Conflict Resolution Approaches
While summing up my conflict self-assessment score, I can note that I use avoiding and accommodating approaches less frequently than the others. This is because these methods are ineffective strategies for overcoming controversial situations in the workplace and bring few benefits to any of the conflicting parties. Avoiding disagreement means leaving everything unchanged and not solving the problem. Accommodating means losing individual dignity and putting others above oneself, which negatively affects self-esteem. I often follow collaborating and compromising approaches, and I find these conflict resolution techniques to be the most convenient. I believe that this speaks of me as a person who takes into account the interests of others and is ready to interact to come to a mutually beneficial solution in controversial situations. These methods help me avoid personal insults to myself and to others and contribute to finding adequate strategies for building relationships in case of a disagreement.
I can follow distinctive strategies when communicating with healthcare employees of different statuses. For instance, while interacting and communicating with managers, the compromising approach seems acceptable because my job is to follow the directions of the administrators. I cannot dictate tough conditions, but I can do everything possible to ensure that the leaders’ instructions are adequate and do not contradict the norms of professional communication. For colleagues, the collaborating technique for conflict resolution is more appropriate. We are on an equal footing with them, and instead of proving individual points of view, searching for alternative solutions that could satisfy the interests of each side is a more objective practice. To improve my use of different methods, I should study more theoretical information about their manifestations in the work environment and perform different tasks, thereby communicating with numerous employees.
Conflict Process Analysis
Active communication in the workplace is one of the drivers of conflict situations due to constant interaction and numerous points of view from different employees. In my practice, I had come across conflict situations several times when I had to resort to effective resolution approaches and analyze such disagreements. One of such cases was a conflict that happened a few years ago regarding the operating regime, particularly the nuances related to the work schedule. I worked the first shift, and my colleague wanted me to switch shifts with her because she had driving lessons in the afternoon. This was not very convenient for me since I had planned that schedule and agreed on it with the management in advance. As a result, a colleague made a complaint to me that I did not want to make concessions, although she had contacted me only once before asking if I wanted to change shifts with her.
In addition to my colleague and me, our line manager became involved in the conflict. The colleague filed a complaint with him, and he had to study the shift schedules and analyze whether her requirement was adequate. Since his job was to monitor the workload, he had to assess the objectivity of the appeal and compare our arguments to arrive at the right solution. The conflict itself could have been avoided if the colleague had contacted me directly, without a claim but with a request. However, I was not ready to put up with her radical position since, in her opinion, I was obliged to yield to her during the first shift, although this was not my responsibility. As a result, neither side accepted the other’s arguments, and I believed that my colleague’s categorical position was incompatible with the principles of teamwork, while she accused me of being unyielding.
Frustration Stage
At the very beginning of the conflict, when my colleague approached me with a claim and promised to contact our immediate supervisor with a complaint, I was puzzled. I could not understand the reason for her behavior since we had not considered this issue in detail before, and I had already forgotten about her question about a possible change in our shifts. After that, I felt irritated, which was caused by the colleague’s arrogance and her categorical position. This behavior was incompatible with her status and work experience because I had always considered her a professional specialist with a rich store of knowledge. My annoyance was also exacerbated by the fact that I had already worked on the second shift several years before that year, and it would be unfair in terms of the distribution of work responsibilities to switch to the old regime. Each employee in our team had an equal range of responsibilities, and there were no prerequisites for giving in to others by infringing on individual rights. Therefore, I was puzzled and annoyed by such tactless behavior of the colleague.
As a result of these feelings, initially, I was ready to enter into open conflict with her, reacting to her position accordingly. Nevertheless, I decided to analyze the situation and not make quick decisions to avoid potential mistakes and threats to my professional authority. Ultimately, I did not regret such a decision, and all my measures to resolve the conflict were based on an adequate assessment of the situation but not on actions under the influence of an emotional impulse.
Conceptualization Stage
After the assessment, I concluded that the real conflict was justified by the colleague’s dissatisfaction with her current schedule, and her complaint was perceived by her as a way out of the situation. She knew about the distribution of shifts in our team, but this did not stop her, and she did so out of desperation. I now believe that other people might perceive the conflict in the same way since they knew both of us well from a professional and personal side. At the same time, the others saw only the outcome of the conflict and its essence, while I did not agree with the essence of my colleague’s claim. They did not know about her form of appeal to me and the reasons that she presented in support of her complaint. In addition, they could have taken my side if the others had known how she acted by reaching out to her supervisor and ignoring my position. The others’ values might not match mine, as I prioritized fairness and equity in the workplace over individual achievement and personal benefits.
Action Stage
To resolve the disagreement, I resorted to two conflict response approaches – compromising and collaborating. I offered my colleague and the manager to discuss the issue jointly to understand the essence of the conflict and give each side to present specific arguments. I believe that the collaboration method was a convenient approach to assessing specific claims objectively, guided not by subjective and biased assessments but by rational reasoning. The compromising approach was a form of flexible behavior that could1 also help mitigate the disagreement. My colleague behaved more peacefully at that meeting since she might have understood my position. The leader was also calm because the conflict resolution was in his professional interests to maintain productivity in the team. The colleague entered into a productive dialogue with me, which allowed us to discuss all the aspects of the problem without personal insults, and spoke of the effectiveness of the steps I took.
Outcomes Stage
Due to the actions taken, the quality of task accomplishment was improved as my colleague and I resolved our dispute and reached a consensus by discussing the terms of the schedule. We agreed to rotate shifts weekly, which allowed us to increase the efficiency of actions and improve productivity by mitigating conflict. The quality of our relationships also improved because my colleague apologized to me for being too harsh and categorical. We came to the conclusion that alternating shifts was the most convenient way out of the situation since both she and I needed periodic free time in the afternoon. As a result, we have maintained friendly professional relationships and overcome conflict.
Workplace Behavior: Self-Assessment Tool
To assess personal workplace behavior, I have utilized a special self-assessment tool. This framework offered by Thompson (2019) reflects the degree of bullying in the workplace and reveals individual aggressive forms of interaction with colleagues. On almost all points, my score is one, with the exception of the point that states the intention to invite specific people to work parties or events (my indicator is two – sometimes). I am aware that I am not prone to bullying; in this case, I do not agree that I can be described as aggressive. Communication at recreational events is different from that during the workflow, and I believe that I am not obligated to follow the image of a friendly colleague in any environment. However, I know that deliberately ignoring others is unacceptable from the perspective of team performance. Therefore, I intend to change this behavior by interacting with other employees more often and revealing in them the positive qualities that I value.
In my practice, I have never experienced bullying, including as a new employee. However, I have heard stories of newcomers being pressured by more experienced employees, which I find unacceptable. In our department, a favorable microclimate in the team is highly valued, and during our joint work, we have developed approaches to supporting and nurturing new employees. First of all, we organize a joint meeting where we get to know a colleague and tell him or her about the specifics of the work process. We also make it clear to the new employee that they can ask for help with any issue since each of us used to be a newcomer and experienced similar anxiety caused by adaptation. The latter approach is particularly important because it minimizes any risks of violence towards new staff and reminds everyone of an individual experience which should not be forgotten so as not to demonstrate bullying. Moral support and encouragement are adequate techniques to help new employees succeed and adapt to a new work environment faster.
Reference
Thompson, R. (2019). What if you’re the bully? American Nurse Today, 14(1), 22-25.