MANAGING WORKPLACE CONFLICTS: CHALLENGES BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE AIDE
RIMA SHAWULU KWEWUM
Introduction
Conflicts are generally second nature to the human being. Individuals are not immune from conflicts. Most people have conflicts within themselves. They are often torn between different opinions. Each morning most people debate within themselves what clothes to wear, what shoes to wear, and even whether to stand up from the bed or not.
These could be seen as disagreements and no more. If one person disagrees with himself and has to debate a course of action, it simply means that when two or more people are involved the disagreements would be much more.
A disagreement may be said to have developed into a conflict when the two parties perceiving that they have incompatible goals seek to undermine each others goal seeking capabilities (Wikipedia).
Steve Roesler (www.allthingsworkplace.com) explains that conflicts can occur in both competitive and cooperative environments. According to him psychologically, a conflict exists when the reduction of one motivating stimulus involves an increase in other so that a new adjustment is demanded.
Other definitions include a disagreement through which the parties involved perceive threat to their interests or concerns (www.ohrd.wisc.edu) the key phrases here include:
* Disagreement
* Involvement of different Parties
* Perceived threat, namely that ones parties gain may be another persons loss. It is important to note that people respond to perceived threats no matter how unrealistic. The perception may not be true or actual, but that is usually beside the point. People are ruled by belief system and so, perceptions are very important.
* Needs, interests and concerns. Sometimes, what may appear to be the needs, interests and concerns may be far from the reality.
The National Assembly: Where Conflicts thrive
The National Assembly, indeed every legislature in the world, is a complex environment full of diversities. The atmosphere within it, and by its historical logic, the legislature is a conflict ridden environment. In otherwords, by its nature, the legislature possesses the potentials of generating as well as receiving conflicts. By the definition of its historical function, the legislature anywhere in the world would have to develop the capacity to allow different views, personalities, styles and ideologies to thrive and blossom. A look at the composition of the Nature would prove the point.
Members of the Nigerian National Assembly represent each of the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory, as well as the peoples of Nigeria. The Senate represents the equality of the Federating states “ three senators from each state no matter the population. The three hundred and sixty members of the House of Representatives represent (or should represent) approximately equal number of people.
Each member of the National Assembly represents largely a mixture of people “ some, different tribes or ethnics groups, and oftentimes, people who do not necessarily agree with him or her. Members come from diverse backgrounds, religions, and parties.
At the National Assembly, its members meet and work with the management staff. Each member is entitled to employ up to five persons in his office. These staff need to work with management staff, and committees. Within the various offices, Aides need to work with people from different backgrounds, and sometimes, people with whom they do not necessarily agree.
It is therefore almost impossible to avoid disagreements “ and sometimes very sharp disagreements in the legislature. Televisions show regularly the boxing bouts that often breakout in the various legislatures in the world. In the First Republic, the Parliament of the Western Region was turned into a bloodied fighting arena.
In Second Republic, a pistol which turned out to be a toy was pulled out on the floor of the House of Representatives. Even the current House of Representatives (2007 “ 2011) has had its share of disagreements which have turned almost violent.
The structure and procedures of the National Assembly also provide the means and tools to find solutions to conflicts.
Sources of Conflicts
The inevitability of conflicts in the workplace makes the search for the causes to be a little bit difficult. What may cause conflicts in one area may not create problems in another area.
Julie Gatin et al list eight causes of conflicts including the following:
* Conflicting needs.
* Conflicting Styles: Individuals differ in the way they think and want to do things.
* Conflicting Perceptions: people view things differently. Perceptions of what is wrong or right always differ.
* Conflicting Goals.
* Conflicting Pressures: A legislator for instance may be torn between two Committee meetings holding at the same time or the demands of plenary sessions and constituency demands.
* Conflict Roles: Who should become speaker or Senate President, or who should be in what Committee.
* Different Personal values: How, for instance, should you answer your phone? Very loudly or quietly.
* Unpredictable Policies: Change in policies or even instructions; when is the Speaker of Senate President prepare to meet visitors.
Other Sources of conflicts include ill defined or unclear definition of responsibilities and obligations. This leads to clashes which sometimes take on a life of their own. Poor communication skills of individuals, leaders and co-workers are known to have created serious problems. Besides, as is generally known, several well meaning people lack skills to interact properly with other people.
Impact Workplace Conflicts
Conflicts defined as disagreement, are not necessarily negative. Indeed the world advances through disagreements and debates. As a matter of fact the advantages of a democratic system over other forms of governance is its ability to allow different ideas to blossom; this, as well as the freedom of people, to fight or pursue their interest, helps to generate the ideas that have advanced the sciences. Any society of organization which does not have conflicts is essentially dead.
Generally, conflicts serve the following purposes:
* Building of understanding. Properly handled conflicts enable greater understanding of the individual and organization. It helps to build respect as those disagreements allow fending individuals to understand and respect each other. Misunderstandings are cleared, and new perspectives of individuals and organisation are developed.
* Conflicts allow new ideas and processes to be brought into play.
* Enable organizations and individuals to make adjustments leading to strengthening of organizations to achieve set objectives
* Unresolved conflicts however ensure the quick and easy death of organizations. The stress related deaths of workers which seemed to have increased of late result from workplace. Conflicts that have not been properly managed.
Generally, research has shown that unresolved workplace conflicts create several problems including the following:
* A survey conducted in the UK in 2005 showed that 78% of mangers suffer from work related stress; the total value of lost work time due to stress is $1.7 billion.
* Lower commitment to work, dissatisfaction with jobs, and loss of creativity.
* High turnover of employees.
* Loss of productivity and wasted time. 42% of Managers time is spent addressing conflicts in the workplace. In the USA CEOs spend up to 70% of their time on conflicts.
* Absenteeism: Unresolved conflicts in the workplace, it has been found result in very high absenteeism. Frustrated workers often get sick or dabble into substance abuse and keep away from work.
* Sabotage: In trying to fight themselves, feuding employees sabotage the organizations. Some workplace accidents are known to have originated from unresolved conflicts in the workplace.
* Stunting of creativity: The creativity of individuals are stunted as the organization itself suffers
What to do when conflicts arise
Every conflict situation is unique and requires that initiatives and unique solutions be worked out. There are no quick fixes in any situation, especially one in which attitudes have been hardened. Deborah Mackin, however, offers some useful guides in approaching unresolved conflicts situations. She explains that conflicts usually create more fight (heat) than light, largely those who fight aim to win at the expense of the other party. Based on the approach developed by the Harvard Negotiation Project, Mackin suggests a four stage approach:
* Separation of people from the problem. There is the need to assist the parties involved to obtain a mutual definition of the problem.
* Focus on Interests and Positions. This is important because, oftentimes, the interests are not the same as the positions. People often grand stand.
* Generate options. The parties involved would need to be helped to generate the options that would result in a win “ win situation.
* Insistence on objective criteria.
Susan M. Heathfield suggests that conflicts need to be confronted and not avoided. Conflicts or conflict situations will not simply disappear because they have been ignored. An ostrich that hides itself in the sand is still visible for other people to see. It is a sitting target, a lame ducking waiting to be taken. Leaders also need to understand that conflicts usually affect more than the parties directly involved.
Heathfield further suggest that the leader or superior office should intervene to mediate through meeting with antagonists together. The antagonists need to state their positions clearly without antagonizing other people. In addition, the parties involved need to be committed to discussing and finding appropriate solutions. Melissa Conrad Stoppler explain that misunderstanding and communication problems remain one of the most common sources of workplace strive, and lists eleven tips to aid proper communications. These include:
* Specificity “ There is need to be specific and not to allow room for ambiguity and generalities. Parties need to clearly define what they mean.
* Mediators need to resist the temptation to become involved.
* Depersonalisation of the conflict.
* Open mindedness. Leaders and problem solvers need to listen, and where they are not sure they need to ask the parties to clarify themselves.
Dong Staneast offers the following advice to persons who may be involved in conflict and may be required to take up leadership. First it is important, according to him to note that people across gender, racial and socio-economic lives would:
* Love to be agreed with
* Hate to be disagreed with
* Like those who agree with them
* Dislike those who disagree with them
It is important, according to him, to further note that people who are good at resolving conflicts look for some point of agreement and use good people skills to get others to see a different point of view.
Staneast suggests seven tips for managing and resolving conflicts:
* Be proactive instead of reactive
* Be slow to anger especially over petty issues.
* Instead of telling people they are wrong, point out mistakes indirectly.
* Look for some common ground as soon as possible.
* If you find out that you are in the wrong, admit it.
* Admit one of your owns poor decision before pointing out a similar error.
* Mend fences whenever possible.
What the Leader should do
The Senior Legislature Aide is the Leader in his own right as the most Senior officer in the office of the Honourable member or distinguished Senator. As a leader in the office, the Senior Legislature Aide needs to overcome obstacles including resistance of the principal, lack of cooperation from other staff as well as seeming non cooperation from the management and other staff. Even constituents, lobbyists and other groups could constitute serious challenges and form sources of conflicts.
However, history shows that conflicts are inevitable and the working environment of the legislature breeds conflicts. It is important to note that those who succeed in transforming conflicts from negative energy to positive energy create for themselves good working environments that are
Leaders need to know that conflicts even those in the workplace are about issues that need resolutions and not problems. All the parties involved in conflicts have legitimate concerns and indeed very valid points that need to be addressed. In addressing workplace conflicts therefore the leader needs to note the following:
* Situations, people and everything about human existence is dynamic. People change. A good man today becomes a bad man. The oppressor yesterday can become the oppressed today. People change religions and ethnic identities.
* Diversity or differences, however, defined have been with us since creation and are not good to be wiped away. They can be source of strength rather than weakness.
* People often, erroneously believe that the proverbial pie is not big enough to round. That someone has to be denied something for them to get.
The reality is that,
The pie is big enough to go round.
There is room for all to have a go.
No one needs to go hungry.
We always have alternative ways of saying something or doing something. We always have the option to do right or wrong. God has given us the ability to live with people we disagree with no matter how strong, our disagreements
Transforming foes to friends: An historical example
South Africa presented a challenge to world in the early 90s. Several years apartheid left the blacks disgruntled and angry. Frightened white people began to seek solace abroad as apartheid crumbled under intense local and international pressure. At the head of the new emerging South African black leadership was Nelson Mandela, the man who had spent 27 years in prison. For anger he was justified to have whatever quantity he wanted.
Mandela, however, refused to choose the easy way out. Instead he chose the path of transforming his foes into friends. He achieved this through the following steps:
* Forward looking: Mandela shifted the focus from the history of the oppression of his people to the bright future of togetherness. He worked for a new state and society where the diverse strengths of people would be pulled together. The people need to show the bigger picture of working together. It is the responsibility of the leadership to show them the way.
* Inclusion: All groups, whites, blacks, Indians and indeed, all groups in South Africa were involved in governance.
* Transparency: The secrecy surrounding the apartheid states were put aside. Whoever is mediating or leading needs to be seen to be fair to all.
* Consultation: Leaders have to get people talking to themselves and to the leaders. Both horizontal and vertical communications need to held.
* Leaders need to build bridge of understanding. Get people working with each other.
* Leaders need to be sensitive to, and listen properly. Most times people listen or a very poor listeners and therefore miss important details which would have made differences to situations.
Conclusion
Leaders make the difference in any society. One of the ways leaders have succeeded in doing that is the creation of visions of the future. Leaders see ahead, and help the people to see a shared future.
References
* Julie Gatin, Allen Wysocki and Karl Kepner, Understanding Conflict in Workplace.
* Susan M. Heathfield, Workplace Conflict Resolution: People Management Tips, www.about.com
* http://conflictzen.com
* Adrian Groenewald: A nine step process for resolving workplace conflict, http://www.the manger.com
* Daniel Robin, Waging Peace in the Workplace, http://www.abetterworkplace.com
* Melissa Conrad Stopper, MD II Communications Tips for a Healthy Workplace, http://www.medicinenet.com
* Rima Shawulu Kwewum, Tolerance and Peaceful coexistence: The Leader as Change Agents
* Deborah Mackin, Conflict Resolution in the Workplace, http://www.sideroad.com/manageat/conflict-resolution-in-the-workplace.
* Bernadine Van Gramberg, Julian Teicher, Managing Neutrality and Impartiality in Workplace Resolution. The dilemma of the HR Manager, working papers series, Victoria University of Technology, Australia.