities?

Organisational culture is closely related to organisational strategy. Managers who normally experience problems

are those ones who fail to merge organisational culture to their strategies. If new strategies are incompatible with

the kind of culture prevailing at that time, then chances are they might fall fail. Numerous authors have explained

how many companies have failed in their endeavours to change their organisation because they had a plan to

reorganise and transform without looking at prevailing culture. (Locke, 1976)

Organisational culture related to employee behaviour

Organisational culture can be tackled in three realms; these are;


31/35

behaviour and artefacts

values

assumptions and beliefs

Assumptions and beliefs indicate all the underlying values that have been taken for granted by particular

organisation. These are usually values that have become so common to a specific organisation that no one even

notices that they are there. Values on the other hand are issues that determine behaviour. It should be noted that

values are more internal and are only expressed through behaviour. The latter term; behaviour denotes the visibleelements of culture prevailing within a certain organisation. These can be analysed through the organisational

dress code, the way employees use technology in their tasks, how work spaces are divided and even the way top

executives are treated within the organisation. All the above elements should be understood by managers and

implemented in order to influence and affect organisational culture.

Corporate communication

It is essential to remember that any particular form of organisational culture is affected by the way

employees, employersand shareholders communicate to each other. Organisational culture is reflected in the

manner communication is made within the firm. Corporate communication normally refers to the way companies

distribute or disseminate their information either externally or internally. Internal communication will refer to the

way employees share information within their organisation and also the way suppliers, partners and investors will

share knowledge with the company. Leaders should endeavour to create organisational cultures in which

employees represent the best image of the company. (Brown, 1995)

Corporate communication normally affects the way the company is perceived by the external market. It may

involve internal relations, crisis communication, corporate social responsibility, issue management and change

management. These are all very critical in the determination of how an organisation will go about implementing its

tasks and objectives. Sometimes, there may be a need to change certain policies. This is something that will need

corporate communication. If done in an appropriate manner, it can affect organisational culture in the future and

consequently employee behaviour. Sometimes internal corporate communication may be done to check on the

progress of a certain plan to be conducted by the company. Managers should ensure that their communication is

done transparently. It should also be done in a compassionate manner in order to make the employees feel as

though they are an important part of the organisation and should not be undermined by certain rigid

communication procedures. It is also important to make sure that communication is done openly. Most managers

make the mistake of letting rumours or here-say be the source of their communications. Most of the time,suchemployers will not bother correcting or rectifying information. This kind of communication normally persists in

cases where there is a high system of hierarchy. Leaders need to realise that they have the ability to influence

organisational culture hence employee behaviour through the types of communication that they adopt for their

organisation. Good corporate communication is one in which all the virtues mentioned above are incorporated.

(Bate, 1994)

Leaders need to realise that they can utilise corporate communication to influence organisational culture

hence employee behaviour as they are communicated to the consumer. Organisations that build a system of loyalty

through open communication will instil these values and will make their employees trickle this down to their clients.

Such employees will ensure that their clients' needs are met through discussions with them and will therefore

contribute towards their satisfaction. Such organisations will normally have greater competitive advantage in

comparison to others in the market.

Decision making

Decision making processes are also ways in which organisational culture can be transformed thus changing

employee behaviour and competitive advantage. Organisations where employees are; confused about their

enumeration systems or those ones where employees' job description contracts always come in late or those ones

where new employees are never recruited on time, may have problems with employee behaviour hence service

delivery. It is essential for leaders to employ the expertise and knowledge that its employees have in their decision

making processes. This is because staff members are the ones who eventually have to carry the burden of those

decisions. Leaders need to realise that employees have a lot of contact with clients and may be more


32/35

knowledgeable about consumer preference. It is therefore wise to learn about those ideas from their employees.

This will make employees more responsible and will instil an organisational culture that is full of cooperation.

(Kilmann et al, 1986)

CEO s and other types of leaders need to create a free environment where employees are allowed to think for

themselves. This will go a long way in enhancing efficiency because too much bureaucracy slows down service

delivery. Employees should be encouraged to contribute their views through regular meetings with managers oremployers. This can also be topped up by freedom to elect an independent advisory group that will facilitate certain

agreements between employees and their employers. Organisations that are characterised with top-down

management structure and cultures rarely affect their employees' behaviour and will be less effective in

achievement of sustainable advantage.

