Conflicts are universal and can occurring due to clash of ideas; however, the results are not always destructive since, conflicts are often responsible for sparking innovation and creativity. Hence, managers may opt to apply the principle of negotiation so that the performance of accompany is not affected. In many companies, the labour force is organised with the presence of unions; they often negotiate with the management in issues related to salaries, bonus and commissions, etc. However, negotiations are also common in political and international sphere (Dwyer, 2012).
In this paper, the researcher has represented the application of three diagnostic tools; namely, The Big Five personality measures, Johari Window and Belbin Team Inventory, in order to illustrate how they can help in reducing destructive conflict. This paper also provides a development plan encouraging win-win negotiations. These tests help in evaluating the potential of employees in comparison to their appropriate job role.
According to Professor William Wilmot and professional mediator, Joyce Hocker, conflict can be described as a struggle taken place between parties. However, it need not necessarily involve any physical fight and often they can be nonverbal (O'Rourke and Collins, 2008). In an organisation, it is often sighted that there is no direct accusation or contact between the parties involved in conflict but they vent their pent up feelings upon a third party. However, Wilmot and Hocker had mentioned interdependency among individual parties is a necessary condition for them to be involved in a conflict. This interdependence is central for the individual to work together providing the opportunity to share ideas setting the backdrop of a conflict (O'Rourke and Collins, 2008).
Nowadays, human capital is considered one of the most productive assets by scholars; helping in increasing organisations’ competitive advantage. As a company expands, its employment also increases which can lead to complexities. However, to curb such chances and increase efficiency, it is very important that employees are comfortable to work as a team (M. Djurica, N. Djurica and Janicic, 2014). Some of the essential attributes in this regard are cooperation, trust among the employees and empathy. These behavioural characteristics can help in building cordial relationships in work place (Cross and Shaw, 2014).
Over the last few decades, the structure of business has undergone manifold changes that have led to increasing difficulties in managing the resources efficiently. These rising complexities have been the root cause of conflicts making it a universal phenomenon whether in relation to personal choices or workplace (Cross and Shaw, 2014). One example of workplace conflict is the argument among colleagues in relation to a specific change in a project. The sustenance of a conflict depends upon the willingness of the conflicted parties to keep their stance in context to a particular issue and in extreme cases can lead to escalation (Singh, 2008). Shargh, Soufi and Dadashi (2013) had identified some reasons that can lead to rise of a conflict; they are emotional antipathy, disagreement among team members and differential opinions. However, among all these factors emotional distress can deter the performance of employees and lead to an environment of mutual distrust. Emotional conflicts are very common at workplaces between superiors and their followers (Singh, 2008).
Conflicts can be either constructive or destructive; the former can help in facilitating innovation and creativity while destructive conflicts can deteriorate the organisational culture. Destructive conflicts have been the root cause of dissatisfaction among workers. When a company works with demotivated employees, it affects the company’s overall productivity resulting in a deterioration of its reputation (Omisore and Abiodun, 2014).
The process through which individual or team opts for a common solution to a particular issue can be described as negotiation (Zartman and Faure, 2005). In this process, people leave their individual opinions and jointly decide on the best outcome. However, it does not mean that all members agree to single outcome but it reflects individual are ready to seek for more suitable solutions by leaving their divergent stance. In a negotiation, each member has to have positive attitude towards compromise and coordinate by leaving his or her status quo. The managers and entrepreneurs negotiate upon the prices with the suppliers and while offering job to applicants, HR professionals negotiate over the salaries and other compensation benefits. In case of team meetings, researchers expect each member to negotiate with each other so that it does not affect their individual schedule (Hames, 2011).
Rise in competition has forced the firms in an industry to think of ways that can help them to retain their market share with positive return on their invested capital. This has resulted in the increase in number of cartels and mergers that require the parties involved to negotiate over a common market price in order to maintain their profit (Hames, 2011). In case of business negotiations, the one with more market power takes the final decisions related to the common agreement (say market price). For example, if there is a merger between a small firm and a big firm, the former has less bargaining power (Goffee and Scase, 2015). International trade has increased manifold following globalisation, which has increased the interdependence among the trading nations. This has an impact upon the political structure of the economy and international treaties shape the future of global trade involving a number of negotiations (UNCTAD, 2008).
Distributive and integrative are the two forms of negotiations commonly observed in business world by scholars (Vo, Padgham and Cavedon, 2007). If in a negotiation, one party wins at the cost of other party, then it is termed as distributive negotiation. On the other hand, Integrative negotiations are formed among parties or individuals who are interested in finding a solution that benefits all. They are of the opinion that by working together, they can reach better conclusion (Schramm and Morais, 2013).