Organizations are continuously adopting alternative dispute resolution by involving third parties after failed direct negotiations in conflicts. It usually entails either arbitration, conciliation, and mediation processes. In particular, conciliation calls for a third party who improves communication and relationships and monitors the discussion. I like consiliation because the opinions of disagreeing people are highly considered as the conciliator only provides a binding view if permitted by the disputing groups.
In contrast, mediation incorporates a mediator who uses logic and persuasion to facilitate communication providing alternative reasoning while considering every group’s opinion. I find mediation advantageous as both parties can decline the mediator’s settlement suggestion. Arbitration is the other process, and the outsider involved has the authority to solve a dispute. I dislike arbitration as one group is likely to feel dissatisfied as arbitrators decision is final. The three processes are effective as they prevent disruption of daily activities by court procedures.
Conciliation and mediation are the best peer-to-peer methods to resolve disputes in an organization. Mediation could be successful if a firm trains selected employees on how to settle conflicts using this process. The mediators then listen to the disagreeing colleagues and facilitate problem-solving without interrupting business operations. Similarly, workmates use conciliation parallel to their daily activities, although it is casual and the third party requires no professional skills (Zhang et al., 2018). A person or group volunteers or is chosen to improve communication and facilitate understanding between those in a disagreement. The methods prevent the escalation of disputes by solving them at an early stage. Additionally, they may create trust and teamwork within the firm. Thus, conciliation and mediation help in strengthening relations of employees.
The relationship between manager and subordinate is complex, and the process of ironing their issues should be chosen carefully. Firstly, the administrator’s authority places employees in a fragile state of fear of job loss or unfair treatment at places of work during conflicts. As a result, most employees choose to avoid ways to mitigate the dispute. According to Tommy and Oetzel (2019), subordinates submit to supervisors after discords but use indirect approaches in their resistance.
Secondly, most multilevel conflicts cannot be solved by juniors as the executive may despise them. Alternatively, servile may be biased if they feel their actions threaten their work position. Incorporating other executives or external parties can provide a holistically acceptable solution. In conclusion, alternative dispute resolving strategies can prevent the escalation of conflicts in most organizations. However, choosing the best approach to use mainly depends on the hierarchy of participants in discord.
References
Tommy, P. F., & Oetzel, J. G. (2019). Managerial and employee conflict communication in Papua New Guinea: Application of the culture‐based social-ecological conflict model. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 12(3), 213-233. Web.
Zhang, X., Bollen, K., Pei, R., & Euwema, M. C. (2018). Peacemaking at the workplace: A systematic review. Negotiation and conflict management research, 11(3), 204-224. Web.