Decision making as a method of influencing employee behaviour and organisational culture is effective in that it

allows employees to be prepared psychologically for business activity. Organisations in which decision making is

largely left to the employee are characterised by fast and intellectual employees during treatment of clients. It

should be noted that such employees are normally quite ready for nay occurrences in the firm since they

contributed to its formation. Consequently, chances of meeting obstacles and objections during hours of business

will be minimised by those employees and they will be more effective in their tasks. Examples of areas in which

employees should be allowed to contribute to include aspects of products sold. Employees can make their

contribution about how their product should be based on knowledge acquired from consumers. They could also give

their ideas about pricing strategies. Through their interaction with clients, employees will have the ability to know

what consumers are looking for in their area of interest are. Such issues will contribute towards better employee

behaviour and hence organisational behaviour. (Benedict, 1934)

Motivation

Motivation can be seen as way of influencing employee's behaviour in such a way that it will lead to positive results

within the organisation. This is one of the most instrumental factors in the process of affecting employee behaviour

and hence organisational culture. Motivation can boost an employee's self esteem and will influence their capacity

to work. Motivation is especially necessary in instances where an organisation is undergoing changes. At that time,

there is a need for a motivational plan that will include all the new environmental factors that will come into play.

This motivational plan should bring out the following aspects in the employees;

confidence

honesty

integrity (Judge & Watanabe, 1993)

Motivation can be achieved through a variety of channels. First and foremost, an organisation needs to implement

rewards systems that create an atmosphere of enthusiasm amongst its employees. It would be preferable if an

organisation links reward systems to organisational success. This is the fundamental principle behind best practice

theories. In best practice theories, employees normally feel motivated to do better when they can see the results of

the efforts./ At the same time, employers need to avoid linking performance with enumeration for specific

individuals within its organisation. When employers adopt such a system of enumeration, then they will only be

dealing with temporary solutions. Linking enumeration to individual performance usually creates negative energies

in the organisation. Employees may look for shortcuts in order to meet their targets. Others may become hostile

towards their counterparts. It is therefore important to adopt fair distribution systems in enumeration so as to

maintain harmony and to create a culture of looking at the bigger picture'.

Another method that managers/ employers can use to motivate their employees is through the use of allowances.

For example, they could [provide certain holidays and flexible working hours that could encourage their employees

to work harder. Organisations should also endeavour to provide safe environments for their employees especially in

the construction and industrial sectors. They could provide their employees with all the necessary resources to go

about their daily activities. This will give them more morale to continue with their tasks because they know their

health or well being is not in any danger.


33/35

Another source of motivation stem from flexible organisational structure. Firms that allow employees to make their

own decision or those ones that allow them to have some form of autonomy in their project group will go a long

way in enhancing motivation within the organisation.

Motivation can also be achieved by institution of training and development strategies. This can be achieved for both

new and old employees. Motivation and training are interlinked; training instils employees with the necessary skills

and knowledge necessary continue with their day to day tasks. Training done on a regular basis ensures thatemployees have confidence when handling clients or when doing other technical skills. This will contribute to the

nature of service delivery in the company and there will be greater achievement of organisational culture. (Bartol

et al, 2005)

Overly, motivation gives employees the energy and drive to bring positive changes to the organisation. When

managers use motivational tools regularly, they will create an organisation culture that has extremely motivated

individuals; this will be manifested in their output or behaviour. The latter will be directed towards achievement of

organisational goals and such companies will be way above the rest.

Employing specific character traits to affect employee behaviour

Managers with the right qualities have the ability to affect organisational culture and hence employee behaviour.

Managers should endeavour to display attributes of justice and honesty. This can be achieved through the honesty

during interaction with employees. When leaders need to solve disputes between their employees, they should dothis in a fast and fair manner. The disagreeing parties should be accommodated effectively in this process. By

being just, employers will be showing their employees that the company is on their side and this will go a long way

in enhancing transparent organisational culture. Such a culture will be depicted by committed workers who have

confidence in their organisation. (Allen, 1985)

Another quality that should be emphasised by managers is the participative culture. This can be achieved by

working with employees. Organisations should try their best to create an environment where employers and

employees collaborate to complete tasks. There is nothing that will many employees over like a leader who walks

his talk'. Such employees will be encouraged to place more efforts or to go that extra mile because they realise

that their employees will do the same too.

Leaders could also try to be more understanding of their employees. They should try and learn their employees and

understand what the most important things to their employees are. Some employees may be motivated to work

harder by money. Some employees may be motivated by continuous challenges in their tasks. On the other hand,

others may prefer seeing the satisfaction on clients' faces. If employers can understand their employees as

individuals, then they can customise motivational tools to create an organisational culture where most of the

employees are satisfied by their motivational tools. This kind of culture will be depicted in the way most of these

employees behave. (Weick, 1979)

Conclusion

Organisational culture is linked to employee behaviour in that the latter is an expression of the former. If managers

try their best to institute changes in the organisation that influence organisational culture, this will be expressed by

employee behaviour and can actually create competitive advantage.

Reference:

Allen, R. (1985): Four Phases for Bringing About Cultural Change; Oxford

Kilmann, M. et al (1986): Gaining Control of the Corporate Culture; McGraw Hill

Bate, S. (1994): Strategies for Cultural Change; Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford

Benedict, R. (1934): Patterns of Culture; Houghton Mifflin, Boston

Brown, A. (1995): Organisational Culture; Pitman Publishing, London


34/35

Bartol, K, et al. (2005): Management: a pacific focus; 4th edition McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Dessler, G (2001): Management, leading people and organisations in the 21st century; Prentice Hall Inc, New

Jersey.

Locke, E. A. (1976): The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and

Organizational Psychology, Chicago; Rand McNally

Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1993): Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship; Journal of

Applied Psychology, 78

Robbins, S. P. (2004): Organizational Behaviour - Concepts, Controversies, Applications; 4th Ed. Prentice Hall

Weick, K.E. (1979): The Social Psychology of Organizing 2nd edtn; McGraw Hill

http://www.organizationalculture101.com/effects-of-organizational-culture.html

What Are Some Effects Of Organizational Culture?

The effects of organizational culture are many and varied. Obviously the affects of organizational culture varies depending on whether the

company has a strong culture or a weak culture, but there are some generalities that apply. This article is going to focus on the positive

effects that occur when a company makes a concerted effort to establish a strong positive organizational culture at the work place.

Many workers are spending more and more time at work. Depending on the job or company, many workers would put in 50, 60, or even

more hours a week. The old axiom goes that a happy worker is a productive worker, and this is one of the effects of organizational culture.

Workers want to enjoy work. They want to be interested in whatevers going on that day, or long term goals. Being part of s omething

meaningful that the worker enjoys makes the whole experience of work better, which will make them more productive. The effects of

organizational culture should help provide this setting.

A strong organization will focus on the environment it creates for its workers because that will help encourage a more efficient and productive

company. Focusing on building and sustaining organizational culture shows employees that they are considered an important part of the

company. This type of company generally has among the best response from its employees and thus will also have a much better chance of

achieving its goals.

There are five major reasons for wanting to create an appropriate and positive organizational culture for your company:

1) A strong organizational culture will attract high level talent. The high level talent entering corporations want to go to the companies that

offer opportunities for advancement and to show off their talents. The best people can be choosy and they will strongly consider the

companies where the organizational culture appears effective and positive and the workers get along with each other and are united in their

goals of making the company better.

2) A strong organizational culture will help to keep your top level talent. If workers love the job they are at, and feel like valuable members of

a team, then theyre not likely to want to go to another company. A top notch culture will not only attract the best new talent, but helpretain them afterwards.

3) A strong culture creates energy and momentum. Once a strong organizational culture is built, it will gain a momentum of its own and will

help to allow people to feel valued and express themselves freely. The excitement and energy this will cause will end up being a positive

influence that affects every part of the organization.

4) A strong and successful organizational culture should alter the employees view of work. Most people think of work as boring,

aggravating, stressful, etc. Instead of thinking of work as a place you have to go, a solid culture can make employees look forward to work. If
http://www.organizationalculture101.com/effects-of-organizational-culture.htmlhttp://www.organizationalculture101.com/effects-of-organizational-culture.htmlhttp://www.organizationalculture101.com/effects-of-organizational-culture.html


35/35

the workers love coming into the job, they are going to work harder, and put more effort into any job. Everyone wants a job that they enjoy,

and most people are willing to work: but its easier to work hard in a job you enjoy than in one you hate. Same principle applies to

everyone else, too.

5) A strong and positive organizational culture will help make everyone more efficient and successful. From the lowest mail room worker to

the highest CEO, a strong culture helps everyone. You often hear this type of description made with a professional football team.

conflict resolution methods

Documents