A Case Study
Company XYZ is a medium-sized technology firm that specializes in developing software applications. The
organization has a diverse workforce with various cultural backgrounds, working collaboratively to meet
project deadlines and deliver high-quality products. Recently, the company introduced a new project
management system, which resulted in significant workflow and team dynamics changes.
Sarah - Senior Project Manager: A dedicated and experienced professional overseeing multiple projects
and ensuring their timely completion. Sarah has been with the company for six years and has a strong
reputation for delivering successful outcomes.
Alex - Lead Developer: A skilled and innovative developer who has been with the company for three years.
Alex is renowned for being meticulous and detail-oriented but struggles with managing time constraints
and adapting to change.
Lisa - Junior Developer: A talented and ambitious developer who recently joined the team. Lisa is highly
motivated and eager to prove herself but lacks experience in the company's project management
processes.
The conflict arises when the new project management system is implemented, significantly impacting the
workflow and team dynamics. As the project manager, Sarah is responsible for overseeing the successful
implementation of the new system. However, Alex, the lead developer, is resistant to the changes,
expressing concerns about the system's effectiveness and its impact on the team's productivity.
Alex feels that the new project management system adds unnecessary layers of bureaucracy, slowing
down the development process. Additionally, he believes that the system's lack of flexibility inhibits
creativity and innovation, making it challenging to deliver high-quality software.
Sarah, on the other hand, firmly believes in the benefits of the new system and its potential to streamline
operations and improve project outcomes. She views Alex's resistance as a roadblock to progress and
feels frustrated by his reluctance to adapt.
Lisa, the junior developer, finds herself caught in the middle of this conflict. She is eager to learn and
contribute but is confused about which direction to follow. The tension between Sarah and Alex creates
an uncomfortable work environment and affects the overall team morale.
Impact on the Organization: The conflict between Sarah and Alex has several implications for the
organization. These include:
●
Decreased Productivity: The ongoing conflict disrupts the team's collaborative efforts, leading to
decreased productivity and delays in project deliverables.
●
●
●
Low Morale: The hostile work environment negatively impacts team morale, leading to decreased
employee satisfaction and engagement.
Communication Breakdown: The conflict hampers effective communication among team
members, affecting the coordination and synergy required for successful project execution.
Talent Retention: The conflict creates a stressful work environment, increasing the likelihood of
talented employees seeking opportunities elsewhere and potentially leading to turnover.
Questions
1. What strategies can be employed to foster a culture of collaboration and compromise among team
members when conflicting perspectives arise?
The following tactics can be used in the company to promote a culture of cooperation and compromise
among team members when opposing viewpoints are present:
a. Promote candid communication and attentive listening: Collaboration and compromise can be
facilitated by creating a space where team members feel free to voice their opinions and concerns.
According to Thomas and Kilmann (1974), active listening entails genuinely comprehending the
perspectives of others and looking for points of agreement.
b. Encourage team members to understand and empathize with one another: This can help to
promote empathy and understanding. According to Pinkley et al. (2001), this can be accomplished
through exercises like perspective-taking exercises or team-building seminars.
c. Look for win-win solutions: Encourage a problem-solving approach that places more emphasis on
locating win-win solutions than on "winning" a debate. As mentioned by Fisher et al. (1991), parties
can explore choices that address their underlying interests and produce win-win results with the aid
of collaborative negotiation approaches.
d. Lead productive talks: To assist team members in reaching consensus and resolving disputes, use
strategies like mediation or led group discussions. These techniques, emphasized by Folger et al.
(1994), offer a systematic and impartial setting for discussing issues and coming to an agreement.
2. How can effective communication channels be established and maintained to prevent and resolve
conflicts within the workplace, especially during times of significant change?
To create and keep up efficient channels of communication in the company the following tactics can be
used to avoid and settle disputes during periods of considerable change:
a. Transparent and clear communication Information regarding the changes, including their causes,
advantages, and prospective effects, should be timely and accurate. According to Liang et al.
(2007), this can assist in reducing uncertainty and addressing problems.
b. Two-way communication channels: Create accessible routes for comments, ideas, and inquiries.
Regular team meetings, suggestion boxes, or anonymous surveys can all be used for this.
Employees can voice their issues and participate in decision-making through two-way
communication (Mishra, 1996).
c. Proactive leadership communication: Team members should be informed of changes and
developments, and any problems or issues should be brought up. By exhibiting excellent
communication techniques and promoting open discussion, leaders can function as role models
(Tourish & Hargie, 2004).
d. Training and assistance: Offer instruction in dispute resolution, change management, and
effective communication techniques. This may improve workers' capacity for self-expression and
conflict resolution during periods of transition (Bordia et al., 2004).
References
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Folger, J. P., Poole, M. S., & Stutman, R. K. (1994). Working Through Conflict: Strategies for Relationships,
Groups, and Organizations. Longman.
Liang, J., Farh, C. I. C., & Farh, J. L. (2007). Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice:
A two-wave examination. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 573-584.
Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler
(Eds.), Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research.
Pinkley, R. L., Neale, M. A., & Bennett, R. J. (2001). The impact of alternatives to settlement in dyadic
negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86(2), 165-197.
Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (1974). Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. Xicom